Home Mail MemberMap Chat (0) Wallpapers
Go Back   ChiefsPlanet > The Ed & Dave Lounge > D.C.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-04-2014, 04:37 PM  
Loneiguana Loneiguana is offline
Veteran
 
Loneiguana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Springfield
Casino cash: $34396
What the CPO actually Said

You may want to sit down for this, because it may shock you, but...

Why the new CBO report on Obamacare is good news

Quote:
The Congressional Budget Office is out with its latest report on the Affordable Care Act, and here are a few bottom lines:
— The ACA is cheaper than it expected.
— It will "markedly increase" the number of Americans with health insurance.
— The risk-adjustment provisions, which Congressional Republicans want to overturn as a "bailout" of the insurance industry, will actually turn a profit to the U.S. Treasury.

Given all this, why are the first news headlines on the CBO report depicting it as calling Obamacare a job killer?

You can chalk up some of that to the crudity of headline-writing, and some to basic innumeracy in the press. But it's important to examine what the CBO actually says about the ACA's impact on the labor market. (You can find it at pages 117-127, excerpted here.)

The CBO projects that the act will reduce the supply of labor, not the availability of jobs. There's a big difference. In fact, it suggests that aggregate demand for labor (that is, the number of jobs) will increase, not decrease; but that many workers or would-be workers will be prompted by the ACA to leave the labor force, many of them voluntarily.

As economist Dean Baker points out, this is, in fact, a beneficial effect of the law, and a sign that it will achieve an important goal. It helps "older workers with serious health conditions who are working now because this is the only way to get health insurance. And (one for the family-values crowd) many young mothers who return to work earlier than they would like because they need health insurance. This is a huge plus."

The ACA will reduce the total hours worked by about 1.5% to 2% in 2017 to 2024, the CBO forecasts, "almost entirely because workers will choose to supply less labor — given the new taxes and other incentives they will face and the financial benefits some will receive." That translates into about 2.5 million full-time equivalents by 2024 — not the number of workers, because some will reduce their number of hours worked rather than leaving the workforce entirely.

The overall impact on the community will be muted, moreover, because most of that effect will be seen at the lowest levels of the wage-earning scale. The effect will be "small or negligible for most categories of workers," the CBO says, because there will be almost no impact on workers who get their insurance from their employers or who earn more than 400% of the federal poverty line (for a family of three, that's $78,120), the point at which eligibility for federal premium disappears.

As for labor demand, the CBO estimates that on balance, the ACA will increase aggregate demand for goods and services, in part by relieving lower-income people of the burden of health insurance or healthcare expenses, so they can increase their spending on other things. In turn, that will "boost demand for labor," especially in the near term, while the economy remains slack.

The rest of the CBO's economic and budgetary analysis has only modest changes from previous projections. It reduced its estimate of the net costs of the ACA by a vanishingly small $9 billion over 10 years compared to its previous estimate, issued in May. In part this is because many states failed to expand Medicaid, which would be almost entirely paid for by the federal government, and also because premiums are lower than it previously projected. Also, the problems of the healthcare.gov website reduced enrollments, cutting the government's bill for premium subsidies. Overall, the CBO reaffirmed its conclusion that that "the total effect of the ACA would be to reduce federal deficits."

The CBO report cuts the legs out from the GOP's attack on "risk corridors," a provision of the ACA that balances costs and expenses for insurance companies participating in the act by paying insurers whose coverage expenses exceed expectations by a certain margin in the first few years of the act, and collecting excess revenues from those whose expenses come in unexpectedly lower.

We've previously identified this GOP position as the most cynical attack on the ACA of all — the Republicans choose to call it a "bailout" of insurers; actually, it's a way of keeping premiums for some plans from getting out of hand, until the industry has more experience dealing with its new clientele. Unsurprisingly, the GOP is doubling down on this dishonesty by talking about eliminating the risk corridors as a condition for raising the federal debt limit.
The CBO, in any case, says that in 2015-2024, the government will pay out $8 billion in risk subsidies to the insurers but collect $16 billion. Real-world math says this is a gain to the Treasury of $8 billion; GOP math says it's a "bailout." You be the judge.

Regarding its most important bottom-line finding, the CBO says enrollment in individual insurance exchanges may reach only 6 million this year, down from its previous estimate of 7 million, thanks to the problems with the federal enrollment website, healthcare.gov. But it says enrollment will likely surge as the April 1 deadline for signing up approaches, and the 7-million goal is still attainable.

The ACA will increase the number of Americans with health insurance by 13 million this year, 20 million next year, and 25 million each year from then through 2024. Some 80% of those enrollees will be receiving federal subsidies to keep their coverage affordable.
There will be fewer uninsured people living in the United States, and most of those with individual coverage will be getting help to pay for it. Is there another other conclusion to draw from those statistics than the Affordable Care Act is working?
http://www.latimes.com/business/hilt...#axzz2sOnNHEGd
Posts: 3,782
Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2014, 11:01 PM   #31
aturnis aturnis is online now
MVP
 
aturnis's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Iowa
Casino cash: $94075
Less unemployed would mean less traditional welfare wouldn't it?
Don't you see the value in good child rearing?

What about the social program corporate and agricultural America are on?
Posts: 10,604
aturnis Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.aturnis Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.aturnis Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.aturnis Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.aturnis Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.aturnis Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.aturnis Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.aturnis Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.aturnis Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.aturnis Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.aturnis Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2014, 11:01 PM   #32
Prison Bitch Prison Bitch is offline
The Bitch is back
 
Prison Bitch's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Lees summit
Casino cash: $84025
Quote:
Originally Posted by aturnis View Post
How is people leaving the workforce a bad thing? You know someone will take their place right? Even when people willfully choose to work part time, the employer will need to hire somebody to pick up those extra 20hrs.

More Jobs = less unemployment

Only a republican could tell you one day that 2 job openings at $7.25 is better than 1 job opening at $14.50. Then the next, tell you that 1 job at 40hrs/week is better than 2 jobs at 20hrs/week.
A Republican says that the free market should determine that question. Are you sleepwalking through these discussions?
__________________
Who wants to see Lebron in a gimp mask being a human bobblehead?
Spoiler!
Posts: 13,058
Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2014, 05:18 AM   #33
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $473555
Quote:
Originally Posted by aturnis View Post
Less unemployed would mean less traditional welfare wouldn't it?
No

Quote:
Originally Posted by aturnis View Post
Don't you see the value in good child rearing?
Yes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aturnis View Post
What about the social program corporate and agricultural America are on?
What about them?
__________________


"I'll see you guys in New York." ISIS Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to US military personnel upon his release from US custody at Camp Bucca in Iraq during Obama's first year in office.
Posts: 75,744
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2014, 06:13 AM   #34
Loneiguana Loneiguana is offline
Veteran
 
Loneiguana's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Springfield
Casino cash: $34396
Quote:
Originally Posted by mlyonsd View Post
Fewer hours worked means less income tax paid + subsidized health care paid for by tax dollars = disaster.
That is not what the CBO said.

The hours worked aren't being reduced.

People who worked just to get health insurance don't have to work to get it now, and may choose to not work anymore.

That is what the CBO said.
__________________
"Most of us can, as we choose, make of this world either a palace or a prison."
–John Lubbock
Posts: 3,782
Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2014, 06:23 AM   #35
Loneiguana Loneiguana is offline
Veteran
 
Loneiguana's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Springfield
Casino cash: $34396
Quote:
Originally Posted by HonestChieffan View Post
Reduction in employment, for any reason, especially for the reduced, is not good. See, some day you may have a job. And you will have a way to relate. Until then you are like the kid in 4H doing a presentation on cattle health to veterinarians. Sort of fun to listen to but not really a doctor.
There is no reduction in employment. Try to get the facts straight before you try to make fun of someone else. It only makes you look stupid.

"The CBO projects that the act will reduce the supply of labor, not the availability of jobs. There's a big difference. In fact, it suggests that aggregate demand for labor (that is, the number of jobs) will increase, not decrease"

That is not a reduction in employment. That is a reduction is available worker hours by choice of the workers.

AKA...Those who only worked because the needed health insurance, may choose to leave the labor market because needed health insurance isn't forcing them to work. Like elder people who want to retire but can't because of health insurance.

CBO quote: ""almost entirely because workers will choose to supply less labor — given the new taxes and other incentives they will face and the financial benefits some will receive."

So, ACA allows workers more choice on whether they want to work or not.

That is a good thing. Because it opens up jobs for those who want to work, who need a job.

The CBO actually says "the CBO estimates that on balance, the ACA will increase aggregate demand for goods and services"

You know what increases in aggregate demand does? Creates jobs.

CREATES jobs.

Of course, if you are a fan of corporatism, anything that doesn't force Americans to work is a bad thing. Desperate workers with no choice because of the need for healthcare is great for the bottom line.
__________________
"Most of us can, as we choose, make of this world either a palace or a prison."
–John Lubbock
Posts: 3,782
Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2014, 06:24 AM   #36
Loneiguana Loneiguana is offline
Veteran
 
Loneiguana's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Springfield
Casino cash: $34396
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
Free agents = people discouraged from working by social safety web.
Patty wants workers forced to work because of the need for health insurance.

What a surprise.
__________________
"Most of us can, as we choose, make of this world either a palace or a prison."
–John Lubbock
Posts: 3,782
Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2014, 06:28 AM   #37
Loneiguana Loneiguana is offline
Veteran
 
Loneiguana's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Springfield
Casino cash: $34396
Quote:
Originally Posted by aturnis View Post
How is people leaving the workforce a bad thing? You know someone will take their place right? Even when people willfully choose to work part time, the employer will need to hire somebody to pick up those extra 20hrs.

More Jobs = less unemployment

Only a republican could tell you one day that 2 job openings at $7.25 is better than 1 job opening at $14.50. Then the next, tell you that 1 job at 40hrs/week is better than 2 jobs at 20hrs/week.

This kind of view required understanding of labor markets and demand.

We are talking to people who don't understand how demand creates jobs. And if you can't reach demand with current workforce, you hire.

Or you leave money on the table for your competitor to take.

If They don't understand those simple concepts, they won't understand that when someone leaves the work place because they can receive health insurance without the job, that opens up the spot for someone who does want to work.
__________________
"Most of us can, as we choose, make of this world either a palace or a prison."
–John Lubbock
Posts: 3,782
Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2014, 06:29 AM   #38
Loneiguana Loneiguana is offline
Veteran
 
Loneiguana's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Springfield
Casino cash: $34396
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
Your spouse can do whatever he/she wants. But I don't want a social welfare system that encourages people to choose subsidies over work.
Patty wants people forced into working because of the need for healthcare.

Less worker choice is bad for patty.

"As economist Dean Baker points out, this is, in fact, a beneficial effect of the law, and a sign that it will achieve an important goal. It helps "older workers with serious health conditions who are working now because this is the only way to get health insurance. And (one for the family-values crowd) many young mothers who return to work earlier than they would like because they need health insurance. This is a huge plus."


Those old people should be forced to work for their health insurance, right patty?
__________________
"Most of us can, as we choose, make of this world either a palace or a prison."
–John Lubbock
Posts: 3,782
Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2014, 06:31 AM   #39
Loneiguana Loneiguana is offline
Veteran
 
Loneiguana's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Springfield
Casino cash: $34396
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prison Bitch View Post
A Republican says that the free market should determine that question. Are you sleepwalking through these discussions?
The free market isn't being suppressed here.

Unless you think health care, something everyone needs and has no choice in and tying that coverage to a job, therefore giving you no choice there, is free market.

I'll give you a hint, people feeling forced to work just to get health care isn't free market.
__________________
"Most of us can, as we choose, make of this world either a palace or a prison."
–John Lubbock
Posts: 3,782
Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2014, 06:40 AM   #40
aturnis aturnis is online now
MVP
 
aturnis's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Iowa
Casino cash: $94075
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
No.

What about them?
How do you figure?

I'm sorry. I thought you wanted a free market, not socialism.
Posts: 10,604
aturnis Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.aturnis Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.aturnis Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.aturnis Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.aturnis Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.aturnis Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.aturnis Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.aturnis Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.aturnis Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.aturnis Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.aturnis Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2014, 06:59 AM   #41
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $473555
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loneiguana View Post
That is not what the CBO said.

The hours worked aren't being reduced.

People who worked just to get health insurance don't have to work to get it now, and may choose to not work anymore.

That is what the CBO said.
It says there will be an economic disincentive to work for some people because working would mean losing their Obamacare subsidy. That's not making a choice to not work, that's being encouraged not to work (and effectively being punished if you decide instead to work).
__________________


"I'll see you guys in New York." ISIS Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to US military personnel upon his release from US custody at Camp Bucca in Iraq during Obama's first year in office.
Posts: 75,744
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2014, 07:03 AM   #42
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $473555
Quote:
Originally Posted by aturnis View Post
How do you figure?
When people decide to leave the workforce because they can get increased welfare, you're not decreasing welfare. How do you figure anything different?

Quote:
Originally Posted by aturnis View Post
I'm sorry. I thought you wanted a free market, not socialism.
What makes you think otherwise?
__________________


"I'll see you guys in New York." ISIS Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to US military personnel upon his release from US custody at Camp Bucca in Iraq during Obama's first year in office.
Posts: 75,744
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2014, 07:04 AM   #43
Loneiguana Loneiguana is offline
Veteran
 
Loneiguana's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Springfield
Casino cash: $34396
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
It says there will be an economic disincentive to work for some people because working would mean losing their Obamacare subsidy. That's not making a choice to not work, that's being encouraged not to work (and effectively being punished if you decide instead to work).
Yes, people can now get health insurance without being forced to work for it.

This is not a bad thing.
__________________
"Most of us can, as we choose, make of this world either a palace or a prison."
–John Lubbock
Posts: 3,782
Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2014, 07:04 AM   #44
BucEyedPea BucEyedPea is offline
BucPatriot
 
BucEyedPea's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: None of your business
Casino cash: $111983
Quote:
Originally Posted by aturnis View Post

What about the social program corporate and agricultural America are on?
They're on a "social" program? Do you even know what the word means?
__________________
Posts: 56,893
BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2014, 07:05 AM   #45
BucEyedPea BucEyedPea is offline
BucPatriot
 
BucEyedPea's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: None of your business
Casino cash: $111983
Quote:
Originally Posted by aturnis View Post
How do you figure?

I'm sorry. I thought you wanted a free market, not socialism.
I just spat out my morning coffee on this one!!

I think you need a better education.
__________________
Posts: 56,893
BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:44 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.