Home Mail MemberMap Chat (0) Wallpapers
Go Back   ChiefsPlanet > The 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: $33021
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: 3,607
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, 04:50 PM   #91
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $473425
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loneiguana View Post
You right, they are select quotes to frame the false narrative.

Or to put bluntly, lying, by leaving out important context and other quotes.

Ready for me to show you how stupid you are, again?

That huge number you guys like to throw around, equals 1.5% to 2% of the total hours worked. Not a big deal. Also, according to the CBO "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 is workers choosing not to work because they don't have to in order to get healthcare.

That is a big difference than the narrative of hours available to work being reduced.

"The CBO projects that the act will reduce the supply of labor, not the availability of jobs." If you don't understand that, you shouldn't be in this discussion.

And the CBO goes on to say 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.

On the demand side of the equation -- "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. "

What does increase in demand do?

Increase jobs.

So, if you were able to keep up, you should have learned that the ACA, according to the CBO, allows workers who only work to receive health insurance to exit the labor market voluntarily while also increasing demand for goods and services, which is job creation; not decrease jobs or hours available.
You misunderstand what choosing not to work means. See the first part of post 87 if you want to understand.
__________________


"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: 75,743
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, 04:53 PM   #92
Loneiguana Loneiguana is offline
Veteran
 
Loneiguana's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Springfield
Casino cash: $33021
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
No, this is false. There are at least two groups of people impacted. There's one group that would rather not work but currently keep their job for the insurance. These people get a great deal because they can quit and get their exchange insurance subsidized. But there's another group that wants to work, but the compensation they'll get for working isn't enough to make it worth losing the subsidy they get for not working. Obamacare is discouraging these people who want to work by making it financially disadvantageous.
No. It is a complete lie that people choose not to work because free stuff. You have zero evidence to back it up.

You still have to work to pay for things, for stuff they want to buy. You just no longer have to work to get fair price on healthcare.

Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
Leave your communist vocabulary at the door please. Outside of the red diaper baby circles you come from, working for what you buy means paying the non-subsidized price. Fair price means the same price everyone else pays not a discounted price based on what an able-bodied non-worker is "able" to pay.
Employer based health insurance exchanges laughs at your naivety.

But continue to be for forcing people to work just to get affordable health care while parroting the lie that people will choose not to work for free stuff.
__________________
"Most of us can, as we choose, make of this world either a palace or a prison."
–John Lubbock
Posts: 3,607
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, 04:55 PM   #93
mlyonsd mlyonsd is offline
Supporter
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Spink, SD
Casino cash: $53844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loneiguana View Post
No. It is a complete lie that people choose not to work because free stuff. You have zero evidence to back it up.

You still have to work to pay for things, for stuff they want to buy. You just no longer have to work to get fair price on healthcare.



Employer based health insurance exchanges laughs at your naivety.

But continue to be for forcing people to work just to get affordable health care while parroting the lie that people will choose not to work for free stuff.
Would you agree people will choose to work less to get 'free stuff'?
Posts: 24,855
mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2014, 04:56 PM   #94
Loneiguana Loneiguana is offline
Veteran
 
Loneiguana's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Springfield
Casino cash: $33021
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
The CBO says our economy will lose the equivalent of 2+ million jobs.


Quote:
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.
Parrot those lies again and again patty.
__________________
"Most of us can, as we choose, make of this world either a palace or a prison."
–John Lubbock
Posts: 3,607
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, 05:01 PM   #95
AustinChief AustinChief is offline
Administrator
 
AustinChief's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Austin
Casino cash: $1701155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loneiguana View Post
Parrot those lies again and again patty.
Why anyone (myself included) bothers with you is a mystery.

I wonder that you will still be talking, Loneiguana. Nobody marks you.
Posts: 14,289
AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2014, 05:05 PM   #96
RNR RNR is offline
Ok which door do I leave from
 
RNR's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Close to the big pond~
Casino cash: $34863
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinChief View Post
Why anyone (myself included) bothers with you is a mystery.

I wonder that you will still be talking, Loneiguana. Nobody marks you.
no shit~
__________________

"If it’s true that our species is alone in the universe, then I’d have to say that the universe aimed rather low and settled for very little"
George Carlin~
Posts: 23,891
RNR is obviously part of the inner Circle.RNR is obviously part of the inner Circle.RNR is obviously part of the inner Circle.RNR is obviously part of the inner Circle.RNR is obviously part of the inner Circle.RNR is obviously part of the inner Circle.RNR is obviously part of the inner Circle.RNR is obviously part of the inner Circle.RNR is obviously part of the inner Circle.RNR is obviously part of the inner Circle.RNR is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2014, 05:08 PM   #97
Loneiguana Loneiguana is offline
Veteran
 
Loneiguana's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Springfield
Casino cash: $33021
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinChief View Post
Man you have ZERO reading comprehension skill. please point out where I stated that AVAILABLE hours will be reduced? YOU stated that HOURS WORKED will not be reduced. You are WRONG (according to the CBO). The CBO specifically states that total hours worked will be reduced. Period.
The CBO does not specifically state that the total hours worked will be reduced. That is your false narrative.

The CBO said "The CBO projects that the act will reduce the supply of labor, not the availability of jobs"

Because employers need to meet demand, any labor that leaves will only be replaced. It isn't forcing employers to cut hours, it is allowing workers to choose to leave. That CBO is saying that those workers will be equivalent to 2 percent of total hours worked.

Plus you are conveniently forgetting this:

"As for labor demand, the CBO estimates that on balance, the ACA will increase aggregate demand for goods and services"

What does an increase in demand in goods and services do to labor and labor hours?



Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinChief View Post
ok moving on...



None of this garbage has anything to do with my rebuttal of your nonsensical posts. Again, I never stated hours AVAILABLE would be affected (according to the CBO report) I stated that your claim that hours WORKED would not be reduced was false (again according to the CBO).

Learn to read, you ****ing moron.
If you know how to read, then why are you ignoring this:

"As for labor demand, the CBO estimates that on balance, the ACA will increase aggregate demand for goods and services,"

Where the CBO says, that on a balance... aka considering the reduction in total hours from those who choose to leave the labor market... the ACA will increase demand for goods and services, which creates jobs. Which means more hours worked.

Again, your false narrative that leaves our context and quotes is a false narrative.

Keep coming, I enjoy making you look stupid.
__________________
"Most of us can, as we choose, make of this world either a palace or a prison."
–John Lubbock
Posts: 3,607
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, 05:09 PM   #98
Loneiguana Loneiguana is offline
Veteran
 
Loneiguana's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Springfield
Casino cash: $33021
Quote:
Originally Posted by mlyonsd View Post
Would you agree people will choose to work less to get 'free stuff'?
No.

Feel free to provide any evidence.

I'm sure it is out there easy to find.
__________________
"Most of us can, as we choose, make of this world either a palace or a prison."
–John Lubbock
Posts: 3,607
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, 05:10 PM   #99
Loneiguana Loneiguana is offline
Veteran
 
Loneiguana's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Springfield
Casino cash: $33021
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
You misunderstand what choosing not to work means. See the first part of post 87 if you want to understand.
"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.""

People who are retired who needed to work for the insurance can not stay retired, like they want?

Or families where the spouse only worked for a healthcare plan can now stay home and raise kids?

Allowing them not to be forced into working is a bad thing, right patty?
__________________
"Most of us can, as we choose, make of this world either a palace or a prison."
–John Lubbock
Posts: 3,607
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, 05:12 PM   #100
Loneiguana Loneiguana is offline
Veteran
 
Loneiguana's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Springfield
Casino cash: $33021
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinChief View Post
Why anyone (myself included) bothers with you is a mystery.

I wonder that you will still be talking, Loneiguana. Nobody marks you.
So the CBO says "our economy will lose the equivalent of 2+ million jobs."

Not "The CBO projects that the act will reduce the supply of labor, not the availability of jobs."?

Too stupid to understand the difference between labor supply and job supply, eh?

Because the CBO says "In fact, it suggests that aggregate demand for labor (that is, the number of jobs) will increase, not decrease"

How can we lose 2 million jobs and the number of jobs increase?

Wait, we can't, you guys are full of B.S., stupid, or most likely both.
__________________
"Most of us can, as we choose, make of this world either a palace or a prison."
–John Lubbock
Posts: 3,607
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, 05:18 PM   #101
cosmo20002 cosmo20002 is offline
Debunking your bullshit
 
cosmo20002's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: KC area
Casino cash: $121490
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loneiguana View Post
Again, people still have to work.

Those who will choose not too will be those who were only working for the health insurance. Liked the elderly.

You know, what the CBO said.

And it is a good thing, because it frees up jobs for those who want to work.
This is just so, so complicated.

And they call me a shill. Yet they will argue and argue against facts, logic and common sense rather than accept anything that could in any way not be interpreted as a negative for Obama.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris616 View Post
As long as Jesus Christ was the president of the US and approved of it Yes.
Posts: 17,312
cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2014, 05:20 PM   #102
BucEyedPea BucEyedPea is offline
BucPatriot
 
BucEyedPea's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: None of your business
Casino cash: $107825
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loneiguana View Post
So the CBO says "our economy will lose the equivalent of 2+ million jobs."

Not "The CBO projects that the act will reduce the supply of labor, not the availability of jobs."?

Too stupid to understand the difference between labor supply and job supply, eh?

Because the CBO says "In fact, it suggests that aggregate demand for labor (that is, the number of jobs) will increase, not decrease"

How can we lose 2 million jobs and the number of jobs increase?

Wait, we can't, you guys are full of B.S., stupid, or most likely both.
__________________
“Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the Government’s purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.” — James Madison
Posts: 56,199
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, 05:25 PM   #103
AustinChief AustinChief is offline
Administrator
 
AustinChief's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Austin
Casino cash: $1701155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loneiguana View Post
The CBO does not specifically state that the total hours worked will be reduced. That is your false narrative.
You are truly one dumb sonofabitch.

That's EXACTLY what it says. READ THE DAMN REPORT YOU LAZY ****.

Quote:
Originally Posted by THE CBO
The reduction in CBO’s projections of hours worked
represents a decline in the number of full-time-equivalent
workers of about 2.0 million in 2017, rising to about
2.5 million in 2024.
You then go on to say that the CBO report says that there will be an increase in demand therefore more jobs! Except that is not what they are saying. If you weren't a moron you'd be able to see that. The report takes all of that into account and gives a FINAL ANALYSIS that states HOURS WORKED will be reduced. Period.

I am not saying the report is accurate or that I endorse it... I am only stating that YOU obviously are clueless on what it actually says.

I'd encourage you to read it but let's be honest, there's not a chance in hell you'd understand it.
Posts: 14,289
AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2014, 05:27 PM   #104
HonestChieffan HonestChieffan is offline
Country Santa Year Around
 
HonestChieffan's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In the Country in MO
Casino cash: $1263840
AC…the force is with you…..do what needs to be done…..
__________________
Frazod to KC Nitwit..."Hey, I saw a picture of some dumpy bitch with a horrible ****tarded giant back tattoo and couldn't help but think of you." Simple, Pure, Perfect. 7/31/2013

Dave Lane: "I have donated more money to people in my life as an atheist that most churches ever will."

Come home to Jesus Dave. Come home.
Posts: 27,853
HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2014, 05:28 PM   #105
Loneiguana Loneiguana is offline
Veteran
 
Loneiguana's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Springfield
Casino cash: $33021
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinChief View Post
You are truly one dumb sonofabitch.

That's EXACTLY what it says. READ THE DAMN REPORT YOU LAZY ****.
It says that in part of a much larger context. It does not SPECIFICALLY state that. Read the rest of the report. You lie by omission.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinChief View Post
You then go on to say that the CBO report says that there will be an increase in demand therefore more jobs! Except that is not what they are saying. If you weren't a moron you'd be able to see that. The report takes all of that into account and gives a FINAL ANALYSIS that states HOURS WORKED will be reduced. Period.

I am not saying the report is accurate or that I endorse it... I am only stating that YOU obviously are clueless on what it actually says.

I'd encourage you to read it but let's be honest, there's not a chance in hell you'd understand it.
No, the report says this:

Quote:
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;
And you claim to have read it? Lie more.
__________________
"Most of us can, as we choose, make of this world either a palace or a prison."
–John Lubbock
Posts: 3,607
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
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 03:54 AM.


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