Great News! New CBO report says Obamacare to cause equivalent of 2 million job losses!

KingpinOG

Banned
Joined
May 6, 2012
Messages
3,339
Reputation
-3,360
Daps
2,460
Reppin
Ohio
http://www.politico.com/story/2014/02/obamacare-first-year-enrollment-numbers-103098.html


Obamacare and jobs: CBO adds fuel to fire

By DAVID NATHER and JASON MILLMAN | 2/4/14 11:41 AM EST Updated: 2/4/14 6:51 PM EST

The Republicans just got a big gift from the Congressional Budget Office: It’s going to be a lot easier for them to call Obamacare a “job killer.”

That’s because the budget office’s new economic report says the health care law will cause Americans to work fewer hours – enough to be the equivalent of 2 million fewer jobs in 2017.
The latest number is nearly three times as high as the budget office’s previous prediction, and it’s supposed to rise in later years to the equivalent of 2.5 million jobs in 2024.


(Also on POLITICO: Mass. GOP aims at Obamacare)

There’s a lot more fine print about what those numbers really mean, and whether the jobs were “lost.” In fact, CBO said it’s in large part about the number of hours people choose to work, not actual job losses. But what matters politically is how the numbers look in attack ads. And in this election year, “2 million lost jobs” is a Republican ad maker’s dream.

The projection will put the White House, and especially red-state Democrats, in an even more awkward position heading into November. Until now, they’ve mostly had to worry about stories of canceled health plans and, of course, the botched website rollout. Now they’ll need to figure out how to counter, or at least explain, the new CBO job figures.
(Also on POLITICO: Spotlight on surgeon general pick)

The White House is already taking a crack at it. The report doesn’t actually say businesses will be forced to reduce employment, said the administration, which noted that the report also states there is “no compelling evidence that part-time employment has increased” because of the Affordable Care Act.

Instead, the administration said Tuesday, the health care law will allow people to choose to work less because they’ll be able to get health insurance.
Under Obamacare, “individuals will be empowered to make choices about their own lives and livelihoods, like retiring on time rather than working into their elderly years or choosing to spend more time with their families,” White House press secretary Jay Carney said in a statement.

“It’s only a GOP talking point if you fail to point out the facts,” said Adam Jentleson, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. “The report is saying [the Affordable Care Act] reduces job lock. To portray these as lost jobs or anything like that would be inaccurate.” Job lock is when people feel they have to stay in a job for the health benefits.
(See POLITICO's full Obamacare coverage)

Still, Republicans wasted no time blasting out multiple emails and statements about job loss, “pink slips” and the new CBO estimates. House Speaker John Boehner’s office gave reporters a quick heads up and other Republicans piled on fast.

“For years, Republicans have said that the president’s health care law creates uncertainty for small businesses, hurts take-home pay, and makes it harder to invest in new workers,” Boehner said in a statement. “The middle class is getting squeezed in this economy, and this CBO report confirms that ObamaCare is making it worse.”

House Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy declared that the new report “undercuts any claim by the president that his policies are helping to expand middle-class opportunity and growth – it’s doing the exact opposite.”

(IN 90 SECONDS: Democrats excited about health care again)

And in the Senate, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell called the job numbers “not surprising,” adding, “The tragedy is once again you’ve got an estimate from CBO that, when all’s said and done, we still have 30 million uninsured.”

The news quickly overshadowed two other important updates about how the law is doing. The budget office lowered its estimates of first-year enrollment in Obamacare’s health exchanges to 6 million, down from the 7 million it had predicted before. That’s a drop, but it’s not the cataclysm many had expected during the worst early months of the website debacle.
And in a significant victory for the Obama administration, the budget office now says the law’s “risk corridors” program — the part Republicans are calling a “bailout for insurers” — would actually save $8 billion over the long term.

The reason: The program is supposed to pay health insurers that have higher-than-expected costs, but the money flows both ways. So if insurers’ costs are lower than expected, the health plans are supposed to pay the government.

As a result, the CBO now projects that the program will collect more payments from insurers than it gives them, saving the government money between 2015 and 2017. The program is a temporary one that only lasts for three years.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s office also pointed out that the CBO lowered its estimate of average premiums for exchange health plans by 15 percent this year.

But it was the jobs number that became the news of the day — and forced the White House into full rapid-response mode.

Republicans have argued all along that the health care law will discourage businesses from hiring workers, or at least lead them to cut the hours of part-time workers so they don’t have to provide health coverage when the employer mandate kicks in next year.
That’s not exactly what the report says. It says total employment will keep increasing over the next decade – though not as much as it would have without the Affordable Care Act. And it says the decrease will be a mix of people not working at all and other people working fewer hours – in a lot of cases, voluntarily.

But that will be a hard sell if the attack ads focus on “2 million lost jobs.” Don’t look for them to explain more in any fine print.

Instead, the Obama administration will have to hope the “people can work less” line will suffice as a snappy comeback.

“At the beginning of this year, we noted that as part of this new day in health care, Americans would no longer be trapped in a job just to provide coverage for their families, and would have the opportunity to pursue their dreams,” Carney said in the statement. For good measure, he added that “the Republican plan to repeal the ACA would strip those hard-working Americans of that opportunity.”

The enrollment news, meanwhile, suggests that the Obama administration likely won’t hit its initial target, but it also means the CBO believes the early website failures won’t ruin the first-year effort completely.

The budget previously estimated 7 million people would sign up through state- and federal-run exchanges in 2014, but “significant technical problems encountered in the initial phases of implementing the [Affordable Care Act]” prompted the revision Tuesday.

At least 3 million people have signed up for coverage as of two weeks ago, the Obama administration announced. However, the administration hasn’t released information about how many have paid for their coverage — the final step in completing enrollment. Those numbers don’t include millions more in Medicaid.

The CBO’s budget outlook predicts a late enrollment surge in the next couple of months. March 31 is the 2014 enrollment deadline to avoid the law’s individual mandate penalty for going without coverage.

The CBO projected that the law’s largest effects on the work force wouldn’t start until after 2016, and they would be felt the most among lower-wage workers.

Obamacare’s employer penalty, which was delayed until 2015, will take some of the blame for the workforce reduction, the CBO said. It said businesses with at least 50 full-time employees may cut back or limit full-time staffing to avoid the penalty for not providing health insurance meeting minimum standards.

The availability of subsidies for part-time workers will also encourage some people to avoid seeking full-time work, the CBO said, citing an “implicit tax” on those workers if they go back to a job with health insurance. The CBO also noted a “relatively modest” reduced incentive to work in states that expanded Medicaid eligibility, but only among “a relatively small segment of the population.”

The CBO said it nearly tripled its employment estimate from four years ago after reviewing new research about ways Obamacare affects labor.

In addition, CBO and the Joint Tax Committee predicted about 1.5 million will stay on health plans that were supposed to have been cancelled until the Obama administration in November they could still be sold, even if they don’t meet the new benefit rules. More than 500,000 people will still be on the policies into 2015 because they can be renewed up until October, the CBO and committee projected.
 

KingpinOG

Banned
Joined
May 6, 2012
Messages
3,339
Reputation
-3,360
Daps
2,460
Reppin
Ohio
This is Obamanomics in full effect. I am waiting for the Obamabots to rush into this thread and call the Congressional Budget Office racist.
 

No1

Retired.
Supporter
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
30,697
Reputation
4,899
Daps
68,723
@DEAD7 look, I get that you provide a contrarian opinion but at least be educated about it. Supporting guys like this make you look entirely uninformed and nothing more than the typical right-wing hack fronting as a libertarian. Here are actual facts, instead of Republican spin taken out of context:

What the CBO really found was that the numbers of hours worked would decrease under Obamacare, by roughly 1.5 percent to 2 percent between 2017 and 2024. The report then translated those lost hours into the equivalent of 2.5 million jobs. But that doesn't mean 2.5 million jobs are going to disappear from the U.S. economy.

The CBO report, in fact, specifically undermines that claim. Those lost hours will "almost entirely" be the result of people choosing to work fewer hours because of Obamacare -- not because they lost their jobs or can't find a full-time job.

The estimated reduction stems almost entirely from a net decline in the amount of labor that workers choose to supply, rather than from a net drop in businesses' demand for labor, so it will appear almost entirely as a reduction in labor force participation and in hours worked relative to what would have occurred otherwise rather than as an increase in unemployment (that is, more workers seeking but not finding jobs) or underemployment (such as part-time workers who would prefer to work more hours per week).



The report explicitly says that Obamacare isn't going to force businesses to cut jobs on any grand scale. What it is going to do is change how much Americans work.

"I think it’s important to distinguish between people choosing to work less and jobs being lost," Larry Levitt, vice president at the non-partisan Kaiser Famiy Foundation, told TPM. "That is something important to keep an eye on, since you don’t want to discourage work. But, it’s not in all cases a bad thing."

"For example, some people in their late 50s and early 60s would like to retire because they have health issues but have kept working for the health benefits. Some of them can now retire because they can’t be discriminated against for having a pre-existing condition and may get help paying their premiums."

So how exactly will the law influence Americans? It is, of course, complicated.

The main takeaway is: Obamacare will affect how much Americans decide to work. Why? Benefits like tax subsidies to purchase private health coverage and expanded Medicaid are based on income. The more money you make, the fewer benefits you receive. In general, the law's added financial security will likely give Americans a little less incentive to work.

Some Americans will therefore decide to work less. That could manifest in different ways: some people might chose to transition to part-time work; others might wait longer between jobs. One population -- those nearing retirement age -- might opt to retire early because the law allows them to continue receiving health coverage even if they don't work.


But the ultimate impact of those decisions is the same: Americans will be working less. But not because there will be so many fewer jobs, as Kaiser's Levitt explained to TPM.

"If you guarantee people insurance even if they don’t get it on the job and you give them help based on their income, that’s likely to lead to people working somewhat less," he said. "That’s going to be true of any means tested program. The only way around it is not to give people the help."

Obamacare will have some effect on businesses and how many workers they chose to employ, but the net impact is hard to deduce, the CBO reported. Parts of the law, such as the employer mandate penalty, will likely reduce the demand for workers among businesses. But that will be offset, at least in part, because of the law's positive financial benefits, putting more money into the economy and increasing demand for goods and services.

The report didn't include any specific projections of how those opposing forces would influence the labor market -- and, as the CBO said itself, they should be negligible compared to Americans' own decisions about how much they want to work.

Try to post like the guy who won poster of the year and not part of the knee-jerk right-wing media apparatus. *Returns to lurking*
 

Hulk Hogan

THE HULKSTER BROTHER
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
848
Reputation
230
Daps
2,725
Reppin
Tampa, Brother
In fact, CBO said it’s in large part about the number of hours people choose to work, not actual job losses. But what matters politically is how the numbers look in attack ads. And in this election year, “2 million lost jobs” is a Republican ad maker’s dream.
ADMIT YOUR ARTICLE IS PARTISAN PROPAGANDA, BREHS!
 

No_bammer_weed

✌️ Coli. Wish y’all the best of luck. One
Joined
Jul 19, 2012
Messages
10,281
Reputation
7,946
Daps
58,323
Do you even read you fukkin pansy? An excerpt from YOUR quote:

Republicans have argued all along that the health care law will discourage businesses from hiring workers, or at least lead them to cut the hours of part-time workers so they don’t have to provide health coverage when the employer mandate kicks in next year.That’s not exactly what the report says. It says total employment will keep increasing over the next decade – though not as much as it would have without the Affordable Care Act. And it says the decrease will be a mix of people not working at all and other people working fewer hours – in a lot of cases, voluntarily.

To put this in terms even you can understand, many people are working solely for the purposes of having health insurance, but with greater individual access to insurance under the ACA people will voluntarily work less, choose a job that they enjoy more, or quit because they wont have to depend on their employer for health care.. Thats what YOUR link says.

The same link you provided also inferred that dumbasses like you understand nuance, meaning, and economic ramifications like a kangaroo understands the japanese language, so all you will need is a misleading headline twisted into an anti-obama meme from one of your republican pimps in order to draw your logic free conclusions.
 

The Real

Anti-Ignorance
Joined
May 8, 2012
Messages
6,353
Reputation
725
Daps
10,726
Reppin
NYC
There’s a lot more fine print about what those numbers really mean, and whether the jobs were “lost.” In fact, CBO said it’s in large part about the number of hours people choose to work, not actual job losses. But what matters politically is how the numbers look in attack ads. And in this election year, “2 million lost jobs” is a Republican ad maker’s dream.

The article itself predicts exactly how it's going to be abused by Republicans in the opening paragraphs... and KingpinOG fulfilled its prophecy completely.
 

No_bammer_weed

✌️ Coli. Wish y’all the best of luck. One
Joined
Jul 19, 2012
Messages
10,281
Reputation
7,946
Daps
58,323
The article itself predicts exactly how it's going to be abused by Republicans in the opening paragraphs... and KingpinOG fulfilled its prophecy completely.

Per Article:

There’s a lot more fine print about what those numbers really mean, and whether the jobs were “lost.” In fact, CBO said it’s in large part about the number of hours people choose to work, not actual job losses. But what matters politically is how the numbers look in attack ads. And in this election year, “2 million lost jobs” is a Republican ad maker’s dream.

Translation: We're an idiocracy, and nobody understands this better, and knows how to play their audience more effectively than Republicans. Fine print, detail, and analytics are socialist or somethin....
 

DEAD7

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Oct 5, 2012
Messages
50,973
Reputation
4,416
Daps
89,065
Reppin
Fresno, CA.
:whoa: I didnt even read the article. I just dap any attack on what I view as a horrible piece of legislation :manny:
However, some scrutiny is probably a good idea.:ehh:

This part of your post is interesting though :mjpls:

Obamacare will have some effect on businesses and how many workers they chose to employ,
but the net impact is hard to deduce, the CBO reported. Parts of the law, such as the employer mandate penalty, will likely reduce the demand for workers among businesses. But that will be offset, at least in part, because of the law's positive financial benefits, putting more money into the economy and increasing demand for goods and services.

The report didn't include any specific projections of how those opposing forces would influence the labor market
 

Jhoon

Spontaneous Mishaps and Hijinks
Joined
Jul 2, 2012
Messages
16,518
Reputation
1,500
Daps
37,705
lol at folks trying to feign anger at working less because they are no longer held captive by employers. I know more than a few folks who refuse to retire because that check is used to pay for their useless insurance.
 

Dirty Mcdrawz

Your girl loves em....
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
11,415
Reputation
1,146
Daps
25,478
I know the "great news" in the title is sarcasm but for some reason I think the majority of conservatives and people who are against this legislation would be overjoyed if it failed just so they could say, see we told you so. So demonic....
 

KingpinOG

Banned
Joined
May 6, 2012
Messages
3,339
Reputation
-3,360
Daps
2,460
Reppin
Ohio
Do you even read you fukkin pansy? An excerpt from YOUR quote:



To put this in terms even you can understand, many people are working solely for the purposes of having health insurance, but with greater individual access to insurance under the ACA people will voluntarily work less, choose a job that they enjoy more, or quit because they wont have to depend on their employer for health care.. Thats what YOUR link says.

The same link you provided also inferred that dumbasses like you understand nuance, meaning, and economic ramifications like a kangaroo understands the japanese language, so all you will need is a misleading headline twisted into an anti-obama meme from one of your republican pimps in order to draw your logic free conclusions.


So let me get this straight........a government law that encourages people to work fewer hours and earn less income is now considered a good thing? In an era when the national debt continues to soar, having the equivalent of 2 million fewer people paying income tax is something to be celebrated? With current entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare facing long term bankruptcy, having 2 million people pay less into those programs is a success?


:dead::dead::dead::dead:


No offense to posters like No Bammer Weed and The Real, but it is that kind of backwards, irrational thinking that makes people laugh at liberals. The fact is that Obamacare creates a massive disincentive to work. Why work more hours when you can just work less, earn less, and then get government subsidized health insurance? The less you work the more subsidies you get. NEVERMIND THE FACT THAT OTHER TAXPAYERS ARE NOW GOING TO HAVE TO WORK MORE AND PAY MORE TAXES IN ORDER TO FUND THOSE SUBSIDIES.

Only in a Democrat controlled presidency is discouraging able bodied Americans from working considered to be an economic success. It doesn't matter if the decrease in labor comes from the demand side or the supply side, it has the same effect on economic growth.
 
Top