Obama-Careless: Health-care law will lead to 2 million fewer workers

By
February 4, 2014

The Affordable Care Act will reduce the number of full-time workers by more than 2 million in coming years, congressional budget analysts said Tuesday in the most detailed analysis of the law’s impact on jobs.

via CBO: Health-care law will lead to 2 million fewer workers – The Washington Post.



AdSense 300×250
NewsMax Trending Now
Comments:
  1. Ragspierre says:

    As we’ve said for YEARS…

    ObamaDoggle is a job-killing machine.

    It has been.

    It is now.

    It will be.

  2. Gus says:

    Ah, wingnuts lying about what the CBO says.

    Shocking.

    • Ragspierre says:

      Hilarious…!!!

      A Collectivist troll, so daft as to use the word “lying” in a post about ObamaDoggle from the WaPo.

      NOBODY lies like your Collective, as we all know.

      Or do you seriously believe anything Pres. ScamWOW crams up your butt, “Gus”…???

      How does it feel to have been so totally punked?

      • Gus says:

        The CBO doesn’t say what you liars say it says, dip shit. Fact. As acknowledged by Paul Ryan. The CBO says that some workers will VOLUNTARILY cut back on hours or quit working all together. The reason is that they would no longer be dependent upon their employers for health insurance.

        Which means that you are lying about what the CBO says.

        Again, how shocking.

        How does it feel to be wagged by wingnut media instead of what the primary authority actually says? Over and over.

        • Ragspierre says:

          You, typically, have distorted things to fit your lies.

          The word “disincentive” is your first clue, moron.

          Which is what the CBO guy has been warning about for three years, but has had to raise his estimate of the harm.

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlBvrp4qV7Q&feature=player_embedded

          Nobody EVER HAD to “be dependent on their employer” for health care, liar.

          Now, under the fascist, totalitarian ObamaDoggle, they are LEGALLY REQUIRED to be dependent on SOMEBODY for health INSURANCE, which is different than health CARE.

          Idiot.

          (Except millions of us will not comply.)

  3. Ragspierre says:

    Honey, I shrunk the Workforce “How Obama fundamentally transformed America” #Obamamovietitles @virginiahume—
    RBGI (@GerkenB) February 05, 2014

    That would have been at least a partially true campaign slogan for Pres. ScamWOW.

  4. Ragspierre says:

    http://a57.foxnews.com/www.foxnews.com/images/root_images/0/0/DISINCENTIVETOWORK2_20140205_110831.jpg

    CBO head delivers damning statement, telling lawmakers that the Affordable Care Act is a ‘disincentive for people to work.’

    • Gus says:

      Which is totally different than employers laying off workers because of Obamacare, isn’t it, inspector?

      Guess what? If workers who don’t want to be working in the first place, for whatever reason, drop out of the workforce, new workers will have to fill in those gaps. Correct, Clownselor?

      • Ragspierre says:

        Yep.

        Two different effects, both bad.

        Employers have been laying off workers/cutting back hours for years, which, naturally, you’ve been lying about for years.

        Employees dropping out of the work-force, or finding it rational to earn so little they stay subsidized is also a very bad thing.

        Unless, like Reid, you think more poor people is a plus.

        What an idiot.

        • Gus says:

          “Employees dropping out of the work-force, or finding it rational to earn so little they stay subsidized is also a very bad thing.”

          Or unless they want to retire, dummy. Or because they just don’t like their job. Regardless, the reason is worker CHOICE. Choice provided to them by Obamacare.

          This is different than a drop in demand for labor, as the CBO made clear.

          And contrary to your lies, and the lies of your brood. Isn’t that correct, Clownselor?

          • Ragspierre says:

            Put up a reference to someone saying this story…as opposed to others about the drop in labor demand ALSO coming from ObamaDoggle…is about a drop in labor demand.

            Yes, moron. Giving people the “choice” to stay impoverished is a BIG gain for your Collective.

            Where are those 400,000 jobs this steaming pile of crap (sold on lies) was going to create “almost immediately”?

            Do you EVER get tired of lying and supporting lies?

          • Ragspierre says:

            Oh, and “choice” and “incentive” are two different concepts.

            I know you have trouble with ideas. But stretch.

  5. Ragspierre says:

    “The reason is that they would no longer be dependent upon their employers for health insurance.”

    That is a lie (of course).

    This whole story is about the effect of the DISINCENTIVE to work and earn more built into ObamaDoggle because of the perverse subsidy system.

    It has NOTHING to do with being “dependent on employers”.

    Seriously, do you understand anything?

    Which moonbattery punkmeister has packed this in your crap-filled skull?

    Serious question. Put up where you got your lying-points.

  6. Gus says:

    “That is a lie (of course).”

    Really? Then Paul Ryan and CBO director, Elmendorf must also be lying. Are they lying, Clownselor?

    • Ragspierre says:

      If you think anybody here is going to answer such a stupid, implicit lie-packed question as that, you are a bigger moron than even I have demonstrated you are.

  7. Ragspierre says:

    CBO’s conclusion is that ObamaCare will encourage people to supply less labor by deciding not to take a job or by working fewer hours. The law’s insurance subsidies are gradually taken away as income rises, “creating an implicit tax on additional earnings,” the CBO observes. These effective marginal tax rates reduce the rewards for work—whether it be overtime, accepting a promotion, or training in the hope of higher future earnings. CBO doesn’t note, though we will, that simply extending “free” coverage skews job search decisions by offering an in-kind bonus for unemployment.

    CBO’s job-loss prediction is all the more remarkable because it doesn’t include the impact of ObamaCare’s employer mandate, which requires businesses with 50 or more full-time employees to offer insurance or pay a $2,000 penalty for each worker beyond 30 employees. CBO more or less punts on the issue because the White House delayed the mandate for a year and the changes would be hard to model. But this means CBO is probably still underestimating job losses because common sense says that labor mandates raise hiring costs and induce businesses to hire less, or pay lower wages, or slash hours, or all three.

    Getty Images

    Too bad this reality isn’t permeating the liberal force field of thinking only positive thoughts. “Claims that the Affordable Care Act hurts jobs are simply belied by the facts in the CBO report,” the White House declared Tuesday. By “facts,” the White House seems to mean that the report is positive because “individuals will be empowered to make choices about their own lives and livelihoods” and “have the opportunity to pursue their dreams.” There you have it: the new American dream of not working.

    All of this is one more contradiction of the arguments that were used to sell ObamaCare. The law would reduce health-care costs and shrink the deficit, you could keep your health plan and your doctor, and businesses could hire more workers and be more competitive. All of this is turning out to be false, and now we learn that the law is a job destroyer that is removing rungs from the ladder of upward economic mobility.
    —WSJ

    But, while earning less…even MUCH less…than you could, you can be assured you’ll have time to tuck the kiddies in bed.

    Like that never happened ten years ago…

  8. Ragspierre says:

    Stephen Green @VodkaPundit
    Follow

    Fewer workers consuming more benefits produces cost savings because shut up, racist.
    10:02 AM – 5 Feb 2014

    Yep. Collectivist “logic”.

  9. Ragspierre says:

    AOL chairman and CEO Tim Armstrong says Obamacare’s regulations and mandates will cose his firm about $7.1 million, and has put his company in a difficult spot between choosing whether to cut benefits or pass the costs onto employees.

    “We have to decide to pass that expense to our employees or cut other benefits,” Armstrong told CNBC on Thursday. “As a CEO and management team, we had to decide, do we pass the $7.1 million of Obamacare costs to our employees or do we try to eat as much of that as possible and cut other benefits?”
    —TheCorner

    Nothing is as expensive as “free” fascist health-care (which, even the Collectivist morons will note, is NOT just “health insurance”).

  10. Ragspierre says:

    http://www.jammiewf.com/2014/45000-people-liberated-from-jobs-in-january/

    Hey, in the gonzo world of Collectivist newspeak, this is GOOD…!!!

    The Collectivist war on the middle-class is going apace.

  11. Ragspierre says:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/370487/humana-will-get-250-450-million-offset-expected-loses-year-thats-just-one-insurer

    Huh?

    The costs jes’ keepa piling up…

    in this steaming pile of Collectivist crap.

  12. Ragspierre says:

    – Economically, this is obviously going to be something of a drag, and it will put strains on other systems. People who retire early probably aren’t collecting Social Security yet, but they aren’t paying into it, either.
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-02-04/will-obamacare-kill-jobs-.html

    Or… Greece.

  13. Ragspierre says:

    As Rich Lowry writes, “The Democrats once styled themselves the party of workers. Now, they are the party of people who would have been workers, if it hadn’t been for Obamacare.” That doesn’t bode well for them in November; and it doesn’t bode well for the rest of the nation if the situation continues.

    Until it can’t.
    —Ed Driscoll

    What an amazing turn-around.

    What an amazing pack of lies and destructive policy.

    Just as we said. Years ago.

  14. Ragspierre says:

    “The problems over the Ukraine come almost as a caboose to a long train of disasters, with a disconsolate State Department pulling along a whole string of derelicts: Libya, Syria, Iran, the Arab Spring and growing tension in the Western Pacific, so that the troubles with Russia pass almost unnoticed as the last car in the series. . . . Under his watch the 70 year old Pax Americana has fallen apart. Al-Qaeda has flourished. President Benigno Aquino of the Philippines caught the tone of rising concern when he warned, in an interview with the New York Times that China was doing to Southeast Asia what Nazi Germany did to Central Europe in the late 1930s. . . . Barack Obama is in trouble and so are we all. It’s time to stop the Happy Talk and for Republicans and Democrats to face the facts. The emperor has no clothes.”
    —Richard Fernandez

    And no balls.

    But he does have him some America hate.

  15. Ragspierre says:

    We were sold the idea that ObamaDoggle was targeted at getting rid of “free-riders”.

    Now we see that it really was all about codifying “free-riders”.

    Sucka…