ObamaCare to reduce workforce by 2 million jobs' worth of hours, CBO says.... AGAIN...CONSERVATIVES TOLD YOU SO!

AGAIN...CONSERVATIVES TOLD YOU SO!

ObamaCare to reduce workforce by 2 million jobs' worth of hours, CBO says
Published December 10, 2015

ObamaCare will reduce work hours equivalent to 2 million jobs in the next decade amid a host of incentives not to work or to work less, a new Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report says -- the latest blow to President Obama’s signature health insurance plan.

The report estimates the Affordable Care Act, or ACA, will make the labor supply shrink by 0.86 percent in 2025. This amounts to a shrinkage equivalent to approximately 2 million full-time workers.

The nonpartisan CBO estimates that the decline will come primarily due to workers responding to changes made by the law to federal programs and tax policy. The agency points to the introduction of health care subsidies tied to income as a key factor -- which in turn raises effective tax rates as someone’s earnings rise, therefore reducing the amount of work Americans choose to do.

“Subsidies decline as income increases, reducing the return on earning additional income,” the report says. “That decline is effectively an increase in recipients’ effective marginal tax rate, so it generally reduces their work incentives through the substitution effect.”

Since the subsidies also reduce the burdens attached to unemployment, the CBO predicts that the law will create additional “work disincentives” for those who are unemployed for part of the year. It concludes that the exchange subsidies will contribute to half of the overall reduction of the labor supply.

[...]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/12/10/obamacare-to-reduce-workforce-by-2-million-jobs-worth-hours-cbo-says.html?intcmp=hpbt1

This article isn't saying what you think it says, Markle.  In fact, your creation of this thread proves that you don't understand the underlying subject matter.

You're framing this as if 2 million people will lose their jobs due to the ACA.  In reality, the labor elastics used by the CBO to determine that figure are based upon incentives.   When health insurance isn't tied to your employer, and when there are exchanges available that offer affordable prices for those who decide to go it alone, it is reasonable to assume that there will be workers out there who may be able retire but don't because they want to stay on their employers insurance plan.  That is the only thing keeping them in the workforce.  With the ACA and the exchanges, that need is no longer in place.  People can retire early or reduce hours and not have to worry about staying on their employer sponsored plan.   Point being, these people are choosing to work less or retire.  It is not as if they're being laid off or losing their job, which is the tone you appear to be trying to set here.

It's like saying that someone who won the lottery isn't working because they lost their job.  To buy that type of reasoning, you either need to be stupid, a republican, or both.

boards of FL wrote:This article isn't saying what you think it says, Markle.  In fact, your creation of this thread proves that you don't understand the underlying subject matter.

You're framing this as if 2 million people will lose their jobs due to the ACA.  In reality, the labor elastics used by the CBO to determine that figure are based upon incentives.   When health insurance isn't tied to your employer, and when there are exchanges available that offer affordable prices for those who decide to go it alone, it is reasonable to assume that there will be workers out there who may be able retire but don't because they want to stay on their employers insurance plan.  That is the only thing keeping them in the workforce.  With the ACA and the exchanges, that need is no longer in place.  People can retire early or reduce hours and not have to worry about staying on their employer sponsored plan.   Point being, these people are choosing to work less or retire.  It is not as if they're being laid off or losing their job, which is the tone you appear to be trying to set here.

It's like saying that someone who won the lottery isn't working because they lost their job.  To buy that type of reasoning, you either need to be stupid, a republican, or both.

It says that the Obamacare co-ops are losing so much money, they are having to close.

As you know...Obamacare = Failure

You just want it to fail, Markle just like you want your own President to fail along w/ the country. You people are that sick!

Vikingwoman wrote:You just want it to fail, Markle just like you want your own President to fail along w/ the country. You people are that sick!

Millions forecast that it would fail economically and every other way. That's not WANTING it to fail, that is facing REALITY.

Something Progressives are incapable of doing.

Vikingwoman wrote:You just want it to fail, Markle just like you want your own President to fail along w/ the country. You people are that sick!

Conservatives also forecast that the policies of semi-retired President Obama would fail, and they have failed...on a massive scale. That's not WANTING him to fail, simply forecasting what is going to happen.

Progressives are so sick that they actually fantasized that academic theories would work in the real world with real people. They also believe there is a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow and unicorns.