The job eliminator –in-chief.
Based on a report from the CBO over 2 million full time jobs will be lost due to obamacare.The worst piece of legislation in history from the worst president in history will fuck well over 2 million more Americans. that is in addition to the over 6 million who lost their health care and the well over, what is predicted to be, 100 million when the employer mandate kicks in. Plus the fucked up web site, the increased co-pay, increased deductibles, and in most cases increased premiums .obama doesn’t know much but sure knows how to fuck things up. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/feb/4/cbo-obamacare-push-2m-workers-out-labor-market/ 2014 = GOP Senate and Hous
Nope, the CBO did not say that Obamacare would push 2 million out of the labor market
The Wash Times headline writer erroneously said that, and you just accepted it uncritically when you paraphrased the headline to say Obamacare was "eliminating" jobs. If you actually read the CBO report, you will see that the CBO concluded that Obamacare is giving these workers THE OPTION to cut back if THEY so choose:
“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).”
That's not much of a push , is it? It's liking saying that Obamacare is pushing St. Croix's millionaires to reduce their income and to accept those ACA subsidies.
I think you have inadvertently found a reason to like Obamacare- it gives workers a new option. Of course the option stinks bc those are subsidies I’m paying for to make this possible but, if you are in this income range, or one of St. Croix's millionaires, Obamacare is definitely a plus.
BTW, you should be reading the Post- not the Times.
There are many good reasons to criticize Obamacare – but if you are one of the favored workers, this is not one of them
Sure any worker would like to work less hours, but they want their current rate, if not more.
The Wash Times headline writer erroneously said that, and you just accepted it uncritically when you paraphrased the headline to say Obamacare was "eliminating" jobs. If you actually read the CBO report, you will see that the CBO concluded that Obamacare is giving these workers THE OPTION to cut back if THEY so choose:
“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).”
That's not much of a push , is it? It's liking saying that Obamacare is pushing St. Croix's millionaires to reduce their income and to accept those ACA subsidies.
I think you have inadvertently found a reason to like Obamacare- it gives workers a new option. Of course the option stinks bc those are subsidies I’m paying for to make this possible but, if you are in this income range, or one of St. Croix's millionaires, Obamacare is definitely a plus.
BTW, you should be reading the Post- not the Times.
There are many good reasons to criticize Obamacare – but if you are one of the favored workers, this is not one of them.
I know some full time and part time workers who turn down extra hours and overtime because it would affect WIC, MNCare, SNAP and a few other programs. It happens.
The Wash Times headline writer erroneously said that, and you just accepted it uncritically when you paraphrased the headline to say Obamacare was "eliminating" jobs. If you actually read the CBO report, you will see that the CBO concluded that Obamacare is giving these workers THE OPTION to cut back if THEY so choose:
“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).”
That's not much of a push , is it? It's liking saying that Obamacare is pushing St. Croix's millionaires to reduce their income and to accept those ACA subsidies.
I think you have inadvertently found a reason to like Obamacare- it gives workers a new option. Of course the option stinks bc those are subsidies I’m paying for to make this possible but, if you are in this income range, or one of St. Croix's millionaires, Obamacare is definitely a plus.
BTW, you should be reading the Post- not the Times.
There are many good reasons to criticize Obamacare – but if you are one of the favored workers, this is not one of them.
subsidies paid for by me. I bet you are a Trader Joe's kinda of guy. Well respected company, the pay is fairly good for retail, and they provide excellent benefits in 2013. I would venture to say that 90% of Trader Joe's employees are classified as part-time, meaning less than a guaranteed 40 hours, which is given only to certain employees. A good majority of the 90% in 2013 worked more than 30 hours. Trader Joe's paid for their healthcare, an HMO plan, nevertheless paid for by Trader Joe's.
So this iconic company, and I think you can say it's iconic, makes the executive decision to effectively move the majority of its part time employees to under 30 hours, which is the magic number in Obamacare. Trader Joe's gave them a one time $500 payment in January,and instructed to get their healthcare under ACA. All of those thousands and thousands of employees will now get a subsidized policy paid for by me. Not Trader Joe's, but by the taxpayer. Do the math mari. How much do they make an hour, multiply it by week or month, and I'm guessing they are over the Medicaid threshold, but still would garner a subsidy that would pay close to 90% of the premium. $500 bucks ain't going to cover mari.
Think about it mari. You run a Trader Joe's store. You have about 80 employees, of which 70 are "classified" as part time. As that leader, you will ensure that no part time employee works more than 30 hours on a repeated basis, because if you do, the company will classify that employee as one that must be given health insurance through the company as mandated by Obamacare.
Same action is being done by Home Depot and Walgreens. So let's say the 2 million jobs lost is bullshit. But I assume you are OK with companies moving employees to part-time and ACA, paid for by you and me. We have a chronic unemployment problem, and now we will have a chronic underemployment problem, along with millions leaving the workforce, which as I understand Jay Carney thinks that is a FABULOUS idea.
But don't worry mari, Trader Joe's will still carry that wine spritzer and cheese fondue that you dearly love, and can share with your significant other. I hope he has a job, because I fired you from your other job.
The Wash Times headline writer erroneously said that, and you just accepted it uncritically when you paraphrased the headline to say Obamacare was "eliminating" jobs. If you actually read the CBO report, you will see that the CBO concluded that Obamacare is giving these workers THE OPTION to cut back if THEY so choose:
“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).”
That's not much of a push , is it? It's liking saying that Obamacare is pushing St. Croix's millionaires to reduce their income and to accept those ACA subsidies.
I think you have inadvertently found a reason to like Obamacare- it gives workers a new option. Of course the option stinks bc those are subsidies I’m paying for to make this possible but, if you are in this income range, or one of St. Croix's millionaires, Obamacare is definitely a plus.
BTW, you should be reading the Post- not the Times.
There are many good reasons to criticize Obamacare – but if you are one of the favored workers, this is not one of them.
Getting out of offering health care insurance and health care to employees is good for business. Health care/insurance costs can bankrupt small businesses who can’t negotiate low premiums bc of asmall risk pool; these costs also are an enormous drag on large companies. GM is a health care company that sells cars on the side; in 2007 GM spent more on health care than it did on steel.
Profits will now go up as TJ sheds this unnecesary expense and TJ can now afford to pay its part time workers more as a result. True, the employees get screwed here if TJ pockets the difference bc that $500 one time payment is taxed; health care benefits are not. But they can still afford a fine wine like Two Buck Chuck.
If the government is willing to pick up the costs, every business should take advantage of this. The cost is spread over so many taxpayers we won’t actually feel the difference, although it grates on me in principle.
As for firing me, I don’t see how you can fire an Unemployed Porn Star anyway. But, if you did, maybe I can now get unemployment benefits from you which would be an improvement over my present salary. And, if you meant the other job, you forgot about my Golden Parachute- you should know that fired CEOs make out better than than they were employed.
So this iconic company, and I think you can say it's iconic, makes the executive decision to effectively move the majority of its part time employees to under 30 hours, which is the magic number in Obamacare. Trader Joe's gave them a one time $500 payment in January,and instructed to get their healthcare under ACA. All of those thousands and thousands of employees will now get a subsidized policy paid for by me. Not Trader Joe's, but by the taxpayer. Do the math mari. How much do they make an hour, multiply it by week or month, and I'm guessing they are over the Medicaid threshold, but still would garner a subsidy that would pay close to 90% of the premium. $500 bucks ain't going to cover mari.
Think about it mari. You run a Trader Joe's store. You have about 80 employees, of which 70 are "classified" as part time. As that leader, you will ensure that no part time employee works more than 30 hours on a repeated basis, because if you do, the company will classify that employee as one that must be given health insurance through the company as mandated by Obamacare.
Same action is being done by Home Depot and Walgreens. So let's say the 2 million jobs lost is bullshit. But I assume you are OK with companies moving employees to part-time and ACA, paid for by you and me. We have a chronic unemployment problem, and now we will have a chronic underemployment problem, along with millions leaving the workforce, which as I understand Jay Carney thinks that is a FABULOUS idea.
But don't worry mari, Trader Joe's will still carry that wine spritzer and cheese fondue that you dearly love, and can share with your significant other. I hope he has a job, because I fired you from your other job.
The Wash Times headline writer erroneously said that, and you just accepted it uncritically when you paraphrased the headline to say Obamacare was "eliminating" jobs. If you actually read the CBO report, you will see that the CBO concluded that Obamacare is giving these workers THE OPTION to cut back if THEY so choose:
“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).”
That's not much of a push , is it? It's liking saying that Obamacare is pushing St. Croix's millionaires to reduce their income and to accept those ACA subsidies.
I think you have inadvertently found a reason to like Obamacare- it gives workers a new option. Of course the option stinks bc those are subsidies I’m paying for to make this possible but, if you are in this income range, or one of St. Croix's millionaires, Obamacare is definitely a plus.
BTW, you should be reading the Post- not the Times.
There are many good reasons to criticize Obamacare – but if you are one of the favored workers, this is not one of them.
Problem getting a job writing fiction, you know like you do here.
You're Welcome
2014 = GOP House and Senate
as long as it is for health insurance. I am certain Trader Joe’s is savvy enough to make sure of it. It is smart move because it is costs the employees lower than what they were paying for one size fits all plan before. Now based on their age and health, the healthy ones may not incur a premium increase or have to pay more than what they were paying in 2013. In some cases, they will save money with the option of Bronze, Gold and Platinum plans. One can choose the coverage one need instead of paying for the one size fits all employer provided insurance before.
In 2015 all companies have to offer the bronze, gold and platinum tiers.
By the time 2016 rolls around the ACA narrative is going to completely different than it is today form Cantor, Cruz and Rubio.
I am interested in this years election results for Governors in states where Republican governors didn’t expand medicare and lost billions in federal money. Would be interesting.
"Employer payments for your health coverage are fully tax free. This rule does not change in 2014 when the health care mandates go into effect. But are cash payments that an employer pays to an employee instead of providing coverage also tax free?
The IRS reminds employees that cash payments, for whatever reason, are taxable wages. This is so even if the cash is meant to replace employer-paid health coverage. Next year, “large” employers must offer minimum essential health coverage or pay a penalty. This responsibility has no impact on cash payments made to their employees."
What is the basis for your statement? I did not look at the IRS publications myself to confirm that the experts are correct. Is there an exception to this rule if the cash payment is a "one time payment"? That is the only way I can see the experts could be wrong. Clearly regular payments are taxable.
...TJ's was sold to a German company that is now spitting on America in the name of profit. They certainly do not stand for...
Gott und das Land
Danke schön
utterly false and baseless. Trader Joe may be doing what you say they are doing but you don’t know what or how their plan work.
Because of ACA, I am saving about $1200 a year and I have no subsidy whatsoever. How am I saving the money? Instead of paying the same premium to subsidize my co-workers with chronic sickness and having need to take medicines, I pay for lower coverage because I very healthy, don’t have any chronic illness, physically fit.
Since, I live a healthy life style, I get $240 per quarter to pay for my deductibles and medicines if I need to. I don’t have to pay a co-pay for a physical and I have no no co-pay for generic prescriptions.
My premium per month went down by $30/pay period and I get paid twice a month. While you babble about shit you know nothing about, the average working joe is benefitting from ACA. Right wings problem is with helping the poor and the needy because of you convoluted belief they are all lazy (some are lazy) but most are not (understand right wing’s penchant to focus on trivial).
The real problem for you right wingers are you can only convince like minded right wingers and no one else. Basically you are talking to and convincing yourselves with you irrational talking points. Another thing right wing media is doing is jumping the gun and getting their faces pelted with rotten lies.
By the way you are not (your tax dollars) not subsidizing anyone, most of it is coming from medicaid and other health care saving and according to CBO, ACA is going to help lower the deficit. All bad news for Republicans.
If not hundreds of thousands of small businesses are going to 49/29.
They are not expanding.
They are not hiring full time employees and keeping part time 29 hours or less.
That is a direct result of obamacare.
You’re Welcome
2014 = GOP Senate and Hous
Whaaa….Whaaa, I see you and your boyfriend wet your panties again.
Not verified ? ? It is common knowledge. !
Here you go, here is a little help
http://www.businessinsider.com/cbo-report-obamacare-job-losses-2014-2
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303460004579192102917020082
I f you want more evidence it is all ove the place, so get off your fat, lazy, worthless, blubber laden asses and look for it yourselves.
You’re Welcome
2014 = GOP Senate and Hous
It is better for society if people work to their normal potential. If I can work 40 hours a week and support myself, that is good.
The "option" you talk about is I stop working 40 hours and "opt" to work 30 because someone else - the state, the system - will pay for part of my expenses.
The social planning aspect of this "option" is to make people less self-reliant because it pays more to work the 30 hours.
The wording of "jobs lost" or "fewer hours" or "more flexible options" is all fancy wording for a person will end up working less, earning less, and needing someone else to fill in the economic gap
making you work 30 hours, or less than full-time, so that they don't have to pay for your insurance, and other benefits! This is a very common practice. At least now a person has the choice to work less hours, and they can have health insurance to boot.
Your "choice" is I work less because someone else will pay for my expenses.
The reality is if people want to improve their lives, many should work more. If you are willing to accept the 30 hours to get subsidized insurance, then don't bitch when you can't afford a nice car, a house, or a trip to Europe.
"Chosing" to work part time is a way to guarantee a lower class.
My God, have we sunk so low that it is a good thing that people can now get aid when they could have been independent? Do we celebrate the fact that people are less able to care for themselves?
I would be glad to work 20 hours if someone would pay for my medical, food and housing.
Why not. Why should i have to work to get a nice meal. (assuming I am able to do so.) It would be a good thing if I could work 25 hours and you would pay for my lunch. (it is you because it is society, and every working person is paying)
Government regulation of arbitrarily setting the part time threshold at 30 hours created the first problem where businesses are incentivized to reduce workers hours. So now we'll let government create another arbitrary threshold to further incentivize additional people to work less.
Great!
I'm being sarcastic but sadly you actually think it is great.
As someone that is an employer and I don't fit neatly into a politcal opposite polar. I think I know the reason why. There has been a breakdown in the family dynamic and over half children black, white and hispanic are born out of wedlock. There chances are already slim, and only the ambitious will strive to get an education, start businesses and demand from life for it to be full-filling. Our youth today have many things against them to keep me hiring them, they don't want to work but want a check. I have a 50 year old that can work circles around someone half his age.
And this is the age of takers, as we watch America breakdown, the greedy are snatching while the lazy will steal your shit while you are working to have a better life. When will America realize the middle class is gone?
you actually think that's the real story here? Are you being a nit picker or do you not really care about the reality of the situation?
Dncphil etal have ably pointed out the lunacy of the consequences of this. Clearly some people will be working less than before. OK, it's not a loss of jobs for now but it most certainly IS a loss of growth and reduction of productivity (potentially a permanent loss), all at the expense of those not taking advantage of the situation.
Good grief!
-- Modified on 2/6/2014 10:03:17 PM
Times headline writer which misled the OP into believing that this feature of the ACA was eliminating 2 million jobs.
This misrepresentation generated a dedicated article in the Washington Post Fact Checker column wherein the writer awarded “Three Pinocchio’s” to anyone who made this misrepresentation.
If you consider a misrepresentation of this quality -eliminating jobs vs an employee choosing not to work - to be “nitpicking,” then I’d say you and I have a difference of opinion so wide on this one as to not justify further discussion.
As to your question “ do I not really care about the reality of the situation,” you might reread the post where I stated that the option “stinks” because I have to pay for it. I further expressly stated that this feature was a plus only for those who benefited.
Did this one really deserve a “good grief?
When I was in the position of choosing not to work. I was still considered a full time employee, and union dues still covered my healthcare.
Marikod are these employees choosing not to work?
...or are they being coerced not to work?
Either way they are now part time employees.
is the general acceptance that the story about the misrepresentation somehow becomes bigger or more important than the actual reality of the situation.
It's no different than someone reporting that your house blew up when in fact in really only burned down and then we spend all our time talking about the incorrect original report rather than the fact that you are now without a house.
While I did use the term job eliminator-in-chief as a Term in general.
If you note in the text of my OP I stated…..over 2 million FULL TIME jobs will be LOST due to obamacare. NOT eliminated. There is a difference between lost and eliminated and that is not nit picking.
Good Grief
You’re Welcome
2014 = GOP Senate and Hous
I'm back to Trader Joe's. Anybody that shops at Trader Joe's knows their stores generally tend to be in upscale urban areas. On the flip slip you have the black community screaming for years on the lack of "CHOICE" in their neighborhoods. When you have choice you have competition, lower prices, better selection, and healthier options. Seriously obesity is a a big problem in the black community, which has direct health care impact. Hello!!!!!!
So Trader Joe's makes the decision to build a store in a predominately black neighborhood in Portland, Ore. That sounds pretty admirable. They provide good jobs, decent pay, of course we all know Obamacare is encouraging a reduction in hours worked, but nevertheless, Trader Joe's is far superior to a Walmart, Target, and other potential retailers. When you think of Trader Joe's, you might think of the word "gentrification", which is a good thing. Better pay for local residents, property values increase, other business will now flock to this area. Doesn't this help income inequality. Obviously not!
Trader Joe's decided not to build because black activists said "the grocery-store development would increase the desirability of the neighborhood for non-oppressed populations". What the fuck does that mean. I guess they don't want any white urban millennials moving in and increasing the value of the community. Let's just stay with a Popeye's, Pay Day Loans, or a Liquor store development plan.
So when any of you liberals want to talk about income inequality, remember this article before you ask for higher taxes from me to pay for Obama's economic agenda, which is unemployment extension for the umpteenth time, minimum wage increase, and expansion of the earned income tax credit. Yes, that is Obama's economic agenda.
Based on a report from the CBO over 2 million full time jobs will be lost due to obamacare.
The worst piece of legislation in history from the worst president in history will fuck well over 2 million more Americans. that is in addition to the over 6 million who lost their health care and the well over, what is predicted to be, 100 million when the employer mandate kicks in. Plus the fucked up web site, the increased co-pay, increased deductibles, and in most cases increased premiums .obama doesn’t know much but sure knows how to fuck things up.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/feb/4/cbo-obamacare-push-2m-workers-out-labor-market/
2014 = GOP Senate and House
Don't forget about the bail bondsmen, they need office space too.
proved their ignorance. None of the things you shit heads said about ACA is true or is ever going to come true. But, it is fun to watch Republicans making an ass of themselves in public
of the Washington Times article says exactly what the OP said. A lot of internet sources also got it wrong.
We all rely on internet sources in here and rarely read the original, so I think your ad hominem criticism is misplaced.
If youlike your plan you can keep your plan PERIOD
If you like your doctor you can keep you doctor PERIOD
neither of those statements made by obama many thime are true PERIOD
You're Welcome
2014 = GOP Senate and House
Another idiot that can not write a complete sentence or spell and has the nerve to talk about the potus. Edit your damn post idiot. What school did you attend in the back woods of America? Shameful!
Blah blah blah so phucking what.
If all you can do if wet your panties over a few typos that means you cannot reply to what the post says and you concede.
And do you really think I give a fuck what a sissy ass little twat alias like you thinks about my typing and spelling. Little boy, grow a pair and when you get the courage to be man enough to bust balls with your real screen name maybe I’ll think about giving a fuck because right now you do not have a SMIDGEN of creditability.
You’re Welcome
2014 = GOP House and Senat