Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Math not your strong suit, is it.. Dont worry, thats a trait I've come to expect from liberals.
Adding to threads not your strong suit. Don't worry, thats a trait we've come to expect.
The CBO report actually says that the impact of the ACA will be “almost entirely” due to a decline in labor that “workers choose to supply.”
It says explicitly that the ACA’s impact will not be felt as an “increase in unemployment” or “underemployment.”
I'm not so sure about people working less because of reduced health care costs. I just got back from the local big box home improvement store. Every employee there seemed older than me - and I am getting up there. They all must be getting Medicare and SS yet they still need those jobs to pay the bills. There are probably a relative handful that are close enough to the cutoff on Obamacare that not working a job might matter. But I think the pencil pushers in DC are out of touch with the reality in the heartland if they think that average American can make ends meet on the handouts. It remains to be seen if workers choose not to work in the numbers CBO is claiming.
Adding to threads not your strong suit. Don't worry, thats a trait we've come to expect.
The CBO report actually says that the impact of the ACA will be “almost entirely” due to a decline in labor that “workers choose to supply.” It says explicitly that the ACA’s impact will not be felt as an “increase in unemployment” or “underemployment.”
If worker A reduces the amount of hours they work, the employer still needs to make up those house by hiring someone else.
If you are running a pizza delivery joint, and need 200 hours of labor to deliver pizzas, if someone cuts their hours from 40 hours to 35, this means the company hires one more person, and STILL has to fill in the hours..
While your hours might go down, the net impact on the economy doesnt change..
No, its about you making excuses as if people cutting their own hours, so they can obtain governmental welfare, will somehow reduce the demand for labors, and thus the employer wont have to fill it..
No, its about you making excuses as if people cutting their own hours, so they can obtain governmental welfare, will somehow reduce the demand for labors, and thus the employer wont have to fill it..
Like I said.. math, not your strong suite..
The CBO is non-partisan. Sorry their report doesn't parrot the nonsense talking points of the GOP.
No, its about you making excuses as if people cutting their own hours, so they can obtain governmental welfare, will somehow reduce the demand for labors, and thus the employer wont have to fill it..
Like I said.. math, not your strong suite..
WTHeck are you going on about?
This is not about me.
This is about reading comprehension.
I didn't supply the projected numbers that you seem to embrace the CBO does.
I didn't supply the reasoning that the CBO gave for the projected numbers that you embraced.
It seems to me that your disagreement is with the organization(CBO) that is supplying the statistic you believe, yet don't believe.
I guess that would make anyone confused.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
