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.
Not according to the Democrats. These are people who are ready to retire and spend more time with family only healthcare costs are holding them back.
So instead of them continuing to work for their healthcare insurance they can now leave the workforce yet continue to get healthcare on my dime.
But they are already using retirement as the reason for the big drops in the labor force before Obamacare went into effect.
Will this serve as the reason for all dropping numbers in the future now.."they are retiring" ?
The reduction in CBO’s projections of hours worked represents a decline in the number of full-time-equivalent workers of about 2.0 million in 2017, rising to about 2.5 million in 2024. Although CBO projects that total employment (and compensation) will increase over the coming decade, that increase will be smaller than it would have been in the absence of the ACA. The decline in full- time-equivalent employment stemming from the ACA will consist of some people not being employed at all and other people working fewer hours; however, CBO has not tried to quantify those two components of the overall effect. 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 busi- nesses’ 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 underemploy- ment (such as part-time workers who would prefer to work more hours per week).
The reduction in CBO’s projections of hours worked represents a decline in the number of full-time-equivalent workers of about 2.0 million in 2017, rising to about 2.5 million in 2024. Although CBO projects that total employment (and compensation) will increase over the coming decade, that increase will be smaller than it would have been in the absence of the ACA. The decline in full- time-equivalent employment stemming from the ACA will consist of some people not being employed at all and other people working fewer hours; however, CBO has not tried to quantify those two components of the overall effect. 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 busi- nesses’ 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 underemploy- ment (such as part-time workers who would prefer to work more hours per week).
It seems not.
These low wage workers just don't need to work 1 more hour then necessary because they got subsidized health insurance.
I didn't realize that was the driving force in the low wage labor market today.
And you wonder why the poor never seem to get off welfare programs ?
Now you have the middle class doing it.
It just doesn't pay to work so much when the government is there to take care of you.
Welp, at least the right-wingers have jumped off the "Obamacare will triple premiums and raise deficits" since the CBO report emphatically states ACA will do no such thing. Now you can switch to your "leecher" crap.
I would be embarrassed to say to my employer - "sorry I have to quit because your full time employees are now subsidizing my healthcare costs."
More than likely it will be them refusing extra hours or overtime.
Maybe even taking a LOA towards the end of the year if their salary gets too high.
These are not poverty level people here.
They are making $75K-80K a year.
They probably have some stocks and bank accounts.
They may get bonuses, raises, bigger dividend checks, cash in some stock options, etc.
I work with retired teachers and they do this.
If they work too many hours in the schools their pension gets reduced and it's not $1 for $1 so they keep very good track of their hours.
And when it gets close they just stop working for the rest of the year and that's when I'm at my busiest because I didn't retire from education so I can work however many hours I want.
Folks on SS do it as well. They watch their hours so they don't get taxed if they make too much.
Wouldn't you watch your salary too ?
Wouldn't you be kicking yourself if you made $100 over the limit and find out you owe Uncle Sam all that money they gave you in subsidies last year ?
Remember people are projecting their next year's salary to qualify for subsidies this year.
You go over and you owe it all back..as high as $20,000 in some cases.
You want that to happen cause you made $100 more ?
While THEY are pursuing their hobbies, WE have to work harder to pay the taxes for them to be bums.
The only thing your ilk pays for are the corporate handouts given to the companies you and the right shill for. You're property of walmart/Koch brothers/etc, you do their bidding.
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.
