Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

News & Politics News & Politics

Obamacare will push 2 million workers out of labor market: CBO

Posted by   + Show Post

Obamacare will push the equivalent of about 2 million workers out of the labor market by 2017 as employees decide either to work fewer hours or drop out altogether, according to the latest estimates Tuesday from the Congressional Budget Office.

That’s a major jump in the nonpartisan budget agency’s projections and it suggests the health care law’s incentives are driving businesses and people to choose government-sponsored benefits rather than work.


CBO estimates that the ACA will reduce the total number of hours worked, on net, by about 1.5 to 2 percent during the period from 2017 to 2024, almost entirely because workers will choose to supply less labor — given the new taxes and other incentives they will face and the financial benefits some will receive,” CBO analysts wrote in their new economic outlook.

The scorekeepers also said the rollout problems with the Affordable Care Act last year will mean only 6 million people sign up through the state-based exchanges, rather than the 7 million the CBO had originally projected.

But over the long run, Obamacare will eventually catch up and by 2020 only about 30 million people will be without insurance coverage — down from 45 million this year. That will mean about 92 percent of legal U.S. residents without guaranteed access to Medicare will have insurance coverage.

Taking the budget as a whole, the CBO said Congress has made substantial headway on cutting spending and raising taxes, which has cut the deficit in 2014 to just $514 billion.

That deficit will continue to drop in 2015, but will then begin to quickly rise, once again topping $1 trillion in 2022.

The CBO analysis said the economy isn’t rebounding as fast as usual after such a deep recession, and said that poor growth means less revenue coming in to the Treasury Department — which means the cumulative deficit over the next decade will be $1 trillion more than projected just last year.


Debt, which is the accumulation of those annual deficits, is already at its highest level since the aftermath of World War II, and the CBO says debt held by the public will be nearly 80 percent of gross domestic product by 2024, which is the end of the budget window.

The new report will give ammunition to those who argued that tax increases or spending cuts should have been delayed while the government pursued more stimulus spending to boost economic growth over the last few years.

But the CBO’s report also suggests that the problems are more structural, given the aging U.S. population and women’s participation in the labor force.



 

by on Feb. 4, 2014 at 12:10 PM
Replies (31-40):
blondekosmic15
by Blonde on Feb. 5, 2014 at 7:38 PM
1 mom liked this

Europe is the place for you.....

Quoting sweet-a-kins: Many things are flawed and I never said it wasn't

Too bad republican obstructionists wouldn't allow a single payer system


Quoting rocketracer:

The ACA remains flawed.

...-- and the CBO report is not all rosy for the nation’s economic future. But Boehner’s statement remains flawed. 



blondekosmic15
by Blonde on Feb. 5, 2014 at 7:41 PM
2 moms liked this


Quoting sweet-a-kins: The liars on the right doing their job

hmm..Obama you can keep your insurance. You can keep your Dr. Anyone with intelligence & common sense knows who the liar is. 

Abbysmom1215
by on Feb. 5, 2014 at 7:47 PM
3 moms liked this
Can't believe people still support this man and his administration. Impeach!
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
vic270
by Vic on Feb. 5, 2014 at 7:48 PM
3 moms liked this

 i see that, it just surprized me when she called the ones on the right liars. i wonder when she last heard the news. the whole administration is proud of the fact that the lies are out there, they aren't  even denying them , why should she defend them.

Quoting blondekosmic15:


Quoting vic270:

 and why would you be name calling, we have a president that got the biggest liars award and he was just as proud of that as he was his nobel peace prize. i think his nickname is SIRLIESALOTobama, and you are calling someone else liars. they don't even try to defend themselves why would you?

Quoting sweet-a-kins: The liars on the right doing their job

 

Sweet-a-kins is in denial. Obama can do no wrong in her eyes. 

 

vic270
by Vic on Feb. 5, 2014 at 7:56 PM
2 moms liked this

 the sad part is that is one he repeated dozens of times, how many more are still out there, its like everyone has forgotten about all of those ( you know how all those ppl were gonna be held accountable that got promoted) but this one. it wasn't that long ago i wondered what the lie of the day from him or his adm. was going to be

Quoting blondekosmic15:


Quoting sweet-a-kins: The liars on the right doing their job

hmm..Obama you can keep your insurance. You can keep your Dr. Anyone with intelligence & common sense knows who the liar is. 

 

blondekosmic15
by Blonde on Feb. 5, 2014 at 8:20 PM
2 moms liked this

Obama's an habitual liar. I don't believe anything he says. He lost credibility a long time ago. I respect the Office but not the person sitting in the Oval Office. 

Quoting vic270:

 the sad part is that is one he repeated dozens of times, how many more are still out there, its like everyone has forgotten about all of those ( you know how all those ppl were gonna be held accountable that got promoted) but this one. it wasn't that long ago i wondered what the lie of the day from him or his adm. was going to be

Quoting blondekosmic15:


Quoting sweet-a-kins: The liars on the right doing their job

hmm..Obama you can keep your insurance. You can keep your Dr. Anyone with intelligence & common sense knows who the liar is. 



blondekosmic15
by Blonde on Feb. 5, 2014 at 8:33 PM
2 moms liked this

It's so obvious, vic. She's constantly in denial about Obama. Ideologues will defend him while the country is falling apart around them. This admin has no shame. Obama's policies & Obamacare is the fruit of high unemployment & out of control debt. A recipe for disaster & failure. 

Quoting vic270:

 i see that, it just surprized me when she called the ones on the right liars. i wonder when she last heard the news. the whole administration is proud of the fact that the lies are out there, they aren't  even denying them , why should she defend them.

Quoting blondekosmic15:


Quoting vic270:

 and why would you be name calling, we have a president that got the biggest liars award and he was just as proud of that as he was his nobel peace prize. i think his nickname is SIRLIESALOTobama, and you are calling someone else liars. they don't even try to defend themselves why would you?

Quoting sweet-a-kins: The liars on the right doing their job


Sweet-a-kins is in denial. Obama can do no wrong in her eyes. 



Carpy
by Platinum Member on Feb. 6, 2014 at 6:52 AM

The Politifact spin.

Quoting sweet-a-kins: John Boehner says Obamacare is “expected to destroy 2.3 million jobs”

Share this story:



House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, sent this tweet after the CBO published a new report that addressed the impact of President Obama's health care law on jobs, among other things. But is it accurate?

Ever since President Barack Obama shepherded the Affordable Care Act to enactment, critics have called the health care law a job killer. Now, many of the critics are saying that a new report by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office proves their point.
The CBO estimated that by 2017, there would be about 2 million fewer workers than there would be in the absence of the law. CBO said that number would grow to about 2.5 million by 2024.
Shortly after the report was released on Feb. 4, 2014, House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, joined many Republicans and conservatives in highlighting this finding via social media.
Boehner tweeted, "Pres. Obama’s #hcr law expected to destroy 2.3 million jobs http://on.wsj.com/1kM33oN via @WSJ." (Wonk alert: #hcr is shorthand for "health care reform.)
In short order, Democrats and liberal commentators took issue with such characterizations, saying Obama’s critics were misreading the report. A full-fledged war of facts and spin ensued.
We have addressed previous CBO projections of this sort and found reasons to be skeptical of interpretations like Boehner’s.
The key problem here is that claims by Boehner -- and other critics -- overlook the difference between workers and jobs, and Boehner was misleading when he used the word "destroyed." He made it sound as if jobs are going away because businesses don’t create them or because they eliminate existing jobs. The CBO report, though, was referring to workers who decide on their own to leave the workforce.
The CBO figured that, when presented with new options for purchasing health insurance outside their job, millions of people would decide they don’t need to work as much.
"Workers who now have access to less expensive health insurance through Medicaid or with refundable federal tax credits that help them pay for premiums will not want to work such long hours after the ACA becomes fully implemented," said Gary Burtless, an economist at the Brookings Institution.
The CBO estimated that Obamacare would "reduce the total number of hours worked, on net, by about 1.5 percent to 2.0 percent during the period from 2017 to 2024, almost entirely because workers will choose to supply less labor — given the new taxes and other incentives they will face and the financial benefits some will receive." This would equal 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," the report continued.
These changes, CBO said, would not result in "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)."
To be clear, the report predicts that total employment will still rise. It just won’t rise as much as it would if the ACA did not exist.
Another key point: The CBO did not specify how many of the 2 million figure would include full-time positions, as compared to cases of an employee keeping their job but working fewer hours, or keeping one job while quitting a separate, part-time job.
In some ways, a drop in the number of people who feel the need to work actually could be a boon to the unemployed. As we’ve noted, there are about three job seekers for every job vacancy in today’s economy -- a high ratio by historical standards. Some of these people could pick up the slack once vacancies open up -- and they should be able to, since CBO said it didn’t expect a major change in companies’ demand for workers. In essence, you’d be trading workers unhappy to be working for those who are desperate to be working.
"Unemployed workers who really need to find jobs to support their families, rather than to obtain health coverage, will find it easier to get jobs," Burtless said. "After all, they will not face as much competition from the workers who were mainly remaining in the labor force to get a job with health coverage."
We see a few problems with Boehner’s phrasing -- that the law is "expected to destroy 2.3 million jobs." (We have no quarrel with the 2.3 million figure; it’s the mid-point between 2.0 million and 2.5 million.)
The first problem is the word "destroy." It’s inaccurate because it suggests that CBO says employers will be making 2.3 million layoffs. That's not correct -- the reduction will come primarily from voluntary choices by workers, not by by employers, the CBO said.
The second problem is the word "jobs." Using that word glosses over the fact that CBO didn’t cite a number of jobs that will be reduced; it referred to full-time-equivalents of jobs. That may sound like a technical distinction, but it’s important. These job equivalents will be made of a lot of bits and pieces of hours per week that people will choose to drop. Many of these people might be working two or three jobs, in excess of 40 hours a week, and will choose to cut back to a more reasonable one or two jobs.
All this said, it’s also worth pointing out a few less positive conclusions of the CBO report.
As more people choose to work less, the labor force participation rate should decline, putting a larger burden for supporting the social safety net on those who remain working. Any change in labor force participation comes on top of an already major shift toward retirement driven by the aging of the baby boom.
Also, some commentators have expressed concern about having people work less because taxpayer-subsidized insurance is available. Ultimately, it boils down to a tradeoff, said Tara Sinclair, a George Washington University economist.
"Admittedly there are some touchy issues with the government potentially paying or subsidizing the health care costs for people who could work but choose not to," Sinclair said. "But overall I think separating health care from employment, at least making it like any other service where employment may provide the money to pay for it but where we work doesn't determine our choices, is a good thing."
Sinclair said Boehner has a reasonable point in terms of the larger economic impact of these changes, but adds that he’s largely wrong in how he framed the labor-market question.
"In a macroeconomic sense, this still means fewer people working, even if that is their choice," she said. On the other hand, she added, "it also probably means relatively higher wages and better bargaining power for those who are looking for a job. This is very different than the short-run effects of employers cutting positions, where we would see unemployment rates go up, less bargaining power for workers, and potentially relatively lower wages. So, the description of the source of the cut -- whether it’s from supply or demand -- does matter, but not for the count of ‘jobs.’ "
When we checked with Boehner’s office, spokesman Brendan Buck reiterated that the CBO report shows that "there will be that many fewer people working – that many fewer people in jobs. Whether a result of a change in supply or demand for labor, that’s still bad for the economy. If there’s an error, it’s for tweeting in English instead of ‘economist.’"
Our ruling

In his tweet, Boehner said that Obama’s health care law is "expected to destroy 2.3 million jobs."
Boehner’s use of the word "destroy" mischaracterizes what is going on, since the reduction will come from voluntary actions by workers, rather than layoffs by employers. The law would not push up unemployment. In fact, some people at the low end of the wage ladder would find it easier to find work as a result of the predicted shifts in the workforce.
In addition, it’s misleading to refer to 2.3 million "jobs," since CBO combined all incremental losses of hours worked into full-time-job equivalents. Under this scenario, we would expect many more than 2.3 million people to be affected, but many of them would cut their hours a few at a time, rather than quitting their jobs entirely.
It can be easy to miss the distinction between jobs and workers -- and the CBO report is not all rosy for the nation’s economic future. But Boehner’s statement remains flawed. We rate the claim Mostly False.


GrannyM.
by Bronze Member on Feb. 6, 2014 at 7:21 AM
1 mom liked this

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/no-obamacare-isnt-firing-2-million-workers   

In my humble opinion and/or humanely speaking equal healthcare for all Americans is the only way to go. It's not a political ploy it's common sense..

Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN