Tuesday, February 4, 2014

GOP Spin Machine Again; CBO's 2 million people not working due to ObamaCare is not a loss but a choice people are making.

Right wing fabricator and fear mongering talk show host Charlie Sykes has found another way of keeping his listeners ramped up on anger. 

The CBO just reported that due health care coverage through the Affordable Care Act, some workers might forego working completely, or reduce the number of hours on the job. The EQUIVALENCE of about two million people. 

That would be called a “choice.” It’s not that the ACA killing jobs but people deciding to do something else. Freedom and liberty all the way....
Many of those “not working” will be the self-employed, and many will now be able to relying on one bread winner per family, and not be forced to keep a job because of health insurance. The Post story did not expand on any of this. It's also a CBO prediction. It might not happen at all.

More importantly, the ACA nationwide is predicted to create around 270,000 jobs in ten years, that negates some of the losses we’ll see when some people choose to work less or not at all.

That’s not the way Sykes wants his listeners to think. But don’t let the facts get in the way:
According to a damning new report from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), Obamacare is expected to directly reduce the number of fulltime employees in the United States by 2 million.

The Washington Post reports: The Affordable Care Act will also reduce the number of fulltime workers by 2.3 million (by 2021), congressional budget analysts said in the most detailed analysis of the law’s impact on jobs. The CBO said the law’s impact on jobs would be mostly felt starting after 2016.  

The impact is likely to be most felt, the CBO said, among low-wage workers. The agency said that most of the effect would come from Americans deciding not to seek work as a result of the ACA’s impact on the economy. Some workers may forgo employment, while others may reduce hours, for a equivalent of at least 2 million fulltime workers dropping out of the labor force.
Again, these aren't job losses, but a choice made by people. Is that so bad?
CNBC reports: "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," said the report.
Sykes mucks up the facts by introducing something the CBO never mentioned; productivity.
Two million jobs, lost hours and productivity, and all centering on low-income Americans. Not exactly a message that fits in with the fight for "income inequality." Expect to see the 2 million number everywhere this campaign season.
If a few dumb ass Republican candidates do use this, they’ll be criticizing people for choosing something else, which the last time I looked was just the opposite of their beloved freedom and liberty agenda. As one person said in the comments:
ObamaCare will still not pay the rent, the mortgage, transportation, school expenses etc, so people will still have as much of a need to work and earn incomes as they ever had.
The Post's Greg Sargent had this on the mark observation:
Indeed, the response from many Republicans to the report suggests they are so wedded to their “Obamacare is a job killer” talking point that they will misrepresent what it actually says in order to continue making it. That’s not surprising, in a way. After all, the larger political context here is that claiming the safety net is a disincentive to work ... Remember how Republicans moved away from arguing that unemployment benefits lull people into a state of dependency — Paul Ryan’s Hammock Theory of Poverty — and began arguing instead that it needed to be paid for?


Arun Venkatesh said...

Pretty remarkable post. I simply came across your blog and desired to say that I have really enjoyed searching your blog posts.
Healthcare payer BPO

Anonymous said...

If these people are not receiving federal subsidies for the purchase of their insurance then sure more power to them. However, if their choice is to leave a job and lower their income such that they now qualify for subsidized healthcare policy so that they do not have to work as much, then I would say they are milking the system and sticking it to the shrinking number of taxpayers.