REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

GOP Talking Point Goes Down In Flames: Obamacare NOT Harming Workers

POSTED BY: NIKI2
UPDATED: Saturday, July 27, 2013 08:07
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1165
PAGE 1 of 1

Friday, July 26, 2013 3:08 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Quote:

Once again reality has taken over from the Republicans, as a new study finds that only a small minority of businesses affected have made any significant changes in the number of hours their employees work. According to a 2012 report by the Kaiser Family Foundation ( http://kff.org/report-section/ehbs-2012-section-2/), 98 percent of large firms (those that employ 200 or more workers), and 94 percent of medium-sized firms (those with 50 to 199 employees) offer health care coverage to their employees. It is counterintuitive to believe that any company that offered health coverage when it was not required would drop that coverage or reduce employee hours to avoid the requirement that they provide coverage now, although this is another claim prominent in Republican conversations. That leaves only about 10,000 companies that would be affected by the mandate to provide insurance to full-time employees that are not currently doing so.

A new report from the Center For Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) looks at two claims made by Republican politicians and some corporate heads: that firms are deliberately keeping their workforce below the 50 employee threshold where they would be required to offer health coverage or face a penalty, and that firms are reducing employee hours below the minimum of the 30 hours per week that would require the company to offer health coverage to those employees. The CEPR report observes:
Quote:

…most of these firms [those with 50 or more employees] would already be providing health care insurance for their employees and therefore need not be concerned about the sanctions in the ACA. If some number of firms actually are limiting or reducing employment to stay below the 50 worker cutoff then the impact would be too small to be noticed in the economy as a whole. http://www.cepr.net/documents/publications/aca-job-killer-2013-07.pdf]


In other words, while there may be some mid-sized companies that attempt to reduce their workforce to stay below the 50 employee threshold, they are so few in number that the economic impact is negligible. In regard to the claim that businesses have reduced or plan to reduce employee hours, the CEPR report says:
Quote:

The alternative course of evading ACA penalties, reducing average hours of work below 30 per week, could at least plausibly have an impact on employment patterns. In fact, several large employers have claimed that they would deliberately keep workers’ hours below 30 hours per week in order to avoid having them count toward the number for whom they would have a $2,000 penalty. (Same)


Fortunately, it is possible to test whether employers are actually reducing hours below the 30-hour threshold. The Current Population Survey (CPS) provides monthly data on workers usual weekly hours. We used the CPS to compare the first four months of 2013 with the first four months of 2012. We looked at the numbers and percent of workers who reported working 26-29 hours a week. We considered this range a reasonable cutoff for an ACA effect. Presumably if an employer would have a worker put in more than 30 hours a week in the absence of ACA penalties, they would require a worker to put in close to, but less than, 30 hours in order to avoid the penalties.

The results of the CEPR analysis are as follows:

--Only about 0.6 percent of the U.S. workforce typically works between 26 and 29 hours per week. The report also observes that some workers choose to work less than full-time; more than two-thirds of part-time workers say they chose to work part-time.

--The number of workers who worked between 26 and 29 hours per week declined slightly in the first four months of 2013 compared to 2012. While the change is statistically insignificant, it is not what should be expected from a law forecast to be a “job killer.” http://www.cepr.net/documents/publications/aca-job-killer-2013-07.pdf


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 26, 2013 4:19 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!



It's a job killer and it's hurting PEOPLE and FAMILIES. We're not " workers ", you communist pig.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

Resident USA Freedom Fundie

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 26, 2013 4:25 PM

REAVERFAN


Ignore the troll.

It's a step in the right direction, but until we socialize healthcare, like all the other countries that pay less and get more, We'll be stuck in idiotland.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 26, 2013 4:37 PM

MAL4PREZ


Quote:

Originally posted by reaverfan:
Ignore the troll.


Amen. That post is an obvious beg for the usual nit-picky BS Rappy derail of a thread. He is incapable of addressing the point. Well, or just not interested.

So, the blue states with the health care exchanges are coming in with lower offered rates than expected, far far lower than the doom forecast by the neocons, (see: Maryland) and yet the Repubs in the House are trying yet again to repeal it. They just don't see how bad they are making themselves look, they just keep digging.

It all fits in my current theme: Neocons have no respect or even awareness of reality. They fight and fight against something that is helping people, and think that the people won't notice. The more they fight, the more they will sink.

Na-na-na-na Na-na-na-na Hey hey hey...


*---------------------------------------*
The French Revolution would have never happened if Marie Antoinette had just given every peasant an iPhone.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 26, 2013 4:58 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!



I'm right, and you know it.

Obama is pussing out by delaying the employee mandate a full year ( and breaking the law, again ) because he knows this fiasco is a complete, total and unequivocal cluster fuck.

He wants to wait until after the '14 midterms before the full dookey hits the fan.

Obama and the Dems are horrible, absolutely evil dicks.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

Resident USA Freedom Fundie

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 26, 2013 5:13 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Pretty much covers it, Mal4. The usual suspects will type the usual things without any knowledge of reality, while everyone else at least discusses REALITY around them.

Along those lines:
Quote:

The Affordable Care Act Is Being Implemented And Working

Yesterday I received a rebate check from my insurance company. This rebate came about because of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) that specifically forces health insurance companies to spend no more than 20% on expenses not attributable to healthcare. No longer are they allowed to take your premiums and convert it to profits for shareholders, salaries for executives, and the purchase of politicians.

The Republican Party has been successful in misinforming and lying about Obamacare. This is likely one of the most immoral actions giving that slowing implementation and in the case of many Republican governors not accepting full implementation, is tantamount to the murder of American citizens with the weapon of knowing neglect.

Yesterday morning MSNBC Chuck Todd assessed that the Obama Presidency using the Republican moniker of Obamacare for the Affordable Care Act while cute was stupid. Todd vastly underestimates the success of the Republicans in promoting that name so much so that most Americans immediately identify with the Obamacare as opposed to the Affordable Care Act.

Just before the elections in 2012 I interviewed two intelligent upwardly mobile middle class women in Austin Texas. When asked about the Affordable Care Act they were completely oblivious to it. When told it was Obamacare they immediately knew what I was talking about and said they did not know it by that name. Check out that video here. It is probative.

The Obama administration has done a poor job of promoting the Affordable Care Act. The media has failed to effectively call out the lies on the Republican side thus given these lies plausibility and mental metastases. There is a lot of good news in states where politicians have made the concerted effort to support its citizens.

As people get rebates from insurance overcharges, as exchanges open that afford individuals affordable rates, and as states that have the best interests of their citizens expand Medicaid, many will see the benefits of having a healthier, humane, and moral healthcare system. It is incumbent upon those on the right side of history to not allow those who would put corporate interest and greed over humanity to go unpunished for the sabotage they have effected on the wellbeing of the poor and the working middle class.



and



and "Obamacare Is Already Working In California" ( http://www.nationalmemo.com/obamacare-is-already-working-in-california/)

and "Obamacare is working in Maryland" ( http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2013-07-22/news/bs-ed-obamacare-20130
722_1_maryland-health-tax-credits-health-insurance
)

and "Obamacare already working in D.C., officials say" ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/mike-debonis/wp/2013/07/19/obamaca
re-is-already-working-in-d-c-officials-say
/)

and
Quote:

One Way Obamacare May Already Be Working

There was a time when all anyone in Washington wanted to talk about was “bending the health-care cost curve.” Forget covering the uninsured -- the ultimate test of the Affordable Care Act would be the trajectory of health-care costs.

But Washington has a short memory. That whole “curve” thing was years ago. Meanwhile, we’ve turned our attention to other things, like “Fast & Furious 6.” Yet quietly, the cost curve has begun to bend.

“National health spending grew by 3.9 percent each year from 2009 to 2011, the lowest rate of growth since the federal government began keeping such statistics in 1960,” reports the Kaiser Family Foundation. Early data suggest that the numbers held into 2012. So the curve hasn’t just bent; it has bent more than ever.

In a new paper, Harvard University scholars David Cutler and Nikhil Sahni calculate that if those numbers hold over the next decade, the government will save up to $770 billion, employers will save up to $430 annually on each covered worker and households will spend up to $290 less on annual health costs. “Slow health care spending growth might thus bring much-needed relief throughout the economy,” they write. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-29/one-way-obamacare-may-already
-be-working.html
]


and "Obamacare brings new players to health care" ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/obamacare-brings-new-pl
ayers-to-health-care/2013/07/26/58f76e82-f643-11e2-aa2e-4088616498b4_story.html
)

"They" will go right on typing the same silly things, over and over. But denial doesn't change facts. Nothing is perfect, and the Affordable Care Act is far from it. But it's a start, which is more than those on the right even WANT, much less are willing to work to achieve.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 26, 2013 5:16 PM

MAL4PREZ


Regarding Maryland:

"Maryland regulators unveiled new insurance rates for plans they have approved for sale under the health-care law, touting that premiums on the state’s health insurance exchange could be lower than in many parts of country.

A 25-year-old nonsmoker in the Baltimore area will see premiums starting at $124 a month for a basic “bronze” plan covering 60% of their costs. A 50-year-old seeking a “silver” plan covering 70% of their costs will be able to get a monthly premium of $267.

In both examples, the rates stack up favorably with premiums proposed by insurance carriers in other parts of the country, a point that Maryland’s health insurance exchange has been quick to notice."

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2013/07/26/maryland-touts-low-premiums-i
n-health-exchange
/

And proving my point that neocons do get grok *facts*, a commenter posted:

"Of course Maryland will announce a program favorable to Obismal care – look at the demographics and politics!"

Rates are numbers. They are measurable, by definition. What's more, some numbers are lower than other numbers. That is not demographics or politics. That is cold hard math. Actually, it's so basic that I can't really even call it math. It's just... the way it is.

But Neocons do not care about such facts that $124 is less than, say, $130 or $156. (Rates for comparable plans in VA and TN)

Back to this thread. Now, did someone else post just now? I thought I saw something, but I only caught a cloudyvision of whiny troll chest-beating nonsense the likes of which have been seen 1000 times over on RWED. So I figured it was a flashback and not a real post. I won't put my eyes through the trouble of focusing on it.

*---------------------------------------*
The French Revolution would have never happened if Marie Antoinette had just given every peasant an iPhone.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 26, 2013 5:24 PM

MAL4PREZ


Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:
Along those lines:
Quote:

The Affordable Care Act Is Being Implemented And Working


Hey Niki! Not that I've been here regularly, so maybe I've just missed it, but it seems you aren't around much. Good to see you.

My employer also got refunds because of Obamacare last year. We'll see where it goes this year.

I am learning to like the term Obamacare. It's going to be a thorn in the side of the sinking Neocons that O will be respected and honored for caring about the Health Care system, while Repubs only run in little hysterical circles trying to get more power, centralize more wealth and to hell with The People.

Generally, good links.

I'm still not sure who posted just before you. It's like this big black meaningless void...

*---------------------------------------*
The French Revolution would have never happened if Marie Antoinette had just given every peasant an iPhone.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 27, 2013 3:52 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Hey, Mal4, you're sweet, thank you (and you others who connected privately). No biggie, I'm on FB with several "urban musher" groups, two of which whom I run, and spending time there. It just got silly--still is--to bother here, I know exactly what to expect and reading down the list, most of the threads just aren't interesting enough, just same old/same old endlessly. But you guys made me want to take the time to post some of my own, and once again practice ignoring the idiots., ;o)

I heard on the news (which I've also been mostly ignoring, also because of its predictability...) that Boner said something when asked about this "most unproductive Congress" that it's not how many laws they write that's important, it's how many they REPEAL. Talk about "unclear on the concept"; they're elected to work for the good of the country. That means repealing old, bad laws, writing good, new laws and doing SO much else, but to the current right wing, getting paid to do nothing but obstruct is "righteous work" I guess. Such a shame.

Now, if the right felt like working on ways to IMPROVE the ACA, rather than just grandstanding and taking our money to keep holding worthless votes to repeal it, maybe someone would have some respect for them...

...oops, looks like it went down AGAIN. As of three days ago:
Quote:

Voter approval with the job done by Congress reached an all-time low today in a new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll that shows Americans are increasingly unhappy with their lawmakers.

The poll found only 12 percent of Americans approve of the job done by Congress -- tied for the lowest standing in the history of the poll. The poll also showed 83 percent of Americans disapprove of the job done by Congress, an all-time high for the poll.

When asked about the leadership in Washington, voters disapproved of the job done by House Speaker John Boehner by a 2-to-1 margin.

When U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., was asked about sinking approval ratings for Congress during an editorial board meeting Monday with syracuse.com and The Post-Standard, he said, "It can't get much lower. You're getting down to relatives and employees and other people like that."

A separate McClatchy-Marist poll made public Monday also found the job approval ratings for Congress continue to sink. http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2013/07/today_in_washington_job
_approval_for_congress_drops_to_new_low.html
]


"How lowwww can you go?"

Of course, Obama's approval is taking a bit of a dive, too, but I'll bet Congress would give their eye teeth for HIS numbers! After all the NSA stink, it's only natural it reflects on the Prez. Any negative reflects on the Boss, he doesn't have to do anything to ride those waves up and down. But poor Congress has been in the tank for how long now? Maybe if Congressional Republicans actually started doing their JOB, theirs would rise...y'think?

Hell, even their own PARTY has a low opinion of them: "63% of GOP Voters Think Republicans in Congress Out of Touch" ( http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politi
cs/january_2013/63_of_gop_voters_think_republicans_in_congress_out_of_touch
)

and
Quote:

Majority Of Republicans Disapprove Of Congressional GOP

Republicans in Congress are much less popular than their Democratic counterparts, according to a poll released Thursday, with even a majority of GOP voters nationwide disapproving of their party's leadership on Capitol Hill.

The poll from Quinnipiac University found that 71 percent of voters nationwide, including 53 percent of Republican voters, disapprove of the job the congressional GOP is doing while only 20 percent of voters overall and 38 percent of Republicans approve.

Democrats in Congress rate low too, but they are more popular than Republicans and in much better standing among their rank-and-file. Thirty-two percent of voters overall said they approve of the job congressional Democrats are doing while 60 percent disapprove. But 64 percent of Democratic voters said they approve of the job their party's leaders in Congress are doing.

Congressional approval ratings have been consistently low for a long time, but the PollTracker Average provides an instructive contrast in the public's differing attitudes toward the two parties. Charts at http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/poll-majority-of-republica
ns-disapprove-of-congressional-gop



Pretty sad...when even your own party thinks you're screwing up THAT badly, it's telling. Maybe if they started doing their JOB, they could...nah, of course not, they're in safe districts; as long as there are just enough screwed-up people in each of their gerrymandered districts to keep them in office, that's all they care about. Screw the American people, screw the country, keep them paychecks comin'!

You pretty much said it all: "Repubs only run in little hysterical circles trying to get more power, centralize more wealth and to hell with The People." Glad to hear good news on O-Care from your corner of the world, too!


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 27, 2013 5:23 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


I'm still waiting for the CA rollout. Montana, Max Baucus' home state, who made such a fustercluck of healthcare reform, looked at the requirements and said Ah, screw it. We're going with single payer. Much more efficient.

What about CA?? Single-payer made it thru the state legislature a couple of times, only to die on Schwarzenegger's desk. Now it seems they're going with a "state-run marketplace". Eeeewww. I've had enuf of that looking at Medicare Part B and Part D providers. Why can't they make it simple?

Anyway, there will be a big benefit for younger people: so many 50+ people are not retiring simply because they're not within reach of Medicare. Once healthcare becomes available (and presumably affordable) a lot of these 50+ers will retire, opening up jobs for the younger folks.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 27, 2013 5:29 AM

WHOZIT


Then why do all the unions want out of this? Including the I.R.S union which will be running it.

You wacky libs and your bullshit storys

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 27, 2013 8:01 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:

It's a job killer and it's hurting PEOPLE and FAMILIES. We're not " workers ", you communist pig.




Ah, so you've got into full on cartoon mode.

Amusing.




Excuse me while I soak in all these sweet, sweet conservative tears.

"We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." -- Rick "Frothy" Santorum

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 27, 2013 8:07 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


To answer your question:
Quote:

The issue here is how the law deals with multiemployer health plans, which cover as many as 26 million Americans, and are especially popular with unions whose members frequently work irregular hours for multiple customers. ObamaCare requires these plans to comply with a number of regulations that are likely to drive up costs, but it doesn’t allow employers who provide benefits through multiemployer plans access to subsidies or tax credits. The only way for many of those union members currently covered by multiemployer plans to get subsidies would be for the unions to stop offering those plans.

So as the law stands now, a lot of unions that rely on multiemployer plans will end up having big incentives to drop health benefits and instead let members buy subsidized insurance through the law’s exchanges. The potential cost savings aren't trivial: Last year, a representative from a multiemployer plan organization told a labor issues news site that the difference could easily be as much as $5,000 per employee annually. With savings like that on the table, it's going to be very hard to justify continuing to pay for health benefits if union members can get health insurance elsewhere.

But here’s the thing: Labor unions don’t want to drop health benefits for their workers, in no small part because providing health benefits is a big part of what they exist to do. If they don’t offer benefits, it’s harder to attract and retain union members.

The Obama administration isn’t quite giving the unions an outright no at this point. But it’s not saying yes either. As Adamy and Trottman note, acceding to union demands here would not only result in the law costing more due to the increased availability of the subsidies, it would make it harder for the administration to say no to other groups who might expect similar treatment. Going forward, the politics of this particular subissue will be interesting to watch, because the Obama administration will have to decide between helping an ally and trying to hold down costs. http://reason.com/blog/2013/01/31/will-obamacare-undermine-union-membe
rshi



It's a conundrum. The easy answer to why unions don't like Obamacare is in that one sentence: "If they don’t offer benefits, it’s harder to attract and retain union members." In other words, they're looking at their own best interests...not necessarily their workers, but their own. Which is reasonable, everyone does. And it is a problem which needs to be addressed.

In my opinion, given how hard the right is fighting to (and succeeding in) kill unions every way they can, I'm for lowering health-care costs and making health insurance available for as many Americans as possible the main priority. As we've said before and will keep on saying, the ACA isn't what we wanted or what this country needs, but until/unless the right comes up with something viable to address this very serious problem, all they can do is nitpick and obstruct, and what they have to say is irrelevant as a result.

None of it is a "bullshit story", but that sort of asininity is to be expected, given the source, who doesn't even know the plural of "story".


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Elections; 2024
Tue, November 5, 2024 00:26 - 4511 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Mon, November 4, 2024 23:40 - 4674 posts
Kamala Harris for President
Mon, November 4, 2024 20:13 - 636 posts
Game Companies are Morons.
Mon, November 4, 2024 18:24 - 175 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Mon, November 4, 2024 16:54 - 7421 posts
Electoral College, ReSteal 2024 Edition
Mon, November 4, 2024 16:52 - 37 posts
The DEI Hires Thread
Mon, November 4, 2024 15:23 - 4 posts
U.S. Senate Races 2024
Mon, November 4, 2024 15:15 - 11 posts
Election fraud.
Mon, November 4, 2024 15:09 - 37 posts
Unemployment Rate Facts
Mon, November 4, 2024 14:06 - 828 posts
Any Conservative Media Around?
Mon, November 4, 2024 13:58 - 164 posts
The predictions thread
Mon, November 4, 2024 10:48 - 1181 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL