'Obamacare' will reduce US workforce, report finds

POSTED BY: Geezer
UPDATED: Monday, February 17, 2014 19:37
VIEWED: 8753
PAGE 7 of 9

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT PAGE

KPO

Tuesday, February 11, 2014 3:05 AM

Quote:
I don't believe him. Why couldn't he COPY and paste?

I actually had difficulty copying and pasting from that report. And I noticed that Geezer incorrectly typed 'who's' instead of 'whose', so I believe that he re-typed the quote.

As for why he left out the exact two words that would change the quote's meaning, my guess is that he read the quote to mean what he wanted it to, and then when he came to type it his mind was happy to jettison a couple of words that got in the way of his 'meaning'.

I don't know. Either that or he's lying about not doing it on purpose.

It's not personal. It's just war.

1KIKI

Tuesday, February 11, 2014 5:30 AM

So, Niki

Just curious - do you have anything else you'd like to say on the topic (before Geezer intruded and it became all about his trolling)?

GEEZER

Tuesday, February 11, 2014 6:50 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
I addressed you REPEATEDLY, concisely and specifically, Geezer; you refused to respond. Your statement is pure, unadulterated bullshit, it's absolutely laughable that you would even make it, given the contents of this thread.

One might mention that this is a free forum and any poster can address anyone or anything they desire, not somewhere that you control who says what to whom. Which you're also completely aware of, so the reasonable assumption is you are trolling, nothing more.

You have shown yourself to be a liar, a coward and a troll in this thread; that direct enough for you?

Niki, there are two reasons that I don't answer some of your accusations.

1. Many are buried somewhere in three or four pages of text, so it's difficult to actually find them. Being concise instead of posting reams of quotes and ramblings would make your posts a bit more understandable.

2. Many of your accusations are so obviously dead wrong anyone looking at the thread can see it, so there's no point in responding.

example:

Quote:
2. Then I discovered he omitted two paragraphs from the article he posted:
Quote:

'Empowered'

But the White House said the impact on the workforce would be due to voluntary steps by workers rather than businesses cutting jobs.

The law will leave people "empowered to make choices about their own lives and livelihoods", said White House Press Secretary Jay Carney.

He added that the law would allow participants the freedom to retire early or become stay-at-home parents.

Paragraphs underline were edited out of what Geezer posted. Those are important points, showing AGAIN that the reduction in work force would be voluntary, not job losses.

But those paragraphs were, are, and have always been in my original post. Look at it and see. (Yes. I know. You'll go all KIKI and accuse me of editing it after the fact, but I didn't.)

Then there's...

Quote:
Geezer, tho' your title obviously highlights the reduction in workforce

Quote:
You titled this thread "'Obamacare' will reduce US workforce, report finds"

Still not my title. The BBC's title.

"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."

GEEZER

Tuesday, February 11, 2014 6:56 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
Quote:
Of course it was an accident

I wanted to ask and hear you say it. I don't think you're the kind of person who would straight out lie. I wanted to see if you're the kind of person who would make it sound like it was an accident when it wasn't.

So I'll accept that it was an accident. But the fact remains that you unfaithfully gave a quote, accidentally/subconsciously adapting it to suit your argument. I'd be horrified and apologetic if I'd done that. You seem to be indignant and frothy.

So you actually don't believe me then.

Quote:
By the way, we still haven't heard why you edited the BBC article.

Because I didn't?

See the post above.

"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."

NIKI2

Tuesday, February 11, 2014 7:50 PM

No, Kiki; I endeavored to make my points as clearly as I could, and the CBO has come out and clarified the issue themselves, so I think the issue has been well covered.

As to Geezer's last two posts however, this has gotten utterly incredible. Geezer's gotten truly weird, and I'll address that before I leave this thread.

The article as it appears now in Geezer's post:

Quote:
"The middle class is getting squeezed in this economy, and this CBO report confirms that Obamacare is making it worse," Republican House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner said in a statement.

'Empowered'

But the White House said the impact on the workforce would be due to voluntary steps by workers rather than businesses cutting jobs.

The glitches that plagued the healthcare website during its October rollout would probably result in one million fewer enrolled participants than initially anticipated, the CBO found.

Six million people are now forecast to sign up for coverage by this year.

The president's Democratic allies have been trying to distance themselves from the issue in the lead-up to November's elections.
The law will leave people "empowered to make choices about their own lives and livelihoods", said White House Press Secretary Jay Carney.

He added that the law would allow participants the freedom to retire early or become stay-at-home parents.

Those polls will determine which political party holds sway in Congress for the final two years of Mr Obama's presidency.

The original article:

Quote:
"The middle class is getting squeezed in this economy, and this CBO report confirms that Obamacare is making it worse," Republican House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner said in a statement.

'Empowered'

But the White House said the impact on the workforce would be due to voluntary steps by workers rather than businesses cutting jobs.

The law will leave people "empowered to make choices about their own lives and livelihoods", said White House Press Secretary Jay Carney.

He added that the law would allow participants the freedom to retire early or become stay-at-home parents.

The glitches that plagued the healthcare website during its October rollout would probably result in one million fewer enrolled participants than initially anticipated, the CBO found.

Six million people are now forecast to sign up for coverage by this year.

The president's Democratic allies have been trying to distance themselves from the issue in the lead-up to November's elections.

Those polls will determine which political party holds sway in Congress for the final two years of Mr Obama's presidency.

I don't believe him. I looked the first time; they weren't there, and now they're there in a different place in the article? I can't guarantee I ran a "search" for those sentences, but it's what I normally would do.

Add to that the fact that he's never addressed his lie that he was "pointing out, first" the difference in the CBO's numbers, the omission of the other two words KPO caught which changed the meaning, and his responding to others for several posts before "clarifying" the two missing sentences (my writing long is bullshit, I addressed these three issues extremely clearly more than once), and yeah, I think he went back and edited.

And yes, KPO, I didn't believe Geezer would stoop to the kind of bullshit our resident troll does, either, previously, but he's now lost all credibility with me. As such, I've had it with his games. I've struggled with Geezer's specious arguments for a long time, trying to treat him as a legitimate opponent, this was the last straw. He can go on playing them by himself from here on.

KPO

Tuesday, February 11, 2014 8:58 PM

Quote:
Quote:
So I'll accept that it was an accident. But the fact remains that you unfaithfully gave a quote, accidentally/subconsciously adapting it to suit your argument.

So you actually don't believe me then.

Huh??

Quote:
Quote:
By the way, we still haven't heard why you edited the BBC article.

Because I didn't?

Yes you did. Two of the paragraphs have been taken out and put back in the wrong place. How, and why, did that happen?

As for the whole 'negative' impact thing, this is how the CBO in their recent blog post, describe the people that the BBC article described as 'hard hit':

Quote:
...when the labor market is strong and people decide on their own to retire, to leave work to take care of their families, or to cut back on their hours to pursue other interests, those people presumably think they are better off (or they would not be making the voluntary choices they are making). As a result, other people are generally happy for them and do not describe them as having “lost their jobs.”

Have the people described above been 'negatively affected' Geezer?

It's not personal. It's just war.

STORYMARK

Tuesday, February 11, 2014 9:49 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:

So I'll accept that it was an accident. But the fact remains that you unfaithfully gave a quote, accidentally/subconsciously adapting it to suit your argument. I'd be horrified and apologetic if I'd done that. You seem to be indignant and frothy.

So you actually don't believe me then.

Jesus, do you even try to read before saying this shit?

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

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Tuesday, February 11, 2014 10:26 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Jesus, do you even try to read before saying this shit?

Please explain to the class what this response has to do with Obamacare and the US workforce.

6IXSTRINGJACK

Tuesday, February 11, 2014 11:43 PM

Yep.

I can't work more than 30 hours a week now on average since that's considered "full time" under Obamacare. I was bitching about this 6 months ago. Glad to know that it's at least "news" now.

The only good I see coming from this is that I'll NEVER be in danger of hitting the threshold that will cut my food stamps. I'll be damned if I work 2 part time jobs to make ends meet now. I'd sooner live in a house at least 10 degrees colder than most mere mortals could suffer for this bitter winter and use the money I saved to pay future bills instead of putting it on my credit card.

GEEZER

Wednesday, February 12, 2014 7:46 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
Quote:
Quote:
So I'll accept that it was an accident. But the fact remains that you unfaithfully gave a quote, accidentally/subconsciously adapting it to suit your argument.

So you actually don't believe me then.

Huh??

You're still assuming that I modified it to suit my argument. If so, you don't believe I left anything out by accident.

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
By the way, we still haven't heard why you edited the BBC article.

Because I didn't?

Yes you did. Two of the paragraphs have been taken out and put back in the wrong place. How, and why, did that happen?

I copied it and posted it. I wondered at the time about the paragraph structure. Perhaps The BBC corrected it later. It's been known to happen.

Quote:
As for the whole 'negative' impact thing, this is how the CBO in their recent blog post, describe the people that the BBC article described as 'hard hit':

Quote:
...when the labor market is strong and people decide on their own to retire, to leave work to take care of their families, or to cut back on their hours to pursue other interests, those people presumably think they are better off (or they would not be making the voluntary choices they are making). As a result, other people are generally happy for them and do not describe them as having “lost their jobs.”

Have the people described above been 'negatively affected' Geezer?

Let's see, the BBC described - "Lower-income workers will be hardest hit, limiting their hours to avoid losing federal subsidies."

This apparently based on the CBO statement that - "Correspondingly, the negative effects of exchange subsidies on incentives to work will be relevant primarily for a limited segment of the population - mostly people who have no offer of employee-based coverage and whose income is either below or near 400 percent of the FPL (Federal Poverty Level),"

Since your quote from the CBO blog (which one, BTW?) doesn't refer to negative effects or low income workers at all, I'd say the blog is talking about a different group of people than the low-income workers mentioned in both the BBC story and the CBO report.

"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT PAGE