Slacking Equals Success

The NY Times editors put a big smiley face on the devastating CBO report by assuring us that low income people who choose to work less are living the dream:

Freeing Workers From the Insurance Trap

The Congressional Budget Office estimated on Tuesday that the Affordable Care Act will reduce the number of full-time workers by 2.5 million over the next decade. That is mostly a good thing, a liberating result of the law. Of course, Republicans immediately tried to brand the findings as “devastating” and stark evidence of President Obama’s health care reform as a failure and a job killer. It is no such thing.

The report estimated that — thanks to an increase in insurance coverage under the act and the availability of subsidies to help pay the premiums — many workers who felt obliged to stay in a job that provided health benefits would now be able to leave those jobs or choose to work fewer hours than they otherwise would have. In other words, the report is about the choices workers can make when they are no longer tethered to an employer because of health benefits. The cumulative effect on the labor supply is the equivalent of 2.5 million fewer full-time workers by 2024.

That is the DNC spin all right (Michael Hiltzik of the LA Times echoes the NewSpeak "Slacking=Success" party line). However, to get there from here requires a dedicated misreading of the CBO report. Here we go, p. 125 and following from the .pdf; sort of econo-geeky, but work with them:

The Number and Types of Workers Likely To Be Affected.

Subsidies clearly alter recipients’ incentives to work and can certainly influence the labor supply of those who would gain eligibility by working and earning slightly less. But most full-time workers do not  confront that particular choice—either their income is well above 400 percent of the FPL or they are offered employment-based health insurance and thus are generally ineligible for subsidies regardless of their income.

Even so, one line of research indicates that the subsidies will affect the labor supply of many full-time workers with health insurance from their employer—precisely because they effectively forgo exchange subsidies when they take or keep a job with health insurance. If instead a worker switched to a part-time job, which typically does not offer health insurance, that worker could become eligible for exchange subsidies. In that view, exchange subsidies effectively constitute a tax on labor supply for a broad range of workers.

In CBO’s judgment, however, the cost of forgoing exchange subsidies operates primarily as an implicit tax on employment-based insurance, which does not imply a change in hours worked. Instead, the tax can be avoided if a worker switches to a different full-time job without health insurance (or possibly two part-time jobs) or if the employer decides to stop offering that benefit. The consequences of that implicit tax are incorporated into CBO’s estimate of the ACA’s effect on employment-based coverage—which is projected to decline, on net, by about 4 percent because of the ACA (see Appendix B).

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  employment-based coverage and whose income is either below or near 400 percent of the FPL. 

So when the Times writes "In other words, the report is about the choices workers can make when they are no longer tethered to an employer because of health benefits." they are exactly wrong. There will no doubt be such people, but the CBO attempts to model that behavior elsewhere.

The CBO says that they tried to separate two decisions - one is to work less (or more) and the other is to change insurance status, perhaps by quitting or switiching employers. As they say above:

In CBO’s judgment, however, the cost of forgoing exchange subsidies operates primarily as an implicit tax on employment-based insurance, which does not imply a change in hours worked. Instead, the tax can be avoided if a worker switches to a different full-time job without health insurance (or possibly two part-time jobs) or if the employer decides to stop offering that benefit.

So someone who likes their income but not their employer will find it easier to switch. That is a good thing, but it is separate from a decision to work less. Back to the CBO:

Nonetheless, another subgroup that has employment-based insurance does seem likely to reduce their labor supply somewhat. Specifically, those people whose income would make them eligible for subsidies through exchanges (or for Medicaid), and who work less than a full year (roughly 10 to 15 percent of workers in that income range in a typical year), would tend to work somewhat less because of the ACA’s subsidies.

For those workers, the loss of subsidies upon returning to a job with health insurance is an implicit tax on working (and is equivalent to an average tax rate of roughly 15 percent, CBO estimates). That implicit tax will cause some of those workers to lengthen the time they are out of work—similar to the effect of unemployment benefits.

...

CBO’s estimate of the response of labor supply to the subsidies is based on research concerning the way changes in marginal tax rates affect labor supply and on studies analyzing how labor supply responds to changes in after-tax income.

There may be compelling and convincing research estimating the number of corporate drones who can't wait to quit but are trapped by their health insurance plan (perhaps even at the Times!), but that is not what the CBO looked at.

The CBO gist is that the ACA subsidy phase-outs represent a high marginal tax on earnings for the working class, and hence discourage work:

However, people whose employment or hours worked will be most affected by the ACA are expected to have below-average earnings because the effects of the subsidies that are available through exchanges and of expanded Medicaid eligibility on the amount of labor supplied by lower-income people are likely to be greater than the effects of increased taxes on the amount of labor supplied by higher-income people.

Overlap that with the ACA War on Marriage and we wonder how the working class will ever get ahead under Obama. Single and Slacking=Success! Oh, I say that, but maybe single and state-dependent is a bug rather than a feature for Nancy Pelosi and the progressive statists. Maybe!

Let's add it up - today it's the ACA's War on the Working Class; tomorrow Dems will focus on waving in a new group of unskilled workers from abroad to compete with native unskilled workers; then maybe on Friday Obama will return to income inequality as the defining challenge of his era. And why not - the weather precludes a round of golf.

IT'S ONLY THE PROLES... Great moments in compassionate progressivism from Michael Hiltzik of the LA Times:

The ACA will reduce the total hours worked by about 1.5% to 2% in 2017 to 2024, the CBO forecasts, "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."  That translates into about 2.5 million full-time equivalents by 2024 — not the number of workers, because some will reduce their number of hours worked rather than leaving the workforce entirely.

The overall impact on the community will be muted, moreover, because most of that effect will be seen at the lowest levels of the wage-earning scale. The effect will be "small or negligible for most categories of workers," the CBO says, because there will be almost no impact on workers who get their insurance from their employers or who earn more than 400% of the federal poverty line (for a family of three, that's $78,120), the point at which eligibility for federal premium disappears. 

My hilarity is not muted.

Comments

[Eric in Boise]

CBO: Dem policies drive up unemployment.

Dems: Hey, you say that like it's a bad thing!

[henry]

The CBO thinks only 4%* of employers will dump healthcare plans? Did they move their office to Denver? Were they using climate models to forecast it?

*Or maybe they think the non-crony sector only employs 4% of workers... Unreasonably optimistic forecast either way.

[Captain Hate]

To involuntarily lose your job is never a good thing. Do these dumbbells realize how stupid they sound?

[clarice]

I thought I read that NYT reporters did not have company-provided health insurance.

[narciso]

Funenployment, get with the program, if they did they would go fully Terrell and phaser themselves.

[NKonIPad]

Well if 4% of employers employ 65% of employees on group plans this could be right.

[NKonIPad]

As TomM points out this Funemployment is a good thing meme is a full court Journolist press that was cooked up when the Admin knew what CBO was going to say. And I m glad they are doing it. This is such an Imperial DC mentality, completely unhinged from America. The Dems will pay the price for it, Big Time.

[peter]

Insty nails it with that reference to Groucho Marx and wage slaves..

[Jane-Rebel Alliance1]

We are close to a foot of snow here- and it shows no signs of stopping.

[NKonIPad]

Jane -- radar says you have about an hour of snow and sleet left, then drizzle and flurries.

[Eric in Boise]

It's almost as if they're coming out and saying "OK, we like high unemployment, because people get to sit on their couch and watch The View, and they are free to do what they want, and we can send them checks and they'll vote for us. So it's all good."

This seems like it's starting to get quite a bit of traction. Will the muddle pay attention?

[glasater]

I believe the more enterprising lower income people in our community are already working 'off the books' and have done so for quite awhile.

[NKonIPad]

Completely rational for them to do so, and for the people who employ them.

[Threadkiller]

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/private-sector-adds-175k-jobs-in-january-adp-2014-02-05-8911824?dist=beforebell

[Goats]

For the past 20-30 years in Corp. 'Merica the trend has been toward part-time vs FT workers, accelerating after 2000.

http://www.epi.org/publication/a-decade-of-flat-wages-the-key-barrier-to-shared-prosperity-and-a-rising-middle-class/

"The weak wage growth since 1979 for all but those with the highest wages is the result of intentional policy decisions—including globalization, deregulation, weaker unions, and lower labor standards such as a weaker minimum wage—that have undercut job quality for low- and middle-wage workers. These policies have all been portrayed to the public as giving American consumers goods and services at lower prices. Whatever the impact on prices, these policies have lowered the earnings power of low- and middle-wage workers such that their real wages severely lag productivity growth. Macroeconomic policies have often added to the forces disempowering the vast majority of workers by tolerating (or causing) unnecessarily high unemployment rates to forestall (often hypothetical) increases in inflation or interest rates.

To generate wage growth, we need to rapidly lower unemployment, which in the current moment can only be reliably accomplished through expansionary fiscal policy—particularly large-scale ongoing public investments and the reestablishment of state and local public services that were cut in the Great Recession and its aftermath. The priority has to be jobs now, rather than any deficit reduction (which under current conditions will sap demand for goods and services and slow job growth).

On top of lowering unemployment, policy should also aim to restore the bargaining power of low- and middle-wage workers. This means aggressively increasing the minimum wage so that it eventually grows to half the average worker’s wage. It means reestablishing the right to collective bargaining for higher wages and addressing workplace concerns. It means not allowing immigration policy to be dictated by employers’ desire to bring in guestworkers lacking basic labor market protections in order to undercut wages in both high-wage and low-wage occupations. Instead, guestworkers should have full rights to the same labor market protections as resident workers, and such programs should be allowed only to relieve rigorously documented episodes of genuine labor shortages. It means establishing citizenship for undocumented workers who are currently vulnerable to exploitation. It means taking executive action to ensure that federal dollars are not spent employing people in jobs with poverty-level wages. Overall, it means paying attention to job quality and wage growth as the key priorities in economic policymaking and as mechanisms for economic growth and economic security for the vast majority.

[Eric in Boise]

I'm just thinking that if the donks are trying to spin unemployment as a good thing, it probably means they're losing the argument, although they'll never admit it.

Next up: lack of access to doctors and hospitals frees people up to pursue "alternative therapies".

Idiots.

[Janet - the districts lie fallow, while the Capitol gorges itself]

Wage Slaves - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lad5bc6Gpb4

[NKonIPad]

THIS is exactly right eric.

[Jane-Rebel Alliance1]

The latest from VDH is great.

[NKonIPad]

Historically, January BLS #s have been pessimistically biased. We ll see Friday.

[Truthbetold]

I await the next installment with bated breath. When do we get to Ernie's fantastical notion that Plamegate was a deliberate plot by Bush and pals to distract from Iraq? It's a special favorite lunacy ..

Posted by: clarice | February 03, 2014 at 04:28 PM

Clarice

I can't find Ernie saying "Plamegate was a deliberate plot by Bush and pals to distract from Iraq" anywhere.

Did you make that up?

[clarice]

You don't want to be wage slaves. do you?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lad5bc6Gpb4&feature=share

[Janet - the districts lie fallow, while the Capitol gorges itself]

How bout we free Congress & the President from being wage slaves?

[Eric in Boise]

From a commenter over at the WSJ: "Next the administration will be telling us that Obamacare creates jobs, because of instead of a full time job, everybody now has two part time jobs."

At this point it wouldn't surprise me.

[Captain Hate]

Aaaand now it's snowing again.

[Threadkiller]

WASHINGTON, Feb 4 (Reuters) -

JPMorgan Chase & Co settled the latest in a string of legal claims on Tuesday when it agreed to pay $614 million to the U.S. government and admitted that it defrauded federal agencies by underwriting sub-standard mortgage loans.

JPMorgan, the largest U.S. bank by assets, said as part of the settlement that for more than a decade it approved thousands of insured loans that were not eligible for insurance by the Federal Housing Administration or the Department of Veterans Affairs, according to court papers.

As a consequence, "both the FHA and the VA incurred substantial losses when unqualified loans failed and caused the FHA and VA to cover the associated losses," the U.S. Justice Department said in a statement.

JPMorgan is one of several banks that has faced similar allegations. Citigroup Inc and Deutsche Bank AG have also reached settlements, while the Justice Department is seeking $2.1 billion in penalties from Bank of America Corp after a jury found the bank liable for fraud over mortgages sold by its Countrywide unit.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/05/jpmorgan-settle-idUSL2N0L928N20140205

Stupid homeowners.

[lyle]

Some twit on Kudlow last night was running down these new CBO numbers as "unreliable." The R congressdude cut in and reminded the bint that Dems repeatedly used the CBO as proof that Ocare would lower costs when enacted. She didn't have a rebuttal.

[boricuafudd]

"For those workers, the loss of subsidies upon returning to a job with health insurance is an implicit tax on working (and is equivalent to an average tax rate of roughly 15 percent, CBO estimates). That implicit tax will cause some of those workers to lengthen the time they are out of work—similar to the effect of unemployment benefits." Or WELFARE!

[Beasts of England]

Free agents!

[lyle]

I'd like to know where the money from these bank settlements go. I have a sneaking suspicion that it's getting funneled right back into groups like ACORN or whatever they're calling themselves now. Holder's getting away with shit John Mitchell could only dream of.

[boricuafudd]

I seem to remember when the President said that the mandate was needed to stop the "free rider" getting a free ride on Health Care. Now being a free agent who may or not pay, depending if he gets subsidies or free Medicaid for Health Care is a good. What is the upside? Legalized "free riders"?

[henry]

Lyle, screw bank shareholders and give money to the people who abetted the fraud in the first place. Typical govt work.

[Old Lurker]

Right you are, Lyle. Just as the EPA is used by environmental groups to bully settlements that pays, among others, contributions to environmental groups. I wish I could use free government lawyers to collect from my enemies.

This is another great scam damaging the country.

[Threadkiller]

Shareholders of fraudulent investments should not be punished.

[Jack is Back! (But in Typhus Hell)]

Dad's Will

A man was telling his buddy "You won't believe what happened last night.

My daughter walked into the living room and said, "Dad, cancel my allowance immediately, forget my college tuition loan, rent my room out, throw all my clothes out the window, take my TV and my laptop. Please take any of my jewelry to the Salvation Army or Cash Converters. Then, sell my car, take my front door key away from me and throw me out of the house. Then, disown me and never talk to me again. Don't forget to write me out of your will and leave my share to any charity you choose."

"Holy Smokes," replied the friend, "she actually said that?"

"Well, she didn't put it quite like that. She actually said,
'Dad, meet my new boyfriend-- Mohammed. We're going to work together on Hillary's election campaign!'"

[Truthbetold]

lyle

George W. Bush protected ACORN.

[clarice]

HEH!

[Jane-Rebel Alliance1]

This government rules by extortion. And no one says a word.

I believe my snow has just coverted to heavy rain. This won't end well.

[NK(withnewsoftware)]

Here's the UK Daily Mail take on Beckham's Miami-Dade franchise. BTW-- I was never a beckham fan, but he was a world class player for most of a decade. Between '96-'03 he had to have about the highest work rate of any big star at any big club. His work rate combined with his free kicks made him a legitimate world class player. But he has branded himself better than his playing ability: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2552250/Cant-wait-David-Beckham-announces-exciting-MLS-franchise-Miami.html

[Porchlight]

From a commenter over at the WSJ: "Next the administration will be telling us that Obamacare creates jobs, because of instead of a full time job, everybody now has two part time jobs."

At this point it wouldn't surprise me.

Someone just said THAT EXACT SAME THING in an argument I am having on Facebook:

People choosing to work less creates jobs because the same number of person-hours of work needing to be done gets spread over more individuals. Rather than working one person for 60 hours a week, a company might find that the people who were working 60 hour weeks to pay for healthcare have decided they no longer need to do so, and are only willing/needing to work 30 hours at the same rate -- so the company hires two people for 30 hours each.

My response: "if I split an apple in half, do I now have two apples?"

This is blowing my mind.

[Jane-Rebel Alliance1]

I heard someone this morning say that allowing people to work part time will free them up to become entrepreneurs.

Yeah, that should work.

[Threadkiller]

Hey, it is no different than thinking that two citizenships equals one allegiance, Porch.

[daddy]

I would like to see the Republicans in the House not fund this, but I won't hold my breath:

the Obama administration is creating seven regional "climate hubs" that will serve as clearinghouses for information and outreach about extreme weather across the U.S.

[Truthbetold]

Clarice

You have stated that the CIA waged war on George W. Bush.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2004/11/the_cias_war_on_bush.html

Do you also contend that the NSA was against Bush?

[Captain Hate]

I like how this argument is being reduced to "people only work to pay for health care and if they get health care cheaper they don't have to work so much". Entirely missing from that absurd argument, among other things, is that work can be it's own reward in that people might find it enjoyable. Having spent some time doing contract work for the feds, I can understand that attitude because it was the worst working experience of my life. But that doesn't mean that positive and more fulfilling options don't exist.

[henry]

Porch, if a unionized company tried to do that it would be skewered for being too cheap to pay overtime, and too cheap to pay "experienced" workers their inflated hourly rates.

[Dead in a ditch.]

Face it, Obama's whole regime, from Day One, has been a moral hazard.

[Porchlight]

Ha, great point, henry. May I steal it?

The guy brought up Bill Gates and Steve Jobs deciding to retire after becoming billionaires, as if that's just the exact same thing as if they decided to become ski bums in their 20s and work part time (or not at all) for the rest of their lives.

[henry]

Steal away -- at own risk ; )

[peter]

do not engage danger Will Robinson do not engage

[Danube on iPad]

"two citizenships equals one allegiance, Porch."

*Groan*

[henry]

Um, Jobs worked to the end, and Gates is back to work on MS's product direction. You are arguing with imbiciles.

[boricuafudd]

We have not talked about the new cost projections which have ballooned from $838 billion over $2 trillion and counting.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/cbo-obamacare-s-10-year-costs-will-now-eclipse-2-trillion_778723.html?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed

[rse]

lyle-I know it is being used for that because I attend some of the presentations and I always look at list of sponsors.

eric-I suspect you were being sarcastic, but under the vision of the welfare state being foisted on us via the OECD and the UN entities and tied to the ed reforms, the idea that everyone works part time and job shares is quite the norm. It truly is as of having sucked from the public and foundation teat all their lives, these profs and execs do not understand what actually makes an economy work. Expertise is also believed to lead to hierarchy and not be egalitarian.

Seriously nuts, but it's still influential among lots of credentialed people. I know henry is looking forward to young employees having an equal voice to his.

[henry]

rse, I'm looking forward to robots. In the mean time I hire old people.

[Porchlight]

Um, Jobs worked to the end, and Gates is back to work on MS's product direction. You are arguing with imbiciles.

I paraphrased a bit - the guy said something about them stepping down as CEOs, not retiring. Or something. My blood was up so I was skimming.

[Truthbetold]

Clarice

No comment on the NSA?

[Danube on iPad]

Look at the bright side. These dopes have, for the first time to my knowledge, acknowledged that higher marginal tax rates are a disincentive to work.

I find this whole line of argument from the progs nothing short of astounding.

[DrJ]

In the mean time I hire old people.

I do the same, though for large variances of "old." I'm happy to let someone else break in the yutes.

OTOH, I may have another (paid!) intern this summer.

[peter]

liberating, Danube, liberating

[lyle]

When and where did this bore, TBT, get the notion that commenters on this site are huge W fans? I liked and admired him personally but I hated the stupid "compassionate conservative" tripe.

[peter]

Now there's a new Clinton sex scandal surfacing from the White House days. Say what you will about JEF, he's practically asexual compared to Bubba

[henry]

stepping down as CEO's your guy bought the spin. Another way to look at it is they were kicked out by institutional shareholders. A better reference for him would be Tom Steyer, who quit doing the VC thing last year to be an AGW chicken little.

[Truthbetold]

lyle

Protecting ACORN goes beyond "compassionate conservative" tripe.

[peter]

repeating my 1:10

[Captain Hate]

Now there's a new Clinton sex scandal surfacing from the White House days. Say what you will about JEF, he's practically asexual compared to Bubba

Ok you forced me to google that. Elizabeth Hurley? Are they sure Slick didn't start that rumor? She doesn't seem like his type.

[Porchlight]

These dopes have, for the first time to my knowledge, acknowledged that higher marginal tax rates are a disincentive to work.

Yep, and they're now saying that less work is a good thing.

I wish I could just get you guys on this Facebook argument and let you rip - you're much better at this than I am.

[Truthbetold]

Listen to peter he knows what's is best for you.

[NK(withnewsoftware)]

According to this Rubio meets with House repubs today to explain the need to pass repeal of Insurance Co Bailout provisions. Why would the House Repubs not do this? I assume TP House members would be happy to, and Establishment repubs taking BigGov insurer $$$ would be penalized it will never be signed into law. I understand the House members don't 'get' anything out of this (no eficit reduction no repeal), but it makes a Repub Senate much more likely-- and gives repubs control of the budget. http://washingtonexaminer.com/rubio-makes-case-for-obamacare-bailout-blockade/article/feed/2116947?custom_click=rss&utm_campaign=Weekly+Standard+Story+Box&utm_source=weeklystandard.com&utm_medium=referral

[Account Deleted]

"if I split an apple in half, do I now have two apples?"

Porchlight,

If you give the halves to glasater, she can give you a photo back which can be used as scientistic proof of the existence of two apples. The NBER, CBO and BLS will then incorporate the scientistic evidence into their economic projections and issue a report warning against participation in an obviously saturated apple market with a conclusion that immediate federal intervention is necessary to return land currently being wasted on apple orchards to its natural state.

[Porchlight]

A better reference for him would be Tom Steyer, who quit doing the VC thing last year to be an AGW chicken little.

But he would probably think that was just dandy. Leaving the evil corporate world behind to do good for the environment.

We really do have two Americas. Actually this guy I'm arguing with is British. He's over here to make more money than he can in the UK, I guess.

[maryrose]

We the taxpayer get to fund the subsidies of these too lazy to work 40 hours group so they have more time to take in all their entitlements.
Something is wrong with this picture. In the meantime,people with real illnesses that can't afford the premiums are being told they can't have their same doctor and whomever they get will cost more.

[Porchlight]

Rick,

You aren't far off. He said that if he doesn't need to eat a whole pizza, he can split it in half and then two people can have a meal instead of one.

There are just too many pizza makers out there in the saturated pizza market and we need to cull the herd, I guess.

[Bori]

War is Peace. Slavery is Freedom. Ignorance is Strength. Unemployment is Liberty. - Barack Obama

From @SooperMexican on twitter

[Account Deleted]

Fed synthetic OPM is the primary funding of the farce, taxpayers are now a junior partner.

[Captain Hate]

You aren't far off. He said that if he doesn't need to eat a whole pizza, he can split it in half and then two people can have a meal instead of one.

I'm assuming you like him for reasons other than his ability to articulate coherent economic principles.

[Jack is Back! (But in Typhus Hell)]

Scroll down to the 3rd Twitter photo

Looks like Russia and Putin are going to the butt (excuse the pun) of the international media.

[NK(withnewsoftware)]

RickB-- we Taxpayers may be 'junior partners' but we are 100% responsible to pay the interest cost for the Debt funding this farce. That Debt service will be a $Trillion/year faster than you can say Bob's you're Uncle when rates rise as 'Taper' begins to bite.

[Jane-Rebel Alliance1]

Daddy,

Supposedly it is coming out of "existing funds".

[Eric in Boise]

Porch, is it Piers Morgan? If it is, tell him that people working less have more time to clean their guns.

[Bori]

JIB, I really feel for those reporters roughing it out in Sochi. NOT!

[Cecil Turner]

But, see, they want to be on welfare. So that's a good thing, right?

[Jack is Back! (But in Typhus Hell)]

When I was working at the "old firm" back in the day, I also had two jobs: my 40 hour a week straight time one that got me paid and my extra 30 hour a week job that got me my promotions.

[miss Marple]

This morning I saw a complaining reporter tweet that said his hotel room lacked heat but it did have a picture of Putin on the dresser.

I don't suppose it occurred to the reporter that Vlad might have been sending a message.

[rich@gmu]

isn't this also an example of a spread the work scheme...why not 3 parttime jobs of 20 hours or 4 of 10 hours?

why not just them all spoons?

[Porchlight]

why not just them all spoons?

I quoted that very same anecdote on the thread, rich! It's perfect. He had no response.

I'm actually not friends with this guy - he's the former neighbor of my (conservative) friend who posted the story on the CBO report from yesterday.

[Porchlight]

Actually he did have a response. I said "why not have everyone work 5 hours/week then?" and he said "if they can be happy and get by on 5 hours a week, why not?"

It's like nailing jello to the wall. I imagine D'Souza felt the same trying to debate with Ayers.

[Old Lurker]

If I allow a homeless family to share my house, does that count as two houses?

You can't make these guys up, can you?

[rich@gmu]

why not just GIVE them all spoons?

crap...coffee time.

[MarkO]

Has anybody here seen my old friend Barack?

He freed a lot of people,

[maryrose]

The term "jobs saved or created "comes to mind when defending the ill-gotten stimulus. That was also passed strictly by dems with Olympia and Arlen along for the ride.

[rich@gmu]

You seem to being well in the debate Porchlight. It took me more than a day to come up with that and I have "Economics in One Lesson" somewhere on my table.

[MarkO]

Meanwhile, to ensure that others can leave the slavery of the workforce, Boehner is conspiring to save the Democrats with open boarders.

We have finally vanquished the laws of supply and demand.

Viva Barack!

[rich@gmu]

why is it the strongest defenders of Ocare are those not touched by it? I'd ask the guy to put up or shut up-how has his enrollment progressed?

[Old Lurker]

"why is it the strongest defenders of Ocare are those not touched by it?"

For the same reasons liberals are generous with the money of others but are not with their own.

[Porchlight]

Thanks, rich.

He works for a tech company and so far his employer-based insurance hasn't been touched by O-care due to the employer mandate delay. It's coming, of course.

[Danube on iPad]

Why should anyone work 40 hours to enable someone else to get by with 5? Is that "fairness?"

[rich@gmu]

DoT-

well if that person who is now working 5 hours can now perform a fearsome twerk...

Porch-

you're welcome. This reminded me of a question I had "his employer-based insurance hasn't been touched by O-care"...would a company be able to game their headcount to change the actuarial mix to get better rates on their policy? would it be legal to do so?

[Porchlight]

Why should anyone work 40 hours to enable someone else to get by with 5? Is that "fairness?"

From each according to their ability, to each according to his need.

It's really what they believe.

[Porchlight]

I don't know the answer re: legality, rich, but unquestionably employers are going to try to do it.