General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsPaul Ryan just went off the Fox News reservation at the CBO hearing
Paul Ryan Fact-Checks Republicans On Obamacare Job 'Costs'
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/paul-ryan-gop-job-losses
House Budget Chair Paul Ryan (R-WI) explained in a Wednesday hearing with CBO director Steven Elmendorf that the health care reform law wouldn't cost the U.S. economy more than 2 million jobs, as many of his colleagues alleged, but that Americans would choose to work less.
"I want to make sure we accurately understand what it is you are saying," Ryan said, before leading Elmendorf through a series of questions to explain the report and its findings.
Ryan and Elmendorf combined to explain that Obamacare would lead to a decrease in the number of hours worked by up to 2 percent in 2024. Most of that drop, the CBO said, would be the result of Americans choosing not to work, for various reasons, but not because employers would want to hire fewer workers on account of the law. Translate those lost hours into full-time employment and it equals up to 2.5 million jobs by 2024. But that's not the same as jobs being cut.
"Just to understand, it is not that employers are laying people off," Ryan said.
"That is right," Elmendorf said.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)Allowing people to leave the work force when they want to OPENS UP 2.5 MILLION JOBS for people who need the work.
This isn't eliminating any jobs. It is CREATING 2.5 million job openings, and that is a good thing.
Progressive dog
(6,917 posts)Dirty Socialist
(3,252 posts)lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)anything that reduces average hours worked helps to constrain the supply of labor, which drives up its value.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)should be 35 hours. If we did that, we would have essentially full employment. More people would be paying taxes and fewer would be on SNAP and other assistance. And almost everybody would have a better quality of life.
LuvNewcastle
(16,849 posts)I've worked with a lot of people over the years who only worked for the insurance the job provided. ABC also reported that some people won't wish to work because more income would mean less of a subsidy for their insurance. This will be very good for those of us who have had a hard time finding a job, although most of the jobs opened up will probably be lower-paying jobs. Still, I think most of us want to work badly, not just for the income but also just to stay busy. Also, it's hard for most people to get any financing without any kind of job.
okaawhatever
(9,462 posts)about the report. He hasn't been overly concerned with the truth in the past.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)and the teabaggers can get excited about.
And the party bosses are concerned:
a) That some of those teabaggers are so crazy they won't support the party guy
b) changing demographics already mean the the GOP starts in the hole
so they know they need a candidate that can do the "Reagan Democrat" thing. And the "Lyin' Ryan" act isn't the way to do that. So he is looking to overhaul his image a little.
underpants
(182,863 posts)Mass
(27,315 posts)This was Paul Ryan's point. That people do not want to work and want handouts.
Sad that Tpm could not listen to the end.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)once they are no longer terrorized by the health insurance industry. I'm sure there a re a few poor people in that 2.5M, but mostly it will be people who have enough savings to retire early, or are willing to drop back to one spouse working to improve their quality of life.
Mass
(27,315 posts)Before high fiving him, May be people could listen to his argument. At least, the disingenuous side of the Gop pretends to care if people have or not a job. Ryan calls people lazy.