Thanks Obama! Care- Now with 25% Fewer Jobs!

Townhall.com ^ | February 5, 2014 | John Ransom

[Kaslin]

The Congressional Budget Office just confessed that the healthcare law passed by Democrats and only Democrats in 2010—you know the one that was supposed to save us so much money?-- is really a dud, a job killer, as we have said all along.

And the consequences aren’t just that some guy you don’t know won’t have a job, the consequences are that guys you DO know won’t have jobs, and --in the best case—your tax bill will go up accordingly.

The reform package, derisively known as Obamacare, is going to cost the country an additional 2 million jobs by 2017 says the CBO in a new report. That’s in addition to the 6 million jobs Obama’s already managed to kill by reforming the greatest, most vibrant economy in the world.

“The Congressional Budget Office on Tuesday said that the Affordable Care Act will contribute to the equivalent of 2 million workers out of the labor market by 2017,” reports Yahoo’s Business Insider, “as employees work fewer hours or decide to drop out of the labor force entirely.”

As I wrote previously, the labor union-controlled Economic Policy Institute (EPI) estimated recently that the numbers of missing worker in the country has grown to 5.9 million people under Obama, through dropping labor participation rates.

These are people who have become so discouraged by the job market that they stopped looking for work entirely.

Imagine a state the size of Illinois being completely unemployed: That’s how many people we are talking about when combined with the new CBO estimate.

Actually you don’t really have to imagine: Illinois is trending that way anyway, with the third highest unemployment rate in the nation.

Thanks Obama! Care.

Since Obama took office, the country has added a little less than 2.5 million additional jobs while the populations from which we draw workers have grown by 12 million people.

That means that we have only created 10,000 new jobs per state per year, or 27 jobs per day per state.

With the entire federal government straining itself and Obama waving around his mighty pen, one would think that we could do better than that.

Mitt Romney would have done better. Donald Trump would do better, even if he fired them too.

Jimmy Carter would have done better, as well.

Not coincidentally, the unemployment rate amongst government workers is 3 percent, according to the BLS, which not coincidentally is about half of the new “natural” employment rate predicted by the Congressional Budget Office.

“The CBO also thinks it will be a long time before the country gets back to full employment,” says the Washington Post’s Wonk blog. “The unemployment rate isn't expected to fall below 6 percent until late 2017.”

Full employment means 6 percent unemployment?

Say what you want about George W. Bush, but people had jobs under Bush with unemployment only going above 6 percent once during eight years in office. It’s hard to create jobs when you are at full employment. 6 percent unemployment, the max under Bush, is Obama’s new “natural” unemployment rate.

O let’s just say that there are many problems that can be solved when people have jobs.

Conversely, not having jobs is a bummer.

I only say this on the off chance that someone in the White House is sitting on the can reading this column surreptitiously via their Blackberry—you know, without the NSA monitoring them.

How big of a bummer are no jobs?

Well getting past the obvious problem that the ratings for The View go up, a state the size of Illinois—which is roughly the size of the workforce problem we have-- puts out about $700 billion in GDP annually, or about 4 percent of our GDP. That’s about $225 billion in missing government tax revenues yearly.

While the Obama administration argues about the “fairness” of tax rates for corporations, or the “fairness” capital gains tax rates, I know this one thing: There’s nothing fairer than raising tax revenues by giving someone a job.

And that’s likely the real liberals problem with this very simple idea that the way out of our difficulties begins and ends with job creation.

It’s an ideal that actually is fair to everyone, and liberals can’t have that.

[Thorliveshere]

And the unbelievable spin for people working fewer hours (so they can get subsidies for O-care) is, “see what a wonderful thing this is, now people don’t have to work as hard to get health coverage!”

[FlingWingFlyer]

I guess this is why the commie libs insisted that free condoms be a major benefit of ObamaCare. They knew everyone would be staying home and spending more time with their “family”.

[JPG]

Time for Boner to change the subject. Hey, lets do immigration!

[txrefugee]

Ted Cruz was right....again. He is the smartest man in the USA.

[Yosemitest]

DEMOCRAT BoneHead can go to hell, and rapidly.

Only idiots and the evil voted for Obama, or ANY of the Democrats.
AND NOW, WE CAN ADD "Establishment Republicans" TO THAT LIST, ALSO!
They've lied to us, constantly, and really are "Collapsing the System".
And now, these "Useful IDIOTS" who voted for them, are buying the lies that "Obamacare was designed to work." ?
It was designed to fail from the start.
THEN ... THEY GO TO THE "SINGLE-PAYER SYSTEM".

Flashback: Obama's Campaign to Transition to Single Payer Health Care (VIDEO)


obama master plan on health careover the years in his own words--SINGLE PAYER!!! ( 3:38 )

They've been sucking our wallets dry for over four years now on the "Obamacare" LIE.
AND NOW THEY WANT MORE TAXES ?
Our Founding Fathers would have hung them already!

Lets review:

Who was it that cut future funding for Medicare by $575 billion?

...the president and the Democratic Party successfully bamboozle voters... The 2012 election could turn on this falsehood.
The truth is that the Obama health law reduces future funding for Medicare by $575 billion over the next 10 years ...

Mr. Obama and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius frequently make that false claim.
Indeed, even Medicare's mailings to seniors repeat the claim
that reducing spending on Medicare will make it more financially secure for future years.
The fact is that Mr. Obama's law raids Medicare.

Who was it that moved Medicare Trust Funds out of the "trust box" and into the General Revenue, replacing them with Government I.O.U.s?
"In early 1968 President Lyndon Johnson [DEMOCRAT] made a change in the budget presentation by including Social Security and all other trust funds in a"unified budget." "

Who was it that expanded Medicare and Medicaid to cover many, many more people than it was originally designed to cover?

The History of Medicare

In 1965, the Social Security Act established both Medicare and Medicaid. Medicare was a responsibility of the Social Security Administration (SSA), while Federal assistance to the State Medicaid programs was administered by the Social and Rehabilitation Service (SRS). SSA and SRS were agencies in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW). In 1977, the Health Care Financing Administration was created under HEW to effectively coordinate Medicare and Medicaid. In 1980 HEW was divided into the Department of Education and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

The first U.S. President to propose a prepaid health insurance plan was Harry S. Truman [DEMOCRAT]. On November 19, 1945, in a special message to Congress, President Truman outlined a comprehensive, prepaid medical insurance plan for all people through the Social Security system. The plan included doctors and hospitals, and nursing, laboratory, and dental services; it was dubbed "National Health Insurance." Furthermore, medical insurance benefits for needy people were to be financed from Federal revenues.

Over the years, lawmakers narrowed the field of health insurance recipients largely to social security beneficiaries. A national survey found that only 56 percent of those 65 years of age or older had health insurance. President John F. Kennedy [DEMOCRAT] pressed legislators for health insurance for the aged. However, it wasn't until 1965 that President Lyndon B. Johnson signed H.R. 6675 (The Social Security Act of 1965; PL 89-97) to provide health insurance for the elderly and the poor.

On July 30, 1965, President Johnson signed the Medicare and Medicaid Bill (Title XVIII and Title XIX of the Social Security Act) in Independence, Missouri in the presence of former President Truman, who received the first Medicare card at the ceremony; Lady Bird Johnson, Vice-President Hubert Humphrey, and Mrs. Truman also were present. President Johnson remarked: "We marvel not simply at the passage of this Bill but that it took so many years to pass it."

Medicare extended health coverage to almost all Americans aged 65 or older. About 19 million beneficiaries enrolled in Medicare in the first year of the program. Medicaid provided access to health care services for certain low-income persons and expanded the existing Federal-State welfare structure that assisted the poor.

The 1972 Social Security Amendments expanded Medicare to provide coverage to two additional high risk groups disabled persons receiving cash benefits for 24 months under the social security program and persons suffering from end-stage renal disease.

...(continued at link)

So Democrats,

YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE
FOR INSURING THE FAILURE
OF THE MEDICARE/MEDICAID PROGRAM,
and now YOU DEMOCRATS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE INTENTIONAL DESTRUCTION OF THE U.S.A. ECONOMY!!!

So DEMOCRATS ... SHUT UP!!!

You have no integrity!!!

Sen Mark Kirk's statement Thursday, Dec 1, 2011 ...

"There are 55 million Social Security beneficiaries that will see little or no extra cash from this 2012 tax holiday;
instead, the dedicated payroll contributions meant to pay for future benefits are being diverted from the Trust Fund
and replaced with Treasury debt that does not even have a AAA credit rating.
Social Security was designed to be independent and free from the danger of Congressional manipulation,
and maintaining the firewall between the Social Security Trust Fund and general government funding is the best way to maintain the solvency of this important program.
Neither bill protects the Social Security Trust Fund
so I voted no. "

It's not our fault that DEMOCRATS raided the Social Security Trust Fund.
Let's remember ...

Not ALL are to blame for the empty lock box.

It's the Democrats Communists.

Let's take a deeper look.

Obama: "I Don't Want the Folks who Created the Mess to do a lot of Talking" "

Okay, then the DEMOCRATS need to shut up!!!

[Obadiah]

“It’s about jobs. In it’s life, it [the health bill] will create 4 million jobs — 400,000 jobs almost immediately.”

-Nancy Pelosi

[griswold3]

‘That’s about $225 billion in missing government tax revenues yearly. ‘
So just who do the ‘Progressives’ believe will make up that difference? I am personally preparing to have a ZERO tax footprint in the very near future. Even if that means I have to live in a van down by the river.

[Paine in the Neck]

Per Cent of Population Employed



This is what Obama has done so far. As ObamaCare comes fully on-line expect another big downward step.

[b4its2late]

And the slimes think this is just the thing people that only work for health insurance need. Idiots. We are surrounded by them.

[Qiviut]

At some point, when you’re bringing home $640 (before taxes) every two weeks and Obamacare is taking $429 every two weeks and you have a $4-5K deductible, what do you do? You go without insurance (but the real person in this example is terrified of the ‘tax people’ if he doesn’t have insurance) or you make less and get it all subsidized.

Eventually, those trying to do the right thing and working hard either can’t make ends meet any more or they decide to go the route of the bloodsuckers out there that are slurping up all the freebies without losing sleep over it. One day, there won’t be enough people working to pay for it all and then all heck will break loose - those who live by freebies (EBT, etc.) have no way to provide for themselves with food, etc. and those who have worked hard for what they have will be forced to defend it.