Labor Participation At 37 Year Low!! GoObama!!!

[D1B]

Thanks for the link, but it's not the link I'm looking for. You said: "Obamacare disincentivized national corporate employers from hiring full-time, thereby increasing the poverty rates?"

I did not see any "national corporate employers" on the list. It's a long list and I admit I didn't see it all. Most are schools, small government and entities like the Mexican American Opportunity Foundation and Tsunami Surf Shops. I think we both would agree that the cost cutting actions taken by them, especially the schools, universities and gov, are a good thing, but that's another thread.

Also, many of the cuts were 30 hours down to 29 hours, and they weren't getting medical coverage in either scenario. At least with Obamacare, they now can get affordable insurance if they want. Very affordable. You know Tman, medical bills bankrupt the poor. Its a win for them.

Let's try it again, Tman.

By Densey's admission the increase in part-time positions has created a "parallel economy" of underemployed people resorting to "scrapping" and "pot growing" to survive.

Get your narratives straight.

Try again, King Troll.

Focus, focus...

Try again.

[Grizalltheway]

The nation's largest private employer, Wally-World, perfected the art of keeping people under-employed to avoid giving them any kind of benefits long before Obama even announced his candidacy.

Meanwhile US taxpayers subsidize this practice in the form of food stamps and Medicare/Medicaid, and 5 or 6 of the 10 wealthiest Americans are Waltons.

God bless America.

[D1B]

The nation's largest private employer, Wally-World, perfected the art of keeping people under-employed to avoid giving them any kind of benefits long before Obama even announced his candidacy.

Meanwhile US taxpayers subsidize this practice in the form of food stamps and Medicare/Medicaid, and 5 or 6 of the 10 wealthiest Americans are Waltons.

God bless America.

Bet a lot of those people secured affordable health insurance through The Marketplace.

Always strikes me as hypocritical that all the self-professed conk christians and catholics will do everything in their power to deny the working poor access to affordable health care and vilify them at every turn. This is absolutely counter to anything christ stood for and they will surely be judged by these in the afterlife.

God bless Obama and the liberals.

[D1B]

Tman?

[travelinman67]

Tman?

Damn, you're stupid.

Obamacare increased the ratio of part-time jobs: Proven

Part-time work INCREASES POVERTY: http://money.cnn.com/2014/11/20/news/ec ... s-poverty/

University research supporting: http://scholars.unh.edu/cgi/viewcontent ... ext=carsey

Conclusion: Obamacare increased poverty.


Is dat simpa eenuff fo woo?

[Ibanez]

I thought CNN was liberal trash.

[D1B]

Tman?

Damn, you're stupid.

Obamacare increased the ratio of part-time jobs: Proven

Part-time work INCREASES POVERTY: http://money.cnn.com/2014/11/20/news/ec ... s-poverty/

University research supporting: http://scholars.unh.edu/cgi/viewcontent ... ext=carsey

Conclusion: Obamacare increased poverty.


Is dat simpa eenuff fo woo?

Thanks for the link, but it's not the link I'm looking for. You said: "Obamacare disincentivized national corporate employers from hiring full-time, thereby increasing the poverty rates"

Your links failed again to list any "national corporate employers" who are hiring part time v full time due to Obamacare. Also, your lame ruse to create a argument to suit your claims is noted. I fully agree, part time employment sucks for families. But, that's not the issue here.

Again, where is the evidence to support this:"Obamacare disincentivized national corporate employers from hiring full-time, thereby increasing the poverty rates"

Keep in mind, as GATW noted, companies no longer care about families and employees, just stockholders and upper management. The shift to part time work started decades before obamacare. It's been accelerated since the economy crashed, again before Obamacare, as a result of greed and a large class of desperate workers - also noted by your second link. Furthermore, it stated:

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA),
passed by Congress and signed into law by President Obama
in 2010, will extend health insurance to more than 30 million
people. The act mandates that, by 2014, employers with fifty or
more full-time workers (including all workers averaging thirty
or more hours per week) offer affordable health insurance or
pay a penalty of $2,000 per worker. Critics charge that this man
-
date will essentially force employers to reduce their employees’
work hours below the 30-hour threshold, but in Massachusetts,
involuntary part-time employment did not increase with the
passage of health care reform.

This point cannot be overemphasized. Massachusetts implemented health care reform in
2006 and mandated that employers with ten or more full-time
workers provide a “fair and reasonable” amount toward health
insurance or pay a penalty of $295 per worker. Between 2006
and 2010, full-time employment declined by 2.8 percentage
points in Massachusetts and by 2.7 percentage points in states
with comparable employment levels, and full-time employment
declined by a significantly larger percentage (3.6 percentage
points) in the rest of the nation.

Finally, it is important to note that this analysis does not
address cause and effect

Do you even read what you post?

[travelinman67]

Please provide links to your data. What you quoted WAS NOT excerpted from my second link, as you state.
Attempts to correlate pre-Obamacare Massachusetts healthcare statistics with reality are absurd.

You clearly did not read the research...

...again.

Dude, you're pissing in the wind.

[Chizzang]

Please provide links to your data. What you quoted WAS NOT excerpted from my second link, as you state.
Attempts to correlate pre-Obamacare Massachusetts healthcare statistics with reality are absurd.

You clearly did not read the research...

...again.

Dude, you're pissing in the wind.

grampa,
Its already been show several times on this forum that YOU DO NOT READ what you link...

So yeah... whatever

[Grizalltheway]

Please provide links to your data. What you quoted WAS NOT excerpted from my second link, as you state.
Attempts to correlate pre-Obamacare Massachusetts healthcare statistics with reality are absurd.

You clearly did not read the research...

...again.

Dude, you're pissing in the wind.

Everything in his post was a direct copy and paste from the UNH paper you cited.

[BDKJMU]

If someone is working 25 hrs a week at Lowes, that's 100+ hrs a month. Lowes avg starting pay is around $11 an hr, and if he's been there any decent amount of time would be making more than that. So he' either isn't working 25 hrs a week at Lowes, or he's making a lot more than $800 a month at Lowes to be taxed on.

Oh dear. Where to start.....(I'm typing verrrry slowly so try to keep up..); you see, BDMBSQT, they call them average starting wages because some starting wages are higher, but some other wages are....wait for it....lower. Now I understand you being skeptical of what my young friend has told me, so if you go here: http://www.gajizmo.com/best-part-time-j ... -benefits/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; you will see that hourly pay for part-time Lowe's employees is between $7.25/hr and $12.00/hr depending on experience and geographic location. Now my young friend may be lying, I admit to not checking his facts closely, but if he is, the facts pertaining to the part-time pay at Lowes do seem to lend credibility to his story. This is the second time you've demonstrated a rather eyebrow-raising lack of knowledge about the day-to-day life of ordinary Americans, BDNOCLU, perhaps you could have one of the maids or the chauffeur educate you about what is going on out there past the end of your driveway? While we're here I guess we need to ask if you have any other idiotic questions pertaining to working for a living? You know, before you make a public spectacle of your imbecility? Run along now, there's a good fellow....

Dear god. You've shown how over and over and over and over
-Travon Martin was innocent...
-Michael Brown was innocent..
-Believing the story told by the McDonalds ghetto whore.
-Believing the story told by this idiot friend of yours. Maybe he used 6.93 to come up with his #s?

Stupidity must run rampant in Illinois...

[BDKJMU]

------------------------------------------------------------

[travelinman67]

Please provide links to your data. What you quoted WAS NOT excerpted from my second link, as you state.
Attempts to correlate pre-Obamacare Massachusetts healthcare statistics with reality are absurd.

You clearly did not read the research...

...again.

Dude, you're pissing in the wind.

Everything in his post was a direct copy and paste from the UNH paper you cited.

The "second link" is the CNN story. The UNH research concludes people working involuntary part-time jobs were more prone to poverty...

I've already provided a list of 300+ employers INCLUDING NATIONAL-FOOTPRINT CORPORATIONS (look, they're there) that publicly acknowledged they had reduced full-time employees involuntarily to part-time, specifically to avoid the Obamacare employer mandate (BTW, Walmart, Lowes and Home Depot also reduced hours to dodge the mandate...and no, I'm not doing any more research for your lazy, Troll azzes)...

...I've proven my case.

Neither you, Densedawg, Klam or King Troll have posted.ANYTHING which disproves that Obamacare has indirectly INCREASED poverty among the working class.

Thing is...

...I believe you're just trolling for the sake of it.

If you TRULY believed in your position, you'd get off your fat asses and do some research.

Since you haven't, it's apparent you either AGREE with my position and are just playing devil's advocate for sport...

...or you're epic idiots.

[kalm]

Everything in his post was a direct copy and paste from the UNH paper you cited.

The "second link" is the CNN story. The UNH research concludes people working involuntary part-time jobs were more prone to poverty...

I've already provided a list of 300+ employers INCLUDING NATIONAL-FOOTPRINT CORPORATIONS (look, they're there) that publicly acknowledged they had reduced full-time employees involuntarily to part-time, specifically to avoid the Obamacare employer mandate (BTW, Walmart, Lowes and Home Depot also reduced hours to dodge the mandate...and no, I'm not doing any more research for your lazy, Troll azzes)...

...I've proven my case.

Neither you, Densedawg, Klam or King Troll have posted.ANYTHING which disproves that Obamacare has indirectly INCREASED poverty among the working class.

Thing is...

...I believe you're just trolling for the sake of it.

If you TRULY believed in your position, you'd get off your fat asses and do some research.

Since you haven't, it's apparent you either AGREE with my position and are just playing devil's advocate for sport...

...or you're epic idiots.

I don't know how I ended up in this (I don't like Obamacare), but here ya go:

WASHINGTON — The Affordable Care Act will "significantly" increase the incomes of Americans who fall in the bottom one-fifth of the income levels, while slightly decreasing — by .8% — the incomes of senior citizens, a new study finds.

Those in the bottom one-fifth will see income measurements rise 6%; those in the bottom one-tenth will see an increase of more than 7%, according to researchers at the Brookings Institution, a non-partisan think tank.

The law also increases incomes for people ages 25 to 64 in the poorest 20% by 9%, found authors Henry Aaron and Gary Burtless, both Brookings fellows. They looked at factors that are not typically included in income estimations, such as how much employers contribute for health insurance, and how much the government pays for Medicare or Medicaid

.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nati ... s/4939135/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Brookings Institute...

[travelinman67]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nati ... s/4939135/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Brookings Institute...

Yeeeoww!!!

If you keep drilling down, you get to the study...

http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/resear ... rtless.pdf

From what I can see, they took the assumption that all under 25 would be paying out-of-pocket, then contrasted to employer paid (the assumption...that the focus group is employed by an "employer-mandate" company)....then lept off a cliff and concluded the younger demograph saved money, ERGO Obamacare would increase income.



Holy shit!!!!!!

The degree of their myopia is staggering.

Hell, if one of the focus group won the lottery after signing up for Obamacare, then according to their logic, it could be concluded that Obamacare helps people win the lottery.



Mother*****!

[D1B]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nati ... s/4939135/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Brookings Institute...

Yeeeoww!!!

If you keep drilling down, you get to the study...

http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/resear ... rtless.pdf

From what I can see, they took the assumption that all under 25 would be paying out-of-pocket, then contrasted to employer paid (the assumption...that the focus group is employed by an "employer-mandate" company)....then lept off a cliff and concluded the younger demograph saved money, ERGO Obamacare would increase income.



Holy shit!!!!!!

The degree of their myopia is staggering.r

Hell, if one of the focus group won the lottery after signing up for Obamacare, then according to their logic, it could be concluded that Obamacare helps people win the lottery.



Mother*****!

Still waiting for the list, Unravelingman67.

[houndawg]

Oh dear. Where to start.....(I'm typing verrrry slowly so try to keep up..); you see, BDMBSQT, they call them average starting wages because some starting wages are higher, but some other wages are....wait for it....lower. Now I understand you being skeptical of what my young friend has told me, so if you go here: http://www.gajizmo.com/best-part-time-j ... -benefits/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; you will see that hourly pay for part-time Lowe's employees is between $7.25/hr and $12.00/hr depending on experience and geographic location. Now my young friend may be lying, I admit to not checking his facts closely, but if he is, the facts pertaining to the part-time pay at Lowes do seem to lend credibility to his story. This is the second time you've demonstrated a rather eyebrow-raising lack of knowledge about the day-to-day life of ordinary Americans, BDNOCLU, perhaps you could have one of the maids or the chauffeur educate you about what is going on out there past the end of your driveway? While we're here I guess we need to ask if you have any other idiotic questions pertaining to working for a living? You know, before you make a public spectacle of your imbecility? Run along now, there's a good fellow....

Dear god. You've shown how over and over and over and over
-Travon Martin was innocent...
-Michael Brown was innocent..
-Believing the story told by the McDonalds ghetto whore.
-Believing the story told by this idiot friend of yours. Maybe he used 6.93 to come up with his #s?

Stupidity must run rampant in Illinois...

Probably best to take your azz whuppin and slink back to your kennel with your tail between your legs, BJKWAD. You're trying too hard and it sounds desperate. Draws attention to the beating you've been taking, yet again, from the moderates here.

[travelinman67]

King Troll...you've been given the list, studies, hell even CNN agrees with me...


....and you have nothing...

...AGAIN!!!


I've kicked your ass so bad, you have no response other than to keep repeating an old question.


Don't you grow tired of losing debates, over, and over, and over...





(Brownshirthippieklamdawg deflect in 5-4-3-2''')

[dbackjon]

The liberals have put such an ass-whooping on the Conservatives on this thread that even Iran feels sorry for them.

[D1B]

King Troll...you've been given the list, studies, hell even CNN agrees with me...


....and you have nothing...

...AGAIN!!!


I've kicked your ass so bad, you have no response other than to keep repeating an old question.


Don't you grow tired of losing debates, over, and over, and over...





(Brownshirthippieklamdawg deflect in 5-4-3-2''')

No need for name name calling. Just provide what has been asked of you.

[travelinman67]

The liberals have put such an ass-whooping on the Conservatives on this thread that even Iran feels sorry for them.

That's a first...

...winning a debate BY POSTING NOTHING!

Jon, the board liberals have become pathetic.

You used to be better than this...

[houndawg]

The liberals have put such an ass-whooping on the Conservatives on this thread that even Iran feels sorry for them.

That's an Old Testament style asswhuppin'.... gotta hand it to Unravellin man, very few imbeciles have this much fight in them after that kind of asswhuppin'..

[houndawg]

Please provide links to your data. What you quoted WAS NOT excerpted from my second link, as you state.
Attempts to correlate pre-Obamacare Massachusetts healthcare statistics with reality are absurd.

You clearly did not read the research...

...again.

Dude, you're pissing in the wind.

Everything in his post was a direct copy and paste from the UNH paper you cited.

Wait for a while before you tell him. This is fun.

Tbagged =