Obamacare hasn't led to an increase in "part-timing", says Urban Institute study

[werepossum]

Is this some sort of unintentional irony?

lol I could explain it to you, but then . . .

Well, actually I probably couldn't explain it to you. Thou art an awfully binary person. Please feel free to continue believing that the ACA is what G-d would be if G-d actually existed, flawless and perfect in every way.

Just so I don't waste my time in the future, could you tell me if you:
(A) Recognized that I offered some evidence, but found yourself unable to process its meaning.
(B) Found my post to be less than worshipful and therefore discounted the IFEPB report in its entirety as corrupted by my heresy.
(C) Found the parts of the IFEPB report not in agreement with your position to be curious random arrangements of words without meaning.
(D) Had a digital dog eat it before you could read it.
(E) Ignored it as a potentially dangerous disconnect between philosophy and reality.

Inquiring minds want to understand the disorder.

 

[OverVolt]

Is the Urban Institute the nemesis of the Heritage foundation or something?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_Institute#History_and_funding

The Institute was established in 1968 by the Lyndon B. Johnson administration to study the nation’s urban problems. Johnson hand-selected well-known economists and civic leaders to create the non-partisan, independent research organization. Their ranks included Kermit Gordon, McGeorge Bundy, Irwin Miller, Arjay Miller, Richard Neustadt, Cyrus Vance, and Robert McNamara.[3] William Gorham, former Assistant Secretary for Health, Education and Welfare, was selected as its first president and served from 1968-2000.

Gradually, the Institute's research and funding base broadened. Today, federal government contracts provide about 55% of the Institute’s operating funds, foundations another 34%, and state and local governments and private individuals the rest.[4] Some of the Institute’s more than 100 private sponsors and funders include The Atlantic Philanthropies, the Annie E. Casey Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, and the Rockefeller Foundation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaiser_Family_Foundation

The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF), or just Kaiser Family Foundation, is a U.S.-based non-profit, non-partisan, private operating foundation headquartered in Menlo Park, California. It focuses on major health care issues facing the nation, as well as U.S. role in global health policy. The Foundation states that it is a "non-partisan source of facts and analysis for policymakers, the media, the health care community, and the general public."[1]

Gee I wonder why they want billions in subsidies thrown their way.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaiser_Permanente

 

[OverVolt]

Oh, gee, another right-wing, anti-Obamacare talking point determined to be BS.

http://www.rwjf.org/content/dam/farm/reports/reports/2014/rwjf415284



But - just like the Second Coming - I'm sure the right will tell us to wait, wait, wait. Someday, the part-timing of America will happen. You just gotta believe.

Anyways they don't say the part-timing of America isn't happening at all, they just blame the recession, or the weather, or because conservatives are stupid and get demoted to part time, or whatever. But its definitely not the ACA. No sir! If its on the internet it must be true as we all know its the most difficult media to reproduce and propagate and thus has very high standards. Just look how much effort it must have taken to make an info-graphic in illustrator. That chart with 7 data points and squiggles where the great recession occurred won't make itself.

I have my own interpretation. Part-time employment was on a down trend until the ACA came out. Oh look it matches the data! Better get crackin in illustrator.

 

[werepossum]

Anyways they don't say the part-timing of America isn't happening at all, they just blame the recession, or the weather, or because conservatives are stupid and get demoted to part time, or whatever. But its definitely not the ACA. No sir! If its on the internet it must be true as we all know its the most difficult media to reproduce and propagate and thus has very high standards. Just look how much effort it must have taken to make an info-graphic in illustrator.

That is what is inexplicable to me, this insistence that some law or act must be either all good or all bad. As every law and act is necessarily going to be composed of good effects and bad effects - if only because there are winners and losers in most changes - seems to me that making this claim disproves one's own position as much as the opposition's. Pretty much the same for throwing out some possible alternate causes and then declaring one has proved one's point.

 

[OverVolt]

I took the liberty of circling where the liberals are butthurt and tried to explain it away for 5 pages :awe:

It is one of two data points where the slope of expected vs actual are opposites (positive slope actual, negative slop expected). And the other one is when the recession stopped getting worse and was an inflection point of the recession (until the ACA).

So I'd assume this one is also an inflection point thanks to the ACA. Nothing else I can think of that happened in 2014 that would promote more part-time workers as the unemployment rate fell etc. etc.

 

[OverVolt]

That is what is inexplicable to me, this insistence that some law or act must be either all good or all bad. As every law and act is necessarily going to be composed of good effects and bad effects - if only because there are winners and losers in most changes - seems to me that making this claim disproves one's own position as much as the opposition's. Pretty much the same for throwing out some possible alternate causes and then declaring one has proved one's point.

I agree but I'm too busy cherishing this golden moment to mess with the liberals a little bit

 

[fskimospy]

lol I could explain it to you, but then . . .

Well, actually I probably couldn't explain it to you. Thou art an awfully binary person. Please feel free to continue believing that the ACA is what G-d would be if G-d actually existed, flawless and perfect in every way.

Just so I don't waste my time in the future, could you tell me if you:
(A) Recognized that I offered some evidence, but found yourself unable to process its meaning.
(B) Found my post to be less than worshipful and therefore discounted the IFEPB report in its entirety as corrupted by my heresy.
(C) Found the parts of the IFEPB report not in agreement with your position to be curious random arrangements of words without meaning.
(D) Had a digital dog eat it before you could read it.
(E) Ignored it as a potentially dangerous disconnect between philosophy and reality.

Inquiring minds want to understand the disorder.

Or:
(F) that post wasn't directed at you. Lol.

I do appreciate the guy who consistently responds to contrary evidence by declaring that whatever source it came from is part of the ever growing worldwide progressive conspiracy complaining about someone else being in a bubble though.

 

[werepossum]

Or:
(F) that post wasn't directed at you. Lol.

I do appreciate the guy who consistently responds to contrary evidence by declaring that whatever source it came from is part of the ever growing worldwide progressive conspiracy complaining about someone else being in a bubble though.

Fair enough, although it came immediately after mine.