Pg. 118-119 (Effects of the ACA on the Supply of Labor) of the CBO report: You should read all of pg.119 and most of 120. For your convenience, some highlights;
In CBO’s view, the ACA’s effects on labor supply will stem mainly from the following provisions, roughly in order of importance: The subsidies for health insurance purchased through exchanges; The expansion of eligibility for Medicaid; The penalties on employers that decline to offer insurance; and The new taxes imposed on labor income.
....
CBO’s estimate of the impact that the subsidies will have on labor supply has three components: the magnitude of the incentive, the number and types of people affected, and the degree of responsiveness to the incentive among those who are affected.
The Magnitude of the Incentive to Reduce Labor Supply. For some people, the availability of exchange subsidies under the ACA will reduce incentives to work both through a substitution effect and through an income effect. The former arises because subsidies decline with rising income (and increase as income falls), thus making work less attractive. As a result, some people will choose not to work or will work less—thus substituting other activities for work. The income effect arises because subsidies increase available resources—similar to giving people greater income—thereby allowing some people to maintain the same standard of living while working less. The magnitude of the incentive to reduce labor supply thus depends on the size of the subsidies and the rate at which they are phased out.
....
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.
(not to mention, the head of the CBO pretty much said what I said about the this matter)
Saying something could happen doesn't mean it will happen, similar to how saying that a CBO report shows people won't work in order to keep subsidies doesn't mean that happened, either.
Of course the CBO report does say that, however, I can agree that they have based their estimates on a number of assumptions, all of which or none of which may turn out to be true. That is the nature of an estimate.
Credits & Style Info
Talk Politics. A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 10/2/14 06:20 (UTC)In CBO’s view, the ACA’s effects on labor supply will stem mainly from
the following provisions, roughly in order of importance:
The subsidies for health insurance purchased through
exchanges;
The expansion of eligibility for Medicaid;
The penalties on employers that decline to offer
insurance; and
The new taxes imposed on labor income.
....
CBO’s estimate of the impact that the subsidies will have
on labor supply has three components: the magnitude of
the incentive, the number and types of people affected,
and the degree of responsiveness to the incentive among
those who are affected.
The Magnitude of the Incentive to Reduce Labor Supply.
For some people, the availability of exchange subsidies
under the ACA will reduce incentives to work both
through a substitution effect and through an income
effect. The former arises because subsidies decline with
rising income (and increase as income falls), thus making
work less attractive. As a result, some people will choose
not to work or will work less—thus substituting other
activities for work. The income effect arises because
subsidies increase available resources—similar to giving
people greater income—thereby allowing some people to
maintain the same standard of living while working less.
The magnitude of the incentive to reduce labor supply
thus depends on the size of the subsidies and the rate at
which they are phased out.
....
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.
(not to mention, the head of the CBO pretty much said what I said about the this matter)
Saying something could happen doesn't mean it will happen, similar to how saying that a CBO report shows people won't work in order to keep subsidies doesn't mean that happened, either.
Of course the CBO report does say that, however, I can agree that they have based their estimates on a number of assumptions, all of which or none of which may turn out to be true. That is the nature of an estimate.