February 13, 2015

Negative Effects of New Health Care Law Worse Than Benefits




[From article]
The economy wouldn’t be nearly as stable as reported if not for this massive injection of government steroids. Liberal, or Keynesian, economists think that’s a positive feature of the new health law. But it’s actually a drawback.
Over time, higher taxes and spending act as a drag on the economy, crowding out private investment. Almost 90 percent of ObamaCare users get federal aid. As a result, a new CBO report projects ObamaCare subsidies will balloon to nearly $2 trillion over the next decade, only partially paid for by more than $640 billion in ObamaCare taxes and fines, which means more government borrowing and more upward pressure on interest rates.
A government-funded flood of new patients, many of them forced into mandatory spending on services they didn’t previously want or need, may be good for the health care sector, but it drains revenue from other sectors of the economy. That means GDP won’t reach its full potential. University of Chicago economist Casey Mulligan estimates that the Affordable Care Act will reduce GDP by 5 percent in the long run, thanks to all of its offsetting negative provisions.
[. . .]



“ObamaCare has caused millions of full-time jobs to become part-time,” Andy Puzder, the CEO of Carl’s Jr. and Hardee’s, recently asserted.
As of January, more than 450 employers have made cuts to work hours or staffing levels as a result of ObamaCare, according to a database compiled by Investor’s Business Daily.
[. . .]
“Firms and individuals appear to be more risk adverse — businesses are hanging on to cash, fewer people are launching firms,” the Brookings Institution noted in a recent study of “business dynamism” in America.
ObamaCare may be helping some uninsured, but it’s killing entrepreneurs — the jobs engine of the American economy.

http://nypost.com/2015/02/08/pay-no-attention-to-the-real-economy-behind-the-curtain/

ObamaCare is creating an illusion economy
By Paul Sperry
February 8, 2015 | 6:00am
New York Post

No comments: