On Wednesday, Douglas Elmendorf, the director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, said the obvious: losing your job and choosing to work less aren't the same thing. If you lose your job, you suffer immense personal and financial hardship. If, on the other hand, you choose to work less and spend more time with your family, "we don't sympathize. We say congratulations."
And now you know everything you need to know about the latest falsehood in the ever-mendacious campaign against health reform.
Although
it was charitable of Krugman to warn readers off the rest of his
column, those who heeded his admonition not to read on missed his
amusingly worded nod in the general direction of reality: "More subtly,
the incentive to work will be somewhat reduced by health insurance
subsidies that fall as your income rises."
But we want to focus on that "more time with your family." Krugman's voice turns out to be but one in a vast chorus of ObamaCare apologists singing that refrain.
E.J. Dionne,
Washington Post: "Oh my God, say opponents of the ACA, here is the
government encouraging sloth! That's true only if you wish to take away
the choices the law gives that 64-year-old or to those moms and dads
looking for more time to care for their children. Many on the right love
family values until they are taken seriously enough to involve giving
parents/workers more control over their lives."
....
(Click link below to read more)
"People who really do decide, as Quindlen
put it, that you might be able to have it all, just not all at the same
time, are undermined by the fibbers," Henneberger observed back in 2012.
Most of the time when someone says he's leaving a job to spend more
time with his family, he does so in order to avoid acknowledging that,
for one reason or another, he has failed.
It
is therefore reasonable to construe the deployment of this excuse by
Krugman, Dionne, Fournier and the others as further evidence that
ObamaCare is a failing policy.
READ MORE Sphere: Related Content
No comments:
Post a Comment