Skip to main content

It is a forgone conclusion that Fox News would misrepresent the latest CBO report. Sadly even Chuck Todd at MSNBC was less than clear in interpreting the report. He was more concerned with how it would be interpreted. He should have been more concerned with his free press journalistic duty. Inform the population objectively.

That tweet gives a false impression. Coming from a "journalist" it does more to confuse than to inform. It must be repeated. For the most part, one should get information from reputable blogs and websites. The traditional media is useless for fact-based and accurate information.

CNN’s Carol Costello got it right in her report this week. The CBO Report said the following:

The estimated reduction stems almost entirely from a net decline in the amount of labor that workers choose to supply, rather than from a net drop in businesses’ demand for labor, so it will appear almost entirely as a reduction in labor force participation and in hours worked relative to what would have occurred otherwise rather than as an increase in unemployment (that is, more workers seeking but not finding jobs) or underemploy­ment (such as part-time workers who would prefer to work more hours per week).
While others hyperventilated, in this instance, CNN’s Carol Costello reported. When the traditional media gets it right, we should let them know to encourage them to do the right thing.

Originally posted to ProgressiveLiberal on Thu Feb 06, 2014 at 01:24 PM PST.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Stopped clock, and all that. (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Fonsia, blueoasis, peacestpete, flavor411

    With the Decision Points Theater, the George W. Bush Presidential Library becomes the very first Presidential Library to feature a Fiction Section.

    by Its the Supreme Court Stupid on Thu Feb 06, 2014 at 01:30:37 PM PST

  •  What puzzles me is why ti (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    VClib, asindc

    people just reported it wrong, and why some on the right were just outright misstating what the CBO said.

    After all, what the CBO actually said gave the right plenty of political ammunition to use against Democrats in the mid-terms.  It's not like they needed to do that.  Just one more instance of them shooting themselves  in the foot by intentionally going for the sensationalism rather than using the ammunition the CBO actually gave them.

    One wonders who some of them managed to get elected.    

    •  News isn't news until someone (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      RichM, flavor411

      writes a press release in put it out there, so, some days, it's TMZ or William Morris telling them that Miley Cyrus danced provocatively. Other days, it's Koch funded groups telling them that the ACA will cost jobs, and here's the report to cite.

      Rinse, repeat.

      I'm living in America, and in America you're on your own. America's not a country. It's just a business.

      by CFAmick on Thu Feb 06, 2014 at 01:57:09 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  That is the sad.... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        .....state of 'journalism' nowadays.  It all started to go downhill when the networks sold ads on the news.

        We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

        by delver rootnose on Sun Feb 09, 2014 at 03:09:57 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  In other words (0+ / 0-)

          Ever since radio?
          Even before television, entire programs were sponsored by companies.
          That included the news.
          Television only continued that tradition and refined it to gather more sponsors per program.

        •  Actually, it's far more recent (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          rabrock, SilentBrook

          Back in the days, Walter Cronkite was on a program supported by ad revenue.  He still told the truth and took positions, such as the time when he declared that the war in Vietnam was unwinnable.  He was so well respected that even President Johnson said "If I've lost Cronkite the war cannot be won."

          The decline in "journalism" is much more recent, partly fueled by newer, untrained "reporters" that accept handouts from the spin machines and partly fueled by owners who wish to support their own viewpoints.  Katherine Graham and Ben Bradley wouldn't recognize the Washington Post today.

    •  What "ammunition" do you believe (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Tonedevil, FiredUpInCA

      the CBO report provides to the right?

    •  traditional media? (6+ / 0-)

      "When the traditional media gets it right, we should let them know to encourage them to do the right thing."

      Traditional media is corp controlled and the media reveals to Americans what they want them to hear.

      The greatest oxymoron in America is the words free press.

      Example huff post is now owned by AOL and have started to make sure they cut down on comments that attack corp America.

      A nation cannot have free press if it is multi national corp controlled or gov controlled. simple logic really.

      If corp America can control the media the gov and the supreme court that is a capitalist win win.

      Obama loves corp lawyers as judges.

      •  You are right about Huff Po, but they are also (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        nocynicism, GAS, Pinto Pony, MDhome

        trying to cut down on all comments in order to hire fewer moderators and make more money.  

        Putting the fun back in dysfunctional.

        by hawkseye on Sat Feb 08, 2014 at 11:50:27 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  HuffPost succeeds! (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          As a long-time poster to Huffpost, I stopped when they wanted me to link them to my Facebook account. Now I spend far less time at the site, which means that, for those like me, we spend far less time catching all of their ads through peripheral vision, which contravenes Huffpost's desire to fill our heads with more and more profit-making ads.

          I think my non-posting status has made my life a little simpler. Huffpost is now exposing itself as a run-of-the-mill profiteering conglomerate that markets to the left-of-center demographic. In that respect, it's no different than Newsmax from another place on the political spectrum.

        •  pretty good (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          PipeUp, rabrock

          huff post was ok while it lasted. AOL will screw it up big time.

          I told the moderators that many of them would be laid off after AOL bought them out.

          Americans have  this funny idea that corporations care about them. I worked with CEO's for 20 years. they have one thing in mind. max profits anyway they can for their yearly  bonuses.

      •  Huffington Post (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        I am surprised that people are just now finding out about Huff Po.

        Back in 2008, when a reporter, and wife of an editor, tried to torpedo the Obama candidacy and Huffpo bragged about what they had done, I resigned my volunteer position with Huffpo's Off The Bus, and just stopped reading it altogether.

        Google News does everything for me that Huffpo ever did.

        I can't figure out why people are 6 years behind me in figuring this out.

    •  As I stated the other day (5+ / 0-)

      Our local paper ran the headline on page one "Obamacare to Cost Jobs". Two days later, they ran a correction in the middle of page four.

    •  BUT, BUT, BUT (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      it opens doors for 2 million of unemployed to step into those jobs that others are leaving or cutting back on hours.

      "The poor can never be made to suffer enough." Jimmy Breslin

      by MDhome on Sun Feb 09, 2014 at 08:32:18 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  But they didn't give real ammunition (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      rabrock, SilentBrook

      What they were saying is that now that their health care is no longer dependent on their job they can finally retire and make way for new blood.  Why is that so hard to understand?

      In France the retirement age is 60 and that makes for lower unemployment and a healthier economy.

    •  Too nuanced (0+ / 0-)

      The CBO conclusions were just too nuanced, the distinctions too subtle for a dumbed-down populace to appreciate without careful explanation.  Discussions about the exact meaning of the report - workers no longer tied to poor jobs for the health benefits they supply - need to be aired in the popular objective media.  More folks would get it then.  Hell, some of them might decide to find better jobs because of it.

  •  Making it clear... (6+ / 0-)

    ...that it is because workers will have less pressure, or more freedom as it were.  

    I'm not always political, but when I am I vote Democratic. Stay Democratic, my friends. -The Most Interesting Man in the World

    by boran2 on Thu Feb 06, 2014 at 01:38:02 PM PST

    •  But...freedom is only for Republicans. nt (6+ / 0-)

      It's all a Communist PLOT!

      by quiet in NC on Thu Feb 06, 2014 at 01:40:30 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  This is partly why (6+ / 0-)

      The Republicans hate the ACA so much.  By decoupling insurance from employment it does two things:

      1) Makes it much easier for employees to move between jobs without worrying about whether their insurance benefits will change significantly in cost or quality;

      2) Makes it much easier for those with health conditions to retire or leave the workforce instead of being forced to work just for the insurance benefits.

      They hate both of those things because it means employees will have more freedom to leave crappy jobs, and it means fewer people will be forced to remain in the job market, reducing competition for jobs and giving workers potentially more bargaining power with employers.

      •  They may have to have end their war on workers (0+ / 0-)
        it means fewer people will be forced to remain in the job market, reducing competition for jobs and giving workers potentially more bargaining power with employers.
        Allow more telecommuting, flex hours, family leave, livable wages.

        By decoupling insurance from employment, creators of crappy jobs lost some leverage and without that leverage all they have is a crappy job with workers looking for their way out.

        "I am not interested in picking up crumbs of compassion thrown from the table of someone who considers himself my master. I want the full menu of rights." (From "You Said a Mouthful" by Bishop Desmond Tutu - South African bishop & activist, b.1931)

        by FiredUpInCA on Thu Feb 06, 2014 at 10:11:49 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  This ^ ^ ^ ^ (4+ / 0-)

        Single Payer would massively reduce health care costs to corporations.

        The corporate types fight it because it's all about control. Money is just a means of control for these people.

        "What could BPossibly go wrong??" -RLMiller "God is just pretend." - eru

        by nosleep4u on Sat Feb 08, 2014 at 08:46:38 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  But on the other hand.... (4+ / 0-)

        Maybe Democratic candidates should do the "Bette from Spokane" thing--only with real people telling the truth, such as:

        "We wanted to (start a family) (have or adopt another child) and now, thanks to ACA, (my spouse or I) can be a stay-at-home parent, and that's what we dreamed of doing when the kids are small."

        "I've been able to leave my old job and start my own business, thanks to ACA."

        And so on...through caring for a sick family member, to going back to school to qualify for a better job, etc.

        What will voters identify with? Personal freedom to make your own decisions about family and work, or the more obscure interest of employers who want cheap  (if unhappy) workers?

        The cheapskate employer's story is not inspiring. It's dismal. The person pursuing her dreams is brave and full of optimism in seeking a better life.

      •  That is also why..... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        ......the republicans will never sponsor an immigration reform bill that does not include some form of work sponsorship.

        We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

        by delver rootnose on Sun Feb 09, 2014 at 03:13:19 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  I knew this would be a consequence (3+ / 0-)

    This was an easy one.  It's always been an easy one to figure. So many people work have been working at just the right number of hours to get their benefits.  It makes complete and total sense to a reasonable person that many of those people would be able to work fewer hours, and still get health insurance for the same cost.  

    That switch  in behavior makes a huge difference for working families with school aged children.  It means that one of those parents, or that single parent will be able to have more time to spread between the duties of just being a parent of a kid in school.


    by otto on Thu Feb 06, 2014 at 04:01:09 PM PST

    •  Also, some folks have been holding off on (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      retirement in order to hang on to their health care. None of these people were working because their employers were being charitable--the jobs needed doing.
      With 3 job seekers for every job now, other folks will get hired to do the work. It isn't even a loss of "the equivalent of 2 million workers"--if anything it is an increase in new hiring to fill those jobs/hours.
      CNN did not really clean up their reporting here. They just added more garbage to the pile. I never watch them anymore & this is why.

      Warren is neither a Clintonesque triangulator nor an Obamaesque conciliator. She is a throwback to a more combative progressive tradition, and her candidacy is a test of whether that approach can still appeal to voters.-J. Toobin "New Yorker"

      by chuck utzman on Thu Feb 06, 2014 at 07:25:33 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Also, many have held off starting a business (4+ / 0-)

        because of health care costs.

        Those 2 million - I'll bet at least 10% of them will starting businesses. The CBO report isn't a job neutral assessment - it's job-positive.

        "What could BPossibly go wrong??" -RLMiller "God is just pretend." - eru

        by nosleep4u on Sat Feb 08, 2014 at 08:50:29 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  this right here, why we don't yell this as loud as (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          possible I do not understand.

          this report proves that "Obamacare" creates jobs by creating business by freeing the Great American Worker (que Wagnerian music and sappy background pic of a puppy) to  innovate and prioritize and how you say.......become a job creator by starting a business to plug the damn hole they had to plug every day at their previous job for crappy hours and pay.....

          Honestly, the ACA is a huge impetus to open your own business now that your ass can be covered......I honestly think this if allowed to work and improved a little here and there, adding a little competition from Medicare, anyway, I digress...This has the possibility to free the people who now are stuck in their crap corporate job and allow them to open the next damn Apple or Dell...........

          We should be trumpeting this from the damn hills and cutting their knees off while smiling.......

          Vaya con Dios Don Alejo
          I want to die a slave to principles. Not to men.
          Emiliano Zapata

          by buddabelly on Sat Feb 08, 2014 at 09:09:26 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  RIGHT, why is it this is not acknowledged? (0+ / 0-)

        "The poor can never be made to suffer enough." Jimmy Breslin

        by MDhome on Sun Feb 09, 2014 at 08:39:34 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  And I am one of them. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        I was clinging to a job - a job I loved, BTW - because I finally had health insurance.  I say clinging because I had been dealing with health issues that made it extremely difficult to do my job - to do any job, really.  I finally bailed out in mid-October, paid one month of COBRA, and picked up an ACA policy as of January 1.

        I cannot tell you how grateful I am for this!  My personal plan was to work until I was 67 or so.  But when my condition changed [my body never asked permission nor did even give two weeks notice that it was going to start malfunctioning] I knew I was in trouble.  

        I was certain the heartless Rs in Congress wouldn't be able to repeal the ACA, but I was worried they might derail it.  I was not sure I could hang on one more year to age 65.  And I sure as heck could not have gone COBRA for a full year.

        Grateful - grateful - grateful.

        "The French have no word for entrepreneur!" G. W. Bush

        by bbuudd on Mon Feb 10, 2014 at 05:21:45 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Anderson Cooper gave a good report on it... (0+ / 0-)

    last night. I thought that's the CNN story you would be referring to.

    I share a birthday with John Lennon and Bo Obama.

    by peacestpete on Thu Feb 06, 2014 at 04:57:59 PM PST

  •  CNN is a pile of garbage (0+ / 0-)

    like most of the teevee so called ' news'.
    Why would I care what people who lie to me say?
    So they told the truth this time, big effin' deal.
    It's newsworthy when they tell the truth?
    That tells you something right there about CNN and the rest of them.
    America's very own little modern day Pravda's for Big Money.

    They stopped being a relevant part of America a long time ago. (Just like Pravda in Russia)
    I hope their ratings continue to plummet further into the toilet.
    Why bother consuming fake 'news' from people who can't be trusted?

  •  I don't think the CBO (0+ / 0-)

    The reduction in CBO’s projections of hours worked represents a decline in the number of full-time equivalent workers of about 2.0 million in 2017, rising to about 2.5 million in 2024. Although CBO projects that total employment (and compensation) will increase over the coming decade that increase will be smaller than it would have been in the absence of the ACA.

    and therefore CNN, got this right in the report.

    On page 124, the report estimates that the ACA will "boost overall demand for goods and services over the next few years because the people who will benefit from the expansion of Medicaid and from access to the exchange subsidies are predominantly in lower-income households and thus are likely to spend a considerable fraction of their additional resources on goods and services." This, the report says, "will in turn boost demand for labor over the next few years."

    "When you boost demand for labor in this kind of economy, you actually reduce the unemployment rate, because those people who are looking for work can find more work, right?" Van Hollen asked Elmendorf.

    "Yes, that's right," Elmendorf said.

    Elmendorf added that the factor Van Hollen had identified was something CBO thinks "spurs employment and would reduce unemployment over the next few years."

    People with more money to buy goods and services will boost the demand for labor and the jobs that they left will be filled with other workers.

    Both of those increases in employment--consumer-driven demand for labor and workers replacing other workers who've quit--are the result of Affordable Care Act, and will likely lower increase employment in those two areas as well in consumer-driven demand for labor in the medical profession.

    The ACA is a stimulus and I the the increase in employment will be larger, not smaller, than it would have been in the absence of the ACA.

    It will prove to be a more effective market mover than tax breaks, which have failed for more than a decade to create a tsunami of jobs.

    All it created was a dam of $1 trillion of stagnant, unspent capital as major job creators are still waiting for "uncertainty" to lift.

    "I am not interested in picking up crumbs of compassion thrown from the table of someone who considers himself my master. I want the full menu of rights." (From "You Said a Mouthful" by Bishop Desmond Tutu - South African bishop & activist, b.1931)

    by FiredUpInCA on Thu Feb 06, 2014 at 10:32:14 PM PST

    •  Hi, FiredUpInCA, and may I add... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      The health profession is career choice that will be booming.  As one who is retired from the health field, there are a myriad of professions other than doctor and nurse.  With 30-40 million more people insured, you can bet when the dust settles, a decade from now, you will find 2.5 million more jobs in allied health professional fields.

      •  I shake my head (0+ / 0-)

        That the astronomically profitable healthcare system will be bursting with new cash from ACA - and still be the most unethical, worst regulated, poorest actual care in the world.

        I am incredibly relieved that friends and relatives have access now. So when do we address the fact that our actual care is abominable and kills?

        Life ain't like a box of chocolates. You pretty much do know what you're gonna get.

        by Nodin on Mon Feb 10, 2014 at 11:37:29 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Whoa, there Nodin.... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          The U.S. and its delivery system through the insurance industry is not ideal, but your statements of, "poorest actual care in the world," and, "our actual care is abominable and kills." is really over the top.

          The ACA makes accessible millions of our citizens able to have coverage who have not had it before; they are amongst the statistics that bring our longevity down a couple of notches from a few other nations.  

          We have innovative medical care, unfortunately, only the highly insured in many states have access.  The ACA is part of the answer.

  •  One thing about CBO report makes no sense. (4+ / 0-)

    It's this:

    In an economy with unemployment, 2 million people choosing to leave the labor force should not result in a reduction in hours worked.

    If people are working, there must be a demand for their hours.  If they leave the workforce, others should be hired in their place.  Net impact: none, aside from the names on the cubicles, name tags, and memo pads.

    So how come  CBO claims a reduction in hours worked?

    LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

    by dinotrac on Sat Feb 08, 2014 at 08:15:57 PM PST

    •  Wrong. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      The people that are currently working in order to keep their health insurance will be replaced by people who are looking for work. Those people who quit their jobs are not going to go out looking for work, they're either retiring or starting their own business. This results in a net decrease in the number of people looking for work which is a decrease in the number of unemployed.

      In addition, some of those people will start their own business, increasing employment when they hire employees.

      [Terrorists] are a dime a dozen, they are all over the world and for every one we lock up there will be three to take his place. --Digby

      by rabel on Sat Feb 08, 2014 at 09:18:12 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes. That's what I said. (0+ / 0-)

        So either we're both wrong or you didn't understand me.

        LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

        by dinotrac on Sun Feb 09, 2014 at 02:01:17 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Misunderstood then (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          It's extremely possible I've misunderstood, happens to me all the time.

          I was mostly taking issue with: " Net impact: none"

          The net impact will be a decrease in the unemployment rate. First directly from some people dropping out of the workforce since they no longer have to work to maintain their health insurance and a currently unemployed person taking their place, second from those people who drop out creating a new business that hires other people.  Both factors will significantly decrease the unemployment rate. Net impact: positive.

          [Terrorists] are a dime a dozen, they are all over the world and for every one we lock up there will be three to take his place. --Digby

          by rabel on Sun Feb 09, 2014 at 12:02:24 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Ah! Perhaps I should have been more explicit. (0+ / 0-)

            I meant no impact on hours worked because people would be hired to replace those who stopped working.

            As to the unemployment rate, that depends on what you're talking about.  It absolutely should reduce unemployment among those who want to work, but it might not show in the most commonly cited "official" U3 rate because of people becoming more encouraged to rejoin the work force and look for jobs.

            LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

            by dinotrac on Sun Feb 09, 2014 at 12:18:47 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  As far as I can tell (0+ / 0-)

      The CBO is predicting a decrease in average number of hours worked per employed person and that more of the decline will be attributable to people choosing to work fewer hours than to people being underemployed and wanting to work more.  The CBO predicts that reductions in labor supply will have a "greatly dampened" effect on overall employment due to the level of unemployment.

      •  Aargh. Sounds like I need to give it the careful (0+ / 0-)

        reading I don't have time to do.

        The interpretation that makes sense to me from a skim and looking at second-hand sources is that people who were working for the purpose of maintaining health insurance would leave their jobs and pursue whatever it is they would prefer to be doing.

        LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

        by dinotrac on Sun Feb 09, 2014 at 09:20:56 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Objectivity in journalism is a myth (0+ / 0-)

    It doesn't exist, it can't.  Everyone carries a bias, as does every institution.  This was what underlay the entire principle of a "free press".  That with a myriad of voices and perspectives, citizens could in time inform themselves by offsetting the biases of the various sources against each other.  Otherwise, if there were "objective" journalism there's be no need for a free press.  "Objective" sources could be allowed to publish, all others suppressed.  The founders knew humans too well.  What they could not foresee was the total hegemony of the money power.  They counted on a diversity of biases.  A uniformity of bias can even get away with pretense to "objectivity".  The one ideology that can successfully deny being an ideology is a society's hegemonic ideology.  And in our society, that's what the money power is.  When you demand "objective journalism" in this society, your only possible reward is the purest incarnation of the ideology of the money power.  It is this understanding that Gramsci bequeathed us from his cell in Mussolini's prison.  We have yet as a society to come to grips with it.

    "Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will." ~Frederick Douglass

    by ActivistGuy on Sat Feb 08, 2014 at 08:22:40 PM PST

    •  I read this wondering if you are old enough (6+ / 0-)

      to remember a few names when they were working for CBS, ABC and NBC. Ones that come to mind:

      Edward R. Murrow
      Richard Hottelet
      Chett Huntley
      David Brinkley
      Walter Cronkite
      Eric Severeid
      Edwin Newman
      Howard K.Smith
      Frank Reynolds
      Peter Jennings
      Hal Bruno

      Although some will undoubtedly disagree with me on this point, when they were actively pursuing their careers in the 50s, 60s and 70s, these folks and many more did a respectable job of objectivity, often in the face of potential persecution and harassment (Nixon and Hoover) or personal danger (covering the war in Vietnam before the press was "inserted" by politically appointed DOD spin doctors).

      Frankly by the standards these journalists plied their trade, todays' talking heads are useless mouthpieces for their corporate spin doctors. And you can thank Ronald Reagan and his redaction of the Fairness Doctrine in broadcasting for the sewage that is passed off for the news these days in America.

      •  ...which is why I now mostly rely on Al Jazeera (0+ / 0-)

        for a good overview of world news these days. On matters of the Middle East they appear to be unexpectedly objective - and their North American journalism seems to be far more concise, factual and objective than the L.A. or N.Y. Times, the Washington Post or any U.S. based broadcast media.

        The difference is pretty remarkable- news for grownups. What a concept. Ayres and Murdoch probably won't be trying for a hostile takeover bid on them anytime soon.

  •  simply put (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    it means that people will no longer feel that they are bound to stay at jobs they don't like because of the insurance it provides.

    the GOP should love this aspect of ACA seeing as it promotes that entrepreneurship thing they profess to love so well.

    hope springs eternal and DAMN is she getting tired!

    by alguien on Sat Feb 08, 2014 at 08:34:21 PM PST

  •  Chuck Todd's journalistic chops are as thin as (0+ / 0-)

    his tortured comb-forward. What a waste.

    "Life is short, but long enough to get what's coming to you." --John Alton

    by Palafox on Sat Feb 08, 2014 at 08:36:13 PM PST

  •  Is it just me? (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    spritegeezer, novapsyche, barnowl, KayCeSF

    Chuck Todd is worthless. He represents everything wrong with this country. He may as well work for Fox.

    “He talks a lot and he's not very bright. And that's a combination I like in Republicans.” James Carville

    by Mokislab on Sat Feb 08, 2014 at 08:38:35 PM PST

    •  Murdoch/Ailes withdrew their Canada media app (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      because Canada has a strict truth in media law "a licenser may not broadcast ... any false or misleading news". The Fox "news" propagandists withdrew their application when their Canadian supporters were unable to abolish the law. Unfortunately the U.S. has no such law and Fox lies go on unabated. Shameful.

      If we lie to the government, it's a felony...but if they lie to us it's politics.

      by rmb on Sat Feb 08, 2014 at 11:11:39 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Why was he hired for this position? (0+ / 0-)

      He's been around for long enough to peg as partisan right winger.  His biases were very clear when he was at Cspan.
      Do not watch him.   Is there no one better at msnbc?

      Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. Voltaire

      by barnowl on Sun Feb 09, 2014 at 04:12:32 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  yes (0+ / 0-)

        Maddow, MHP, Chris Hayes ,All of them always offer context before the report on their subjects.  I don't know how he ended up where he did. I never thought he had any depth.

        “He talks a lot and he's not very bright. And that's a combination I like in Republicans.” James Carville

        by Mokislab on Sun Feb 09, 2014 at 11:39:33 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  increase in youth employment (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nocynicism, Minnesota Deb

    I'd go farther though -- if elderly people (who in the past would have worked only in order to obtain health insurance) now choose not to work, doesn't that increase employment for the young and middle-aged?

    We are right to congratulate our party on some areas, but whoever does Dem messaging should quit and get an internship in an ad agency or policy think tank.

    Dem messaging sucks.

    "Your victory has demonstrated that no person anywhere in the world should not dare to dream of wanting to change the world for a better place." -- Mandela

    by agoldnyc on Sat Feb 08, 2014 at 08:40:46 PM PST

  •  More than a false impression. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    It was a falsehood. An accurate tweet would have said "Chuck Todd essentially reaffirms..."

    "Mr. President, I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed. But I do say no more than ten to twenty million killed, tops." General Buck Turgidson

    by muledriver on Sat Feb 08, 2014 at 08:49:59 PM PST

  •  Here's a concept (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nocynicism, Minnesota Deb

    for reporters: how about FIRST reporting what the actual facts are and then at some later point, speculating on what the facts might mean! It's a given that the Republicans will distort the facts and that Fox News is a right wing propaganda machine, but come on, people like Chuck Todd should be doing a better job.

  •  The other angle not being discussed (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Minnesota Deb

    If the equivalent of 2.5 million Americans voluntarily leave the workforce and the need for their labor remains, then won't 2.5 million American workers move to fill that void?

  •  labor supply and demand (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    If the demand for labor increases because the ACA allows worker to keep insured while they work less, for whatever reason, the cost of labor rises.  Workers will make more money. spend more money and require more workers to be hired thus increasing demand for more labor.

    A fool and his money are soon elected. -Marx, Groucho

    by Garth1066 on Sat Feb 08, 2014 at 09:06:39 PM PST

  •  If 2.5 million by 2024 voluntarily leave the (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nocynicism, Minnesota Deb

    workforce, doesn't common sense tell you that there are workers waiting in the wings to take those jobs?  What is this uncertainty about what it will mean?

    It won't be hurting the economy, especially when many will be startintg their own businesses, or simply living their lives, still consuming products and using services, while others filled their vacancy.  Certainly, if a worker can keep a roof over their head, food on the table and able to leave their job, or cut their hours, the economy will not be hindered.

    What it actually means there will be 2.5 million openings!

  •  chuck todd (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    enemy of the people

    belongs on fox no other network with his poor attempt at journalism.

  •  Fuck. Chuck. Todd. There's nothing more to (4+ / 0-)

    say about that fucker.  Yes, he was super-cute reading election results in 2008 because he came across as a wonky numbers guy, but the truth of the matter is he was just reading the name below the check-mark and sounding confident doing so...and that qualified him for a promotion to WH Correspondent?  Dude's a Republican dickwad.

    Once in a while you get shown the light, in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

    by darthstar on Sat Feb 08, 2014 at 10:25:35 PM PST

  •  It Creates 2 Million Jobs (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    fugwb, Minnesota Deb

    When 2 million people worth of worker hours aren't filled by actual workers, because they don't show up for that much total work now that they don't have to for the insurance, that creates 2 million jobs.

    Bosses still need that 2 million people worth of work done, but the old workers aren't there (home enjoying insurance). So they hire 2 million more people (or part/extended time to that much).

    That's 2 million more jobs created.

    Or less than 2 million more jobs, but higher pay: supply vs constant labor demand.

    Plus the extra insured people are spending more on healthcare, so more spending, so more other jobs. And they're healthier, so they're more productive.

    The failure of the Democrats, and particularly Obama, to scream from the release of the CBO that Obamacare creates over 2 million jobs while covering 40+ million more people's health, is absolutely stunning. It's even more stunning than Obama's failure to ensure the Obamacare launch went off without looking stupid.

    The more Democrats fail to brag, the more the Republicans who win elections instead of them just take the credit, so they're trusted while they tear it down.

    "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

    by DocGonzo on Sat Feb 08, 2014 at 10:32:56 PM PST

  •  Todd is a toad. n/t (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    hawkseye, fugwb, enemy of the people
  •  the crux - CBO using terrible language (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Minnesota Deb

    It might be true is some abstruse and academic sense that "workers choose how much labor to supply" but the real world workers don't get to "choose" to supply labor.

    There is always labor after.  If one person can't or won't do a job, then someone else will.  

    When it comes to labor, there is no real "supply and demand" model.  Only a demand side - if jobs need to get done, then labor will be found.  

    We are so far away from a labor shortage it is not even funny.

    Hence, for every person who can break his "job lock" and retire, cut back or leave to start a new endeavor there is another who will be hired.

    Ridiculous phrasing, terrible language allows the biased or lazy reader to reach their own erroneous conclusion.

  •  Chuck Todd's goal is to entertain, not explain. (0+ / 0-)
  •  Side note: embedding tweets (0+ / 0-)

    Instead of posting screenshots of tweets, why not post embedded tweets?

  •  All the White House has to say is... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Steve In DC

    . The winners are the people who can now work less if they want to.....

    .....and the OTHER winners are the ones who will now get their jobs.

    Simple isn't it, if you are not playing defense all the time that is

    We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

    by delver rootnose on Sun Feb 09, 2014 at 03:07:48 AM PST

  •  I find chuck todd to be lazy . . . . (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Steve In DC

    . . . . and really not very sharp.  NBC News can do better.  They should replace todd with a real journalist who isn't afraid of hard work.  They need someone who can understand, analyze and explain complex issues, and someone who isn't afraid to do the hard work to bring the truth to NBC and MSNBC viewers.  

  •  You have to remember (0+ / 0-)

    To Republicans and the rest of the ownership society, our (the rest of us) sole reason for existence is to serve them through endless labor for peanuts.  "Want to start your own business?  Take time off?  A VACATION?!?!?  What are you some kind of dirty hippie socialist?!?"

    We're just chattel for them to exploit and they don't appreciate our getting all "uppity" and telling them we don't necessarily NEED their job ("how DARE you try to get out from my BOOT on your neck!")

  •  How much information... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    can actually be contained in a tweet?  Really, I mean?  If one's primary method of communicating complex breaking news and evolving political situations is Twitter, then maybe one has chosen poorly.

  •  Checking out (0+ / 0-)

    "As I See It: Class Warfare The Only Resort To Right Wing Doom" right now.

  •  Chuckles Todd is no journalist (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Steve In DC, enemy of the people

    He's a backstabbing right wing toadie.

    "The real wealth of a nation consists of the contributions of its people and nature." -- Riane Eisler

    by noofsh on Sun Feb 09, 2014 at 05:54:40 AM PST

  •  Carrot or stick? (0+ / 0-)

    I think our problem is when we praise journalists they think they've gained capital and they stop trying to please us.  How else to explain how infrequently they get it right?

    For all the things the right does wrong, they have the press wrapped around their little finger.  No matter how close they report what the right wants to hear, they just give them more stick, pushing them further and further to their reality.

    I would love to praise Costello, but I fear it does more harm than good.

  •  My wife (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Steve In DC, R30A, KayCeSF, QuelleC

    Is one of those that will be "losing" her job due to Obamacare. She is in her early 60's she has been relegated to the midnight shift after her position she held for 25 years was lost due to her company losing their contract. She is working in a very hostile environment and is ready to leave her employer. The only thing that has held her back was health insurance. Now she can search for another job without the threat of healthcare being held over her head.

  •  Chuck Todd (0+ / 0-)

    has been sipping at the Right Wing Kool Aid for the past few years. He's lost much of whatever journalistic integrity he may have had early in his career. Soon he'll be on the Fox lineup, unable to resist the siren song of Roger Ailes's money.

  •  Chuck Todd (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    enemy of the people, KayCeSF

    Chuck Todd is a complete and total idiotic troll.  He opens his mouth to spout HIS opinion before analyzing the issues in front of him.  His elevator doesn't reach the top floor.

  •  Reality Leak! (0+ / 0-)

    Imagine what the press would say if we socialized medicine. That would cut costs by about half, which implies literally thousands of people out of work. Think of all the poor people this would put out on the streets:

    The list goes on and on. There would be all the people now trying to find loopholes, so the big companies don't have to pay. Many, many paper-pushers would be tossed out of work. How would all those people find legitimate jobs?

    The media would have a feeding frenzy!

  •  Never liked Chuck Todd's arrogance... (0+ / 0-)

    His know-it-all presentation, usually based upon rumor, what "some people say", and other right wing giveaways, sets the stage for half-truths, lazy reporting, and a "do anything for access" perspective that devalues the news gathering prowess of NBC and MSNBC.

    Chucky the Big Cheese should be demoted to gum-shoe status and sent to northern Louisiana to learn a trade that he was able to bypass through a chronic case of BS.

    •  I can see it now... (0+ / 0-)

      Northern Louisiana's "newest news bureau" consisting of a tar paper shack with a satellite dish for internet, a 10 year old Dell laptop, a can of Altoids and a bottle of Jack on a garage sale card table.

      Helluva operation. Just the right quality to support his brand of "journalism".

  •  Why not "2 million jobs created?" (0+ / 0-)

    If an amount of labor equal to 2 million FTE positions is taken off the market, doesn't that effectively create openings for 2 million FTEs?  Why are we not reporting it that way? This is the progressive way to talk about the issue.

    There's a difference between a responsible gun owner and one that's been lucky so far.

    by BeerNotWar on Sun Feb 09, 2014 at 02:26:41 PM PST

    •  Exactly!!! (0+ / 0-)

      If those 2 (or 2.5) million FTEs are leaving their current jobs  because they now have a choice, won't some of the millions of un/under employed eagerly snap up those openings?  
      So we're not talking about millions leaving the economy - we are talking about a change in WHO holds those millions of job positions (those who really want to work vs those who would prefer not to but have to b/c of health benefits).

      Add into this that some of those 2 million workers who will leave their current job (because they are no longer shackled by health benefits) will go into another line of work - perhaps creating their own job/business - and it seems that this is a net boost to the economy rather than a net loss.

      One last thing - this is unpopular but ... suppose some of those workers leaving the job market are parents who will stay at home to take care of their children ... their family can now get adequate health care so they don't need their job... and now, with the added time to take care of things like childcare, cooking, etc - they don't need to spend as much money.  This will be a net loss to the economy - but it is a bad thing?

  •  chuck todd should be . . . (0+ / 0-)

    . . fired.  This is just a long, long string of Chuck Todd's snide remarks against various Democrats or small/big congressional bills, in particular, the passage of the ACA law. He is sooooo Republican.

  •  This is simplistic but did happen (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I am 60; friends of mine who are nearing retirement age quit working because they can now afford health insurance on the money they have set up for retirement. They couldn't before Medicare kicks in because private insurance was poor coverage at catastrophic costs except in an employee group setting.

    So the jobs they had been doing were quickly filled with people who really need jobs for the income, not just the healthcare.

    I'm thinking another stellar Republican misdirect.

    Life ain't like a box of chocolates. You pretty much do know what you're gonna get.

    by Nodin on Mon Feb 10, 2014 at 11:29:47 AM PST

  •  "Take this Job & Shove It!" (0+ / 0-)

    Thanks to the OCA, employees finally have breathers that will enable them to find better jobs or better yet, start their own businesses. Watch for the numbers of small businesses to rise. Then watch employment increase as these businesses hire employees. Then listen for Repugnicans to revert to Bengazi talking points.

  •  One more point often missed: (0+ / 0-)

    There are plenty of unemployed people to fill the time and jobs that others vacate!  In this economy, does anyone seriously think that the hole left by workers who no longer have to continue working at jobs just to continue receiving health care won't be quickly filled by the unemployed?  This should be obvious.

    This should be good news to both employees who have been stuck in jobs they wanted to leave but couldn't, as well as young people who are trying to start their careers.

    By the way, it doesn't get mentioned enough that this is mainly happening because employees don't have to worry about preexisting medical conditions keeping them from getting health care if they quit their jobs, or look for another one.  It's also good news for workers that get laid off.  No more panic over losing health care for a loved one with a medical condition.

    One more reason corporate media sucks.  It's only worth watching to point out how terrible it is at journalism.

  •  It's better than that. (0+ / 0-)

    What we have is people choosing to work less because it increases their quality of life... thus freeing up job slots for people who want  to work.

    Its good news for workers who want to have more quality time with their families.

    It's good news for workers who need a job so that they can afford to feed their families.

    Isn't that all good news for just about everybody involved?

  •  I am not an economist, but (0+ / 0-)

    if the equivalent of 2.5 million jobs will be lost in the next 10 years because worker choose not to work or start businesses, wouldn't that argue for immigration reform, that is people to meet the demand for these positions? One of the least reported facts is that despite the aging of the 'native' population, the US has been sparred the slow population growth that Japan and Europe have seen is because we have a positive immigration rate. This is a fresh supply of younger, often highly educated workers. I guess it is too complicated to make this point, eh?  

    "Doubt kills more dreams than failure ever will."

    by never forget 2000 on Mon Feb 10, 2014 at 02:32:34 PM PST

  •  Most of the report was pretty good.... (0+ / 0-)

    But at the end the reporter says "pulling 2.5 million people from the workforce over the next 10 years cannot have a positive effect on the economy."  

    What???  With 3 people applying for every job opening it means 2.5 million people can be hired.

  •  CBO report (0+ / 0-)

    I've read the relevant part of the report plus some additional sections, and I've seen all the commentary on it.  The report is not written either well or clearly, and I think the CBO writers are to blame for all the confusion.  Even the explanation by the CBO is not clear.  So naturally, the conservatives are going to make it whatever they want.  It's too bad.

  •  I think the CBO is incorrect ... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    ... in their assertion that the ACA will result in "a (VOLUNTARY) reduction in labor force participation and in hours worked relative to what would have occurred otherwise"  (the capitalized word in parenthesis is my addition.)  I believe that most businesses are operating in as lean a mode as they can these days.  The free market simply cannot tolerate a reduction in the total number of hours worked - they need every hour they're getting these days.

    Thus, if I should decide that I no longer need to work full time, my boss, who needs SOMEONE to do what I do for a full 40 hours a week (I say this with some confidence, because if he DIDN'T my position simply would not be full-time), will hire someone else to make up for the time that I'm not here.  

    So, not only is the CBO's statement on this subject being intentionally misinterpreted, I believe that they have the facts wrong, anyway.  Just as giving tax breaks to the rich will not entice them to "create" a job - ONLY an increase in demand for their product or service that cannot be met by the current level of staffing will have THAT effect - a business that is operating with the bare minimum of staff will not  - CAN not! - allow "voluntary attrition" to decrease their staffing level.  

    OF COURSE the New Right is wrong - but that doesn't make WRONG the new RIGHT!

    by mstaggerlee on Tue Feb 11, 2014 at 10:08:21 AM PST

  •  Here is the truth.... (0+ / 0-)

    CNN's ratings are probably down again.   Maybe a little "truthiness" will bring them back up again.
    Of course people will NOT be enslaved in a Job they hate any longer.  I have interviewed people all over the State of FL and many them have told me they are putting up with a job has been over healthcare.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site