[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

STUDY: Delaying The Employer Mandate Will Have A Minimal Effect On Obamacare | ThinkProgress

Feel free to rip on the source.

The "source" may not be who you think it is. The research was sponsored by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. This would be the entity spending nearly $10 million to promote the ACA with Secretary Kathleen Sebelius among the most trusted aides to the President. I'm not shocked that this study would attempt to mitigate concern around some of the more contentious aspects of this legislation.

The first problem is that the Treasury cannot waive the actual tax for the employer mandate, it can only delay information reporting requirements for 2014. The delay is implemented through the IRS. IRS Notice 2013-45 with regard to the delay states that employers are “encouraged to voluntarily comply with the information reporting provisions for 2014.” What has not been clarified anywhere in the Notice is whether or not businesses meeting the criteria of the tax will be granted amnesty from auditors for FY2014. These businesses still have no clue what "compliance" actually means. That's an immediate impact of the delay, but it's not the impact of this delay I'm complaining about. It's the significance of this element of Obamacare in general and why its implementation (expected to be "messy" by its architects and others regardless of whichever year they opt to implement it) is being delayed for political cover.

However, I'm not sure why you'd insist that something projected by the CBO to generate one-fifth the total revenue required to fund the ACA is insignificant. It's actually -- quite huge. Projected to take in $10 billion its first year of the $48 billion required annually to fund the ACA.

I don't have cable. I don't watch the Daily Show.

I'm not sure Think Progress or studies commissioned by the Obama Administration are going to get you any closer and while my point was directed more at besson who I happen to know is a HUGE fan of the Daily Show... point taken.

[The Final Dakar]

[QUOTE=ebuddy;4246315]I'm not sure why you'd insist[/URL]*sigh* I responded to one of besson's posts and then posted the info when you requested proof. I'm not sure why you'd categorize that as insist but this kind of treatment is why I've become much more lackadaisical regarding my PL participation.

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

I'm not sure Think Progress or studies commissioned by the Obama Administration are going to get you any closer

I googled some terms based on what I remember and that was the top hit. I posted acknowledging the possible bias. I don't read think progress, either.


Thanks for sharing your take.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

I'm not sure why you'd insist[/URL]*sigh* I responded to one of besson's posts and then posted the info when you requested proof. I'm not sure why you'd categorize that as insist but this kind of treatment is why I've become much more lackadaisical regarding my PL participation.

Insist meaning you made the point, I countered it, and you reiterated your point having not accepted my refutation. That's insisting. It's not unwelcome or illegal or bad, but it is insisting by definition. That said, I have no desire to drive you from the PL, but if that's all it takes -- I'm not going to beat myself up over it.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

Insist meaning you made the point, I countered it, and you reiterated your point having not accepted my refutation. That's insisting. It's not unwelcome or illegal or bad, but it is insisting by definition.

Reiterate? I was posting my source as requested.

Specifically, I was answering this:

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

Why would you conclude that this doesn't affect very many people???

I suppose I might be at fault for considering a sentence with three question marks a real inquiry.

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

That said, I have no desire to drive you from the PL, but if that's all it takes -- I'm not going to beat myself up over it.

I'm not saying I'm leaving, I'm saying my level of participation is lazier. I wouldn't beat myself up over it either, but either this place has been more combative lately or I have less tolerance for it.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

I'm not saying I'm leaving, I'm saying my level of participation is lazier. I wouldn't beat myself up over it either, but either this place has been more combative lately or I have less tolerance for it.

I should acknowledge that I'm going through the same thing, Dakar and my frustration with other perspectives is resulting in more combative posting. For what it's worth, I'll work on trying to cut that back a bit (at least for the few I'm not entirely convinced have lost their minds). These virtual friendships are worth at least that much and whether you like it or not, you're one of 'em.