by JDHURF » Fri Sep 27, 2013 1:50 pm
Show me the evidence that what you allege are the "opinions" of the "vast majority of business executives, financial analysts and doctors" are indeed the majority opinion of these people. Just saying it doesn't make it so. Also, alleging that Baker has a "progressive agenda" bias and then saying that his paper is shitty because it relies on numbers that are fictitious while ignoring the fact that he stated quite explicitly that: "We now have the full six months of data for the first half of 2013. This is the period when employers thought they would be subject to sanctions for not covering workers who put in 30 hours a week or more. (The administration announced the suspension of this provision on July 2.)"; is just plain lying.
It must also be noted that even were this not true, were it to be that a majority of employers decided to sabotage the workforce by hiring fewer people (and as stated in the paper, "If some number of firms actually are limiting or reducing employment to stay below the 50 worker cutoff then the impact would be too small to be noticed in the economy as a whole."), there is still no evidence that the ACA is going to harm the general economy.