Cutting Medicare by $700 Million to fund failed Trade Adjustment Assistance and fuck us

[cali]

Last edited Sun Jun 14, 2015, 10:26 AM - Edit history (1)

with TPA, TPP, TISA and TTIP.

So, looking into Trade Adjustment Assistance, it turns out this program is a failure, but hey, President Obama is just fine and dandy with doing anything to pass this crap. After all, his legacy is very important.

Here's some information about the effectiveness, or rather the lack thereof, of TAA. Btw, a sizable chunk of TAA goes to guess who? Corporations, of course. For what? Not very much as it happens.

Yes, TPA may very well pass. That's certainly been my long held conviction, but anyone who thinks this won't badly damage dems in 2016, is delusional. Progressives, Labor, Environmental Orgs and Public Interest Groups, all traditional allies, won't be letting this go. They've all said so.

Program Effectiveness
TAA for workers

The TAA for workers have demonstrated overall low effectiveness so far which is reflected in the controversy to reauthorize the program before the 112th Congress and the fact that the TAA will be discontinued in 2015.

First, the program is not very effective providing support during the transition because a significant portion of workers does not receive TRA. In FY2011 there were over 196,000 TAA participants and only around 46,000 received TRA.[27] One reason is that the training enrollment deadline of 8/16 weeks seriously limits the ability of workers to enroll in training programs and receive the benefit. Moreover, even for those workers receiving TRA and UI, only a portion of the lost income is replaced.[28] The program provides health insurance coverage but in the past it has not been very effective since participation in TAA was associated with decreased coverage in the period following job loss like a joint report by Mathematica Policy Research and Social Policy Research (SPR) prepared for the DOL evaluating the TAA program under the Trade Act of 2002 shows.[29]

The effectiveness of the program in terms of fostering reemployment is very low too. Data on post-TAA outcomes for program exiters based on DOL estimations shows that the entered employment rate was 66% in 2011.[22] The Mathematica Policy Research and SPR report finds that the TAA is not effective in terms of increasing employability. There is positive effect on the reemployment rate for participants but it is not statistically different from that for non-participants.[29]

The effectiveness of the program in terms of mitigating earning losses in the new job is very low too as several studies report. Reynolds and Palatucci (2008) estimate that “participating in the TAA program causes a wage loss approximately 10 percentage points greater than if the displaced worker had chosen not to participate in the program.”[20] The report by Mathematica Policy Research and SPR states that TAA was estimated to have no effect on earnings and compared to a sample of UI claimants, TAA participants worked about the same number of weeks but had lower earnings.[29]

Moreover, a 2007 GAO report shows that in FY 2006 only 5% or less of TAA participants received wage insurance. The program is ineffective closing the earning gap because in order to be eligible for wage insurance workers must find a job within 26 weeks after being laid off, which proved to be a very short period.[30] Additionally, the program only replaces half of the losses.

Finally, the implementation of this program overlaps extensively with others such as Workforce Investment Act generating extra costs and duplicating administrative efforts.[13] The process to allocate training funds is also problematic. States receive funds at the beginning of the fiscal year but it does not properly reflect the state´s demand for training services. In addition, states do not receive funds for case management and lack flexibility to use the funds for training. Thus, states face challenges in providing services to workers properly.[30]

<snip>

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_Adjustment_Assistance

[marym625]

1. K&R!

I thought this was a great OP when it was just a reply.

Great post!

Bernie

[djean111]

2. I think the Medicare thing was just theater - so the Dems who want to vote yes ANYWAY can

cloak their shit with Hey! We saved Medicare! Don't pay attention to this festering heap of smelly rotten corporate sausage!
Oh, gotta go! Jamie is on the other line!

[Enthusiast]

51. I wouldn't be a bit surprised.

[aspirant]

3. Do we know specifically

who put this 700 million dollar Medicare cut into the Senate bill?

Was it Hatch, Wyden, a Schumer suggestion or another member of the Senate Finance Committee?

[Cryptoad]

36. Seems nobody knows,,,,, but it must be true,,,, its on the Internet!

[BKH70041]

4. Where else they gonna go?

"... but anyone who thinks this won't badly damage dems in 2016, is delusional. Progressives, Labor, Environmental Orgs and Public Interest Groups, all traditional allies, won't be letting this go."

Where else they gonna go?

Nowhere. That's where.



And everybody knows it.

[cali]

5. They won't put boots on the ground. That's what many have said

and I suspect it will simply depress turnout with membership of those groups.

Laugh as you will, but this is more serious than many of the Hilary supporters, who as far as I can see are largely people who don't care about theses issues and/or are ill informed on these issues, or simply corporate dems, get.

[Robbins]

8. Your right on that

many hillary supporters around here have been outed as corporate dems.

labor is stupid especilly to offer one cent to any dem who supports free trade bills since they are killing unions and working people.

It's just laughable now dems ocnsently begging for money.Since they only work for corporations get your money from them.Oh,that's right they will always give more to republicans than dems even corporate ones.

[Robbins]

6. no

progressives,labor,environmental,and public intrest groups will all know there is no difference between corporate dems like obama
and your candiate Hillary and republicans.

your really showing how much a corporate dem you are with laughing there.

[aspirant]

7. The question is

where is Hillary going to go when she loses again?

[Divernan]

10. Hangin' at St. Barth's, Martha's Vinyard, Gstaad w/ her homies.

[Fuddnik]

13. Well, lucky for her, she won't need TAA assistance, to land a new job.

My guess would be the dustbin of history.

[MannyGoldstein]

9. Testify!

If we don't do whatever Republicans want, then more Republicans will get elected and do whatever they want!

Regards,

TWM

[daleanime]

11. +1

[Autumn]

12. Manny that quote is pure gold,

The prevailing sentiment in one concise sentence.

[MannyGoldstein]

41. We held off President Sarah Palin once

But with these Sanders supporters... she might be inevitable this time.

[tomp]

21. couldn't have said it better myself. nt

[closeupready]

28. Yup, lol. Can't add to that, really.

[old guy]

40. Yep

If anyone has doubts observe Kansas and Wisconsin.

[neverforget]

46. Lol!

[Betty Karlson]

26. That's what was asked about the LGBT community in 2009.

Where else are they going to go?

HOME.
They went home, they closed their checkbooks, they cleared their desks at the volunteer centers, and they used their energy to relentlessly campaign against the more than disappointing "fierce advocacy" of 2009 Obama. Some of them didn't turn up to vote. The results have been devastating to this day. And no, that wasn't their fault.

When you alienate your left wing, the consequences will be on YOU.

[Bluenorthwest]

38. Load of horse shit. LGBT voters are not idiots. We vote. We do hard core politics.

You want to know who we are? We are the people who persuaded Obama to come out in support of marriage equality prior to the 2012 election, while straight folks kept shouting that to do so would lose us the election. How do we get such results? Everybody knows we always vote and some of us have fat checkbooks.
I challenge you to take a look at turnout in various places, it was not low in heavily LGBT areas and States, 2010 both CA and Oregon went ultra blue, had big Democratic victories, NY did just fine, as did the big cities in general. The non voters were of course whining straight white moderates.
LGBT people most certainly did not campaign against Obama, and would never blame other Democrats for what he was doing. That would be insane, and insanity is for straights.

Trust me, we knew exactly what we were doing, and the proof lies in the results.

[Betty Karlson]

39. Well, I'm happy to stand corrected on this one.

Please accept my apologies for any equestrian manure in that earlier post.

But the core of my remark remains the same:

in 2009, the question was asked "where else would they go?" in order to dismiss marriage equality as part of the Democratic platform. It was not supposed to be electable.

Now, that same question is asked about another group, and their positions. Any advice you want to give them?

[CrispyQ]

37. What a rude post.

Yes, you & dem leadership think it's just so damned funny that the left has no voice. You tell us to sit down & shut up, you ridicule us, asking, "Where else ya gonna go?" You pull out the SCOTUS boogeyman at every presidential election. One of you even called us 'fucking retarded.' But when dems lose at the polls, then you whine & cry & point your fingers at the left & blame us for losing.

If this is how you treat an important segment of your base, then you deserve to lose.

[stillwaiting]

47. I am stunned by what a prick you are. Seriously.

There is so much at stake in this country for so many, and you simply mock and ridicule very valid concerns that could have disastrous results in our country.

Your investment portfolio must be doing quite well, and you clearly don't seem to give a damn about everyone else.

Both of those would have to be true in order to be such an asshole. Otherwise, you're just not too smart.

[Cryptoad]

14. You forgot to tell us,,,

what parts of Medicare is being cut,,,,

[Fuddnik]

15. You forgot to look it up.

[Cryptoad]

16. No I ,,,, i never ask question I dont already know the answer

Since the gubermint only spends around 700 billion on all of Medicare ,,, maybe you would like to tell us what is being cut..,,,,,,,,

[aspirant]

17. If you know the answer,

then it is redundant to ask the question.

[Cryptoad]

35. No . the point was not seeking the answer

the point was that the op's statement about Medicare is BS.....

[jeff47]

42. No, the point was for you to claim it is false without providing any evidence.

That way, you can just say "WRONG!". It's SO much easier than having to supply evidence.

TAA was paid for by reducing Medicare reimbursement rates. So doctors would get paid $700M less in order to fund TAA. The "plan" was to pass another bill restoring these cuts. Which will happen shortly after I am crowned queen of the mynocks.

[Cryptoad]

43. My post was in response to the origal OP before it was edited

Sorry,, your dog is not in this race.....

[geek tragedy]

18. Your math is off by a factor of 1000x.

[cali]

32. thanks. I know it's millions not billions. dope moment for me.

[pampango]

19. I believe the proposed Medicare cut is $700 MILLION (0.1% of Medicare costs), not $700 BILLION.

That is a difference of a factor of 1,000.

The problem with it is not the effect on Medicare of a cut of 1/10 of 1% in its budget. It is the precedent it sets so Democrats are right to oppose it.

The tea party folks have hated TAA for a long, long time. Of course their hatred is not because the program is ineffective. They probably don't know that and think it is effective at helping displaced workers. That is why they hate it.

[Scuba]

20. "We know this trade deal is so bad it's gonna cost $700M to retrain workers who lose their jobs, so

... we're gonna further fuck you by taking that money from the healthcare those same workers need. Because otherwise the banksters and drug companies and other wealthy assholes won't be able to afford their fifth mansions and thirteenth Mercedes, so fuck you. Signed: Most Progressive President Ever."

[Dont call me Shirley]

24. +1,000,000,000

[fasttense]

22. When my spouse was laid off in 2008 he tried to apply for TAA

But you had to get a note from your former employer saying that the job was moved to another country. Or you had to have some kind of evidence to prove that it was due to our crappy trade policies and NOT due to the crappy economy.

Most corporations don't specifically move jobs from one country to another. They lay off people here in the US, then they magically create New Jobs in Mexico or wherever. So getting a corporation to admit that your specific job was moved to North America is near impossible.

Besides it's bad PR. What corporation wants to admit that thousands of people were fired in the US so they could build it cheaper in Mexico? Corporations don't JUST want to build crap with the cheapest labor around, they want to still be able to sell their crap here in the US. So, telling their customers that they moved hundreds of thousands of jobs to another country so they could pay 50 cents an hour for labor, instead of having to pay a US citizen, doesn't sell more crap.

So the requirements you had to meet to be eligible for the program were next to impossible.

[mountain grammy]

27. +1

[dmosh42]

29. Thanks for the explanation. Helped my understanding of this issue.

[Art_from_Ark]

33. Some companies have openly stated they were closing plants and moving to Mexico

Whirlpool, Zenith, and Levi Strauss, among others.

[fasttense]

48. Yes, but was it your job that moved?

I suppose if they came out and said,"We moved all of factory A in west world to South America." Then it might be enough. But the administrator specifically said that general comments, memos or press releases indicating the business was moving to a treaty nation was insufficient. From what I could understand, 1st you had to be located in certain parts of the US deemed to be hardest hit. Then you had to have a statement from the bussiness saying that your specific job was moved. As the administrator told us, the bussiness might decide to no longer maintain your function at the new location.

Anyway, we didn't qualify and the administrator was a snotty, nasty person. You would think it was her money she was using for retraining workers.

[Art_from_Ark]

50. It wasn't my job that moved

I was already working in Japan by that time. But some of my former classmates were working for some of those companies. One of them found a job with Kraft, but then Kraft pulled up stakes and moved to Missouri. I don't know about the others.

[Dont call me Shirley]

23. K & R

[allinthegame]

25. Weird

Is this the same $700 billion Paul Ryan keeps talking about?
It must be very popular money.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

30. How does TAA help long term unemployed who were hoping to get another job as the painfully slow

'recovery' caught up with the rest of us? People who have ALREADY lost their jobs, and just can't get new ones because new ones are created in third world countries now, instead of the US?

[Divernan]

45. TAA "training": Repeat slowly: You want fries with that?

[doc03]

31. If this TPP was good there should be no need for any

TRA. How stupid they think people are? Like NAFTA was supposed to make good paying jobs but when your good paying Union job goes overseas they give you TRA to train for a low paying service job. I've been there and done that in 2009 when I lost a $65000 a year job in steel. Oh and a Democrat pushed that one thru too.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

34. But we aren't going to lose any jobs because of this agreement, according

to the Three Shill Magi. So no need to worry about it. If anything the economy is going to get much stronger as it has before. But if any jobs are lost. Well, fuck 'em because freedom, FDR and JFK. They should’ve work harder and not expect "job handouts".

[Babel_17]

44. You have to spin it the right way

You see potentially hundreds of thousands losing their jobs and getting little to help them. Others see those same hundreds of thousands losing their jobs, and getting something. Something is irrefutably better than nothing.

Think positive!

[octoberlib]

49. K&R