To the editor:

Last week the CBO came out with a report clearly stating that the Affordable Care Act will reduce the workforce by the equivalent of 2.4 million workers. Not that those 2.4 million jobs will be eliminated; the nation will just lose 2.4 million worker’s man-hours. The CBO report specifically stated this would be a result of incentivizing the work force not to work.

Immediately the administration defends this change by saying that people will retire instead of working longer to hold onto health insurance. The single mother will be able to be at home in the evening to prepare supper for her children. Nancy Pelosi said that now people can do something like paint. Seriously? All of the feel-good emotion is presented as defense.

When has it been a good thing to encourage people to stop working so that others can pay their way? What does it say about our society when we discourage others from achieving better? If first one person decides to stop working because someone else will subsidize their income then the next person will do the same. When you pay people not to work, that is exactly what they will do: not work. Social services are set up to help those that can’t help themselves. They are not set up to provide a handout and to discourage achievement although that is what they predominantly accomplish.

“The problem with Socialism is you eventually run out of other people’s money.” — Margaret Thatcher