Now an effective levy of several thousand dollars on the small fraction of middle class Americans who buy on the individual market is not history’s great injustice. But neither does it seem like the soundest or most politically stable public policy arrangement. And to dig back into the position where I do strongly disagree with Cohn’s perspective, what makes this setup potentially more perverse is that it raises rates most sharply on precisely those Americans who up until now were doing roughly what we should want more health insurance purchasers to do: Economizing, comparison shopping, avoiding paying for coverage they don’t need, and buying a level of insurance that covers them in the event of a true disaster while giving them a reason not to overspend on everyday health expenses. If we want health inflation to stay low and health care costs to be less of an anchor on advancement, we should want more Americans making $50,000 or $60,000 or $70,000 to spend less upfront on health insurance, rather than using regulatory pressure to induce them to spend more. And seen in that light, the potential problem with Obamacare’s regulation-driven “rate shock” isn’t that it doesn’t let everyone keep their pre-existing plans. It’s that it cancels plans, and raises rates, for people who were doing their part to keep all of our costs low.
Ross Douthat, Obamacare's Losers and Why They Matter - NYTimes.com
This is why I said that we were just rental cars and library books to Obama back in 2009.
Here's some more stuff I said in 2009:
Obama isn’t just a guy with a good health plan; he’s a guy who will be worth tens of millions of dollars. So while the common man will likely be forced to sacrifice for sake of the currently uninsured, Obama himself isn’t going to sacrifice. He will still get the world’s best health care. It is easy for Obama to force others to make a sacrifice that he himself will not have to make. And because it’s so easy for him to do this, I (and others) believe that he won’t be terribly careful or considerate or respectful when this sacrifice is made. That’s why the anecdote matters.
I’ve been self-employed for several years, and before I got married, I had to go out and buy my own health insurance. Believe me, I know the current system is messed up … it’s messed up for all kinds of reasons that you and I wouldn’t agree about. But a lot of us think we are about to mess things up a whole more. I believe this will have real, and likely tragic, repercussions. There are good sacrifices and bad ones; I believe Obama is going to force us to make some really bad ones.
Obama is sending his kids to private school; he is also canceling the voucher program that lets poor families in D.C. send their kids to private schools. Killing the D.C. voucher program was not humane. Obama killed it because the politics of the issue was more important to him than the education of these kids. Of course, he would never put politics ahead of his own kids’ education, and that’s laudable. But Obama’s hierarchy of values seems to go something like this:
1. Himself and his family.
Again, this doesn’t make him a bad person—it just makes him human. But if you are part of the group called “Other People,” it might be a mistake to cede control of important things like your healthcare or your livelihood to his control, because he might just sell out your interests for the sake of politics.
And, although this oldie-but-goodie isn't healthcare specific, it's worth revisiting while everyone seems to be reassessing their feelings about our President.