Libertarians versus Liberals

Ezra Klein is a knowledgeable and convincing liberal. Most of the time I have a hard time refuting his arguments as they are consistent opinions that are based in fact.

Sometimes, though, I find a gap in his reasoning. In this piece, I found a couple, and they illustrate the same gaps that many liberals have when talking about issues, gaps that portray their inability to understand the libertarian point of view.

He's talking about how the premiums are very likely to go up once Obamacare hits (for many reasons but adverse selection and mandated benefits are the primary drivers). He argues that this misses the point because people will be purchasing superior insurance. Plus, they'll receive subsidies, so their actual expenses will decline.

There are two gaps in his argument. Let's start with the smaller one. He acts as if these subsidies come from nowhere, when, in fact, the subsidies are of course provided by tax-payers. So, yes, the newly insured might be paying less out of pocket than they were before, but society's payments have increased. But this misses the point, the point is that premiums would have been lower without those mandated benefits. It would be far less costly to insure everyone if the benefits weren't so extensive (no copay birth control, no copay for several benefits, for example).

The larger gap is how he ignores people's choices. He takes for granted that everyone wants the more expensive insurance plan (which I grant is probably the case when someone else is paying for it). He proposes a hypothetical choice between high deductible, low premium, very stingy insurance versus high premium, cover everything insurance. He argues that everyone would choose the latter, and that's what Obamacare is striving for.

If the latter option is so great, why does Obamacare have to mandate these benefits? If everyone who ccould afford it would choose it, why doesn't it already exist? It has to be mandated because no one is choosing it, and Ezra Klein and Barack Obama and all the other liberals think everyone should have that type of insurance no matter the cost.

This is just more evidence that Progressives don't believe that people are capable enough to make decisions for themselves. They've decided that high premium, cover everything insurance is the preferred type of insurance, so you should be forced to have it no matter the cost to you or to taxpayers.

He sums up with this. "The intent of Obamacare is to ensure that almost all Americans are covered by high-quality insurance that they can afford." That's exactly right, the intent of Obamacare was not to ensure that all Americans could afford high-quality insurance, it was that they "are covered." This is the difference between libertarians and liberals, the former wants to make sure you have a choice and do what you deem best, the latter wants to make sure you adhere to what they believe is best for you.