From Robert Samuelson, at Real Clear Politics about yet another insidious design flaw in the unpopular health care reform known in Orwellian fashion as the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act," or more colloquially as ObamaCare. Mr. Samuelson's article addresses the definitions of full-time and part-time workers. For the latter under ObamaCare the employer does not have to provide health insurance; once you reach 50 of the former, however, you do. The Bureau of Labor Statistics defines part time as less than 35 hours, while the PPACA defines part-time as less than 30 hours. Problem? Yes.
The argument about Obamacare is often framed as a moral issue. It's the caring and compassionate against the cruel and heartless. That's the rhetoric; the reality is different. Many of us who oppose Obamacare don't do so because we enjoy seeing people suffer. We believe that, in an ideal world, everyone would have insurance. But we also think that Obamacare has huge drawbacks that outweigh its plausible benefits.
It creates powerful pressures against companies hiring full-time workers -- precisely the wrong approach after the worst economic slump since the Depression. There will be more bewildering regulations, more regulatory uncertainties, more unintended side effects and more disappointments. A costly and opaque system will become more so.
Amen to that.