PPACA v. markets

This article in the NYT describes why some professional living in New York will have to pay more under PPACA than they do when left to their own devices and free market exchanges. They have formed associations and purchased health insurance through the associations rather than as individuals. PPACA forces them to enroll as individuals. On the plus side, they will be able to children on their policies longer, face no consequences if they have or develop preexisting conditions, and not worry about how much insurance companies have paid in benefits over their lifetimes.  

The article is a good example of the effects of asymmetric information and a potential solution to it, the ingenuity of individuals and how they respond to incentives, and an unintended consequence of public policy.