After reading Krugman, I turned to TNR‘s Jonathan Cohn, who discusses the same topic—in particular, he mentions the comparisons published by Avik Roy, who claims that more individuals will wind up paying more under Obamacare than will wind up paying less. (In part this would be because Obamacare requires that insurance policies now cover what the law deems “essential” benefits, including mental health benefits and drug abuse treatment.)

Faced with Roy’s claims, Cohn … takes them seriously. “No consensus exists” on the sticker shock issue, Cohn says, adopting a sensible ‘we’ll-know-soon-enough-who’s-right’ posture. Cohn notes that Roy’s analysis does attempt to correct for at least one of the flaws Krugman suggests afflict “supposed experts”–it estimates current costs for all individuals, not just the healthy ones. Roy also compares young people with other young people.

Executive Summary: Cohn analyzes, helpfully. Krugman sneers–inaccurately, it turns out.