At the heart of the matter, I think the political class as a whole skipped over *informing* us straight into attempting to *motivate* us, which gave the media tacit permission to do the same. All of us marketing/media folk know that urgency and scarcity are blunt weapons.

What I see as the critical problem, however, was the lack of an identifiable *thing* to discuss. Rather than getting together a group of experts in healthcare, economics, insurance, etc., to come up with a plan that might address everyone’s concerns (or meet the diplomatic criteria of “making everyone equally unhappy”), the political class created several hugely complex moving targets and behind-the-scenes deals. As a result, everything is subject to interpretation, and they can’t give us any straight answers. And an answer provided today could very well change tomorrow. Most people aren’t willing to buy something on those terms; I’d suggest it comes down to how much you trust the seller.

I’ve already gone long, so I’ll conclude by extending your light beer metaphor: Things would’ve gone more smoothly if our leaders had started by figuring out how thirsty people are, what exactly they were thirsty for, and how much they’d be willing to pay for the next round. Because in the real world, there’s no such thing as “on the house.”