I do and it sickens me. Older people, especially those on medicare, get virtually free care after having paid pennies compared to what I pay, and then whine and complain that people could shift HC from them to a younger generation. Selfishness and stupidity at its core.

The AARP is worse than the UAW. I will do whatever I can to pay as little as possible: high-deductible premiums and to force others to pay for their health care.

Many don't want health insurance but free health care at my expense. I care and I'm pissed--but the AARP will determine who gets elected and bankrupt this country.

Jay,

At least you and the Sun are being honest that universal health coverage amounts to a tax on the young and healthy. How is what you propose any different than slavery? You do realize that is the essence of what insurance mandates are: to coerce money (which is time & labor) from the young to support the opulence of older generations.

This is why the issues need to be broken down by type and paid for by type rather than all being comingled into an nonamalgous confusinng attempt at a whole.

The day to day routine treatments that EVERYONE should be doing (like dentists and Mx checkups)... and paid for with your own cash out of pocket.

The "oh my God" catastrophic and traumatic and similar highly expensive care that NO ONE can afford to pay for on their own. These include the bad traffic accident as well as terminal diseases like old age... and which REQUIRE that 100% actuarial pool and tax supported program in the same way that the VA or Medicare are done now. Oh yeah, and it will absolutely require rationing.

And then the in between incidents with individual insurance (or HSA plans) that should be more about assisting with the budget hiccup or "luck of the draw" in the same way that homeowners insurance does.

This is far too complicated to detail in a blog post but I remain convinced that maintaining the HI providers and employer based plans

And why would the young not believe Obama is looking out for them? Just this week he gave them a rousing conservative speech on how with hard work they could be successful. How unfortunate that the president did not take advantage of the opportunity to tell school children that he and the nation's central planners were counting on them to provide plenty of tax revenue to bail out underfunded social welfare programs, the majority of which commitments go to middle class and upper middle class AARP members.

Of course health care will be paid for by the young and no sick, just like car insurance is more of a burden on safe drivers. That's how these things work.

The problem, though, is that taxpayers end up paying a lot for catastrophic care when things could've been prevented -- the outcomes are worse and the expenses are higher. I really don't know if preventative medicine for everyone would be cheaper than the extreme care from ERs that people without insurance get now, but that doesn't especially matter -- outcomes matter.

Yes, the burden will be heavier on me (I'm in my mid-20s) and my peers, but such a system has to start that way. My children will pay for my care, and their children theirs.

The part that concerns me is the public option debate and how insurance companies are responsible for making profits for shareholders. They have no incentive to allow care for anything -- keeping people alive doesn't pay enough. A new system should change the incentives so (nonprofit) insurance companies want to allow fair coverage and keep patients breathing.

Justine: What you say about how insurance works makes sense. Yes, by definition the people who don't make claims pay for the people who do. What's inequitable for young people is that, at the rate we're going, they're going to pay more than their share over the course of their lives. That's because baby boomers are paying less than their share; the United States has borrowed $11 trillion on the boomers' behalf, spending for their Medicare, their Social Security, their wars.

Real insurance doesn't work like this; it doesn't borrow money to pay claims; it makes sure present claims equal present revenue. If the people running the country today wanted to pay for these things now out of their own pockets with present taxes, great. But they don't. And when it comes time to pay back the money, they'll be dead and gone. Instead, the names on the IOU are "Justine" and everybody else in their 20s, teens and younger. That'll mean higher taxes, a weaker dollar and maybe a weaker economy for you guys.

Maybe it's fair that young people pay health-care premiums to cover sicker old people. What isn't fair is when young people are still paying premiums for folks who died 30 years previously. Of course I'm talking mainly about Medicare here. If there's no public plan, Obama's plan will be private insurance only. But even that will probably add to the government debt: Taxpayers are going to subsidize lower-income folks who buy the private plans, and the subsidies will probably end up being bigger than the Democrats say. More reasons for the Treasury to borrow money today and pay it back MUCH later.

I agree that health care reform must occur, and my general postition is close to MrRational's. I want to add, though, that there are several things that are impossible to legislate--such as eating healthily, exercising, etc. Those sorts of activities are just as important and impact health care just as much as necessary reforms.

Switching topics briefly, I am 32. Since junior high, my generation has heard from baby-boomers and older Gen-X teachers and profs that my generation (and those younger than me) will be paying out the wazoo for previous generations "until something is done to fix it". I hate to play the "generation game", but since I carry no debt I believe there IS a burden placed on those who lectured us to get their financial acts together, too. Coming out of WWII, the U.S. was told to expect ridiculous growth and prosperity as portions of the world were rebuilt. Those levels of growth and the standards of living created during that time are not sustainable in the long term, but that hasn't dawned on many Americans--not just the young.

I'm a young guy, but I'm not going to complain about being looped into the health care system, because it's our moral obligation to watch out for the "least of these."

It'd be easy to get around undue obligations on the young: RAISE TAXES ON THE RICH. Not since the Gilded Age has so much wealth been concentrated in the hands of so few... and working folks haven't seen their real wages go up in years (Census reported yesterday that real median income went DOWN between 2007 and 2008).

As a generation, the Baby Boomers are theieves. They're thieves. They sucked up the prosperity provided by the Greatest Generation... and when that wasn't enough... they started borrowing against their future. That doesn't free us from the moral obligation to make sure they (and everyone) can see a doctor when they need to... but the least they could do is adequately tax themselves for even a few years on their way off the stage.

As a young person we are facing one of the biggest debts the world has even seen. From the bailout and now healthcare, to our own personal troubles - student loans, mortgages we can't afford and a growing cost of living coupled with cheaper labor.

We may be younger and a little inexperienced, but we need to stand up for our future or face economic struggles for generations to come.

Good thoughts in your post!

The young people tune it out because they don't think they need to worry about Healthcare at this moment. The new generations are all ADD, they only know and care about this second and what pertains to them immediately, which is becoming more and more virtual.

The good thing is that a lot of AARP members lost their savings and their home equity.

Hopefully many of them will no longer expect others to pay for their healthcare while they retire on the golf course and cruise. Hopefully they'll work longer and contribute to our economy.

They seriously can't expect to receive 300k in benefits after paying in 50k (or much less) in Medicate taxes. They'd be crazy to think that this system will work and selfish to try it.

There are probably a few exceptions. But not many.

"They seriously can't expect to receive 300k in benefits after paying in 50k (or much less) in Medicate taxes. They'd be crazy to think that this system will work and selfish to try it."

YP: They don't. But to use your examples what they do believe in is actuarial math. That they will be the lucky one in six.

From that 78 year old's High School class of 300 in 1949... how many paid how much over how many years to receive zero/minimal in benefits before they had the misfortune to pass away? If 50 or fewer invitations went out to the reunion last May then it works.

Young people may be supporting yuppies like me when they pay for health insurance (as I did for my parents' generation), but they still need it all too often for their own health problems. Just take a look at the stories being told at twitter.com/YI_Care and www.younginvincibles.org. This is one group proving that not all the young are tuned out on this issue.