Justice Roberts, in his decision, points out that the heathcare mandate is a tax on the young to subsidize the elderly. The young, being at low risk of major health issues, may correctly decide to forgo health insurance in favor of other economic activity such as buying a first house, starting a family, etc. By forcing legions of the young to purchase insurance at costs far exceeding their risk class, the elderly have their health cost reduced.
As the mean age of the population continues to increase so will healthcare costs as a multiple of GDP. This will shifts ever escalating burden to our young. Do we really wish to ask them to forgo some liberty and some pursuit of happiness so that those who have already pursued their happiness can have a final surgery that allows them to gasp for a few months longer from an oxygen mask?
Currently the elderly decide whether to use their own money to chase diminishing returns or perhaps to put a grandchild through college, take a last exotic trip, or support some cause in which they fervently believe. Now, with someone else footing the bill, the decision is fairly easy.
No comments:
Post a Comment