Age Discrimination in Health Care Reform ?

While we need an individual mandate, I am concerned that the House version of health care reform lets insurers charge older customers twice as much as younger customers. At this point, the Senate Finance Committee also allows insurers to discriminate by age. This could make it very hard for 50-somethings who don’t qualify for subsidies to afford a family plan. Under the House bill, a couple with joint income of $75,000, before taxes, would not receive a subsidy. And if they are self-employed, and receive no help from an employer, the premiums that they would be expected to pay could easily run as high as $13,000 a year. After taxes, if they live in a high-tax state, they might take home $65,000 a year—or less. This means that health care premiums would eat 20 percent of their income—or more.

I don’t think it makes sense to suggest that a young couple, earning $150,000, jointly, shouldn’t pool their resources with a 50-something couple earning $75,000.  Don’t younger Americans want to help pay for the health insurance that their parents need? These days, as more 50-somethings become unemployed, it’s not that unusual for college-educated 20-somethings and 30-somethings living in two-income households to earn  significantly more than their middle-class parents.

Both Social Security and Medicare ask all Americans to pay the same percentage of their paychecks into the system, regardless of  age. When they grow older, younger taxpayers will benefit from a system that expects all of us to pull together.  Universal health care should follow the same model: everyone in, no one out of the pool.

 

Comments

[epathchina]

This article is well targeted.Why is there so many inequality? Buddha said: every one is equal.Age is a process. Does anyone grow not from youth to the middle and the old?

[John Whitesell]

Every interest group from insurance companies to drug companies to "young old people" to government hating medicare beneficiaries are being assured that reform is not going to hurt them. Well, these parties caused this mess, young healthy people do not. As long as we continue to waste hundreds of billions on inefficient corporate handouts, you have no moral authority to try to wring another few thousand out of the young to delay reform.

If we were supporting a system that puts people first, like Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare or the VMA, it would make sense for the young to help the old and be helped in turn. But we aren't creating a system that puts people first, those demanding help stubbornly refuse reform. It makes sense to carry the infirm. It simply slows everyone to carry those too proud to touch dirt.

Billions for welfare, I say, but not one cent for entitlement!

Honestly, if you want to look at age discrimination, the culprits are blatantly obvious; the Baby Boomers have yet again sealed their fate as the Greediest Generation. For 28 years they have insisted that they were too good to pay taxes; screw the wretched of the earth and leave the future until tomorrow. Milenials who were too young to vote and those damn lazy X-geners will spend their lifetimes paying the Baby Boomers' taxes. But never mind that... the government is out of money... get those good for nothing young people to pay half the bill!