Affordable Care Act challenged at Supreme Court

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
If politicians wanted to address the rising costs of medicine, why was there no focus on tort reform? Even if Congress pursued a simple policy of allowing individuals with health insurance to write off those costs on their taxes, the unconstitutionality of the law would not have been questioned

And if the SCOTUS rules against the individual mandate, the entire law is dead in the water because provisions such as coverage of individuals with pre-existing conditions needs healthy and young individuals offsetting those costs. I read a report that individuals in their 20s would be expected to utilize ~$800 worth of healthcare per annum, compared to the average cost of premiums at ~$5,000. In essence, the mandated youth purchasers would be subsidizing the healthcare of "sicker" individuals.

Members don't see this ad.
 
If politicians wanted to address the rising costs of medicine, why was there no focus on tort reform? Even if Congress pursued a simple policy of allowing individuals with health insurance to write off those costs on their taxes, the unconstitutionality of the law would not have been questioned

And if the SCOTUS rules against the individual mandate, the entire law is dead in the water because provisions such as coverage of individuals with pre-existing conditions needs healthy and young individuals offsetting those costs. I read a report that individuals in their 20s would be expected to utilize ~$800 worth of healthcare per annum, compared to the average cost of premiums at ~$5,000. In essence, the mandated youth purchasers would be subsidizing the healthcare of "sicker" individuals.

This differs from Medicare how exactly? It's all a transfer of wealth from the poorest (youngest) segments of society to the wealthiest (oldest).

Wouldn't it be cool if Medicare taxed one set of senior citizens to support the other senior citizens?
 
Top