[oh_sigh]

How well does that system work for a generation that produces fewer adults than are present in the generation?

Instead of paying for other peoples health insurance and then other people pay for mine, why can't I just save the money that I would be paying in premiums above and beyond what the rational amount would be and then pay for my own health care when I get older(or, pay for the higher premiums when I get older)?

[mindslight]

It's ridiculously amazing that you're getting downvoted for your general point. Wishful thinking won't change market incentives, although it will help make some profiteers rich.

The young (and healthy) paying for the old (and sick) is a function that can only be provided by government, or bona fide charity. It's impossible for this to be provided by private companies because, in line with the denial behavior we're seeing, it's rational for any company to take on the overpaying low-cost customers, tell the underpaying high-cost customers to go elsewhere, and then pocket the surplus.

Having said that, I'm not personally a believer in single payer fixing everything. It certainly should be possible for routine care for financially able people to be provided completely on the open market. Immediate common-sense based reforms would go a long way. For example, hospitals/providers should be required to have one and only one price list for all payers, published months in advance. And the bundling of "insurance" with employment should be outright prohibited

[maxxxxx]

Are you willing to forego medical care if you have an accident tomorrow and your savings account isn't big enough?

[oh_sigh]

I'm not arguing against insurance - I'm arguing against the government forcing insurance upon groups of people with extremely dissimilar risk profiles and forcing the younger, poorer group to pay to subsidize the older, richer group.