Health Care: Old vs. Young

It is likely that the current health care debate will pit old versus young. Recently we caught a glimpse of that possible conflict on a John Stossel ABC special. He raised the question why Americans should pay for health care through Medicare for people who are financially well off.

Harvard Business School professor Regina Herzlinger worried about young people who have to pick up the tab for these wealthy Medicare recipients. She asked: “What kind of legacy are we leaving for them? We’re really stealing from them.” One of the students stated: “This program, Medicare, is essentially ripping my generation off.”

A researcher at the American Enterprise Institute estimated that the government spends around $6 on seniors for every dollar it spends on children. Remember that statistic, because I believe it will surface again in this health care debate. Hillary Clinton made a similar point 15 years ago when she put forth her health care reform.

The elderly argue that they paid into Social Security and Medicare. Now it is time for them to receive back what they put into the system. But the reality is that the average Medicare beneficiary collects two to three times more money than he paid into the system. Remember that number because I believe it also will surface again in this health care debate.

Part of the problem with Medicare is the ratio between workers and recipients. When Medicare began in 1965, there were six workers for every one Medicare recipient. Now the ratio is four to one and will decrease even more as baby boomers retire.

Another problem is the Medicare is an unfunded entitlement. Regina Herzlinger says: “There is $34 trillion sitting off the balance sheet, waiting for future generations to pay.” That is the price of thirty Iraq wars.

This is why I believe we may be headed to a conflict between old and young. We cannot sustain the current system, and I believe the debate about health care will intensify the conflict. I’m Kerby Anderson, and that’s my point of view.