Fred, I'm not sure what "shortfall" you are talking about. I also have no idea what you mean by another layer of government. You do know this is private insurance we are buying, right? And you keep talking about young people getting screwed...how is that exactly?
The shortfall is the cost of services/product not covered by insurance or the consumer. Joe walks into the ER, complains of a headache and has no insurance. They x-ray his lungs, scan his grey matter, give him some advil and turn him loose. This is the shortfall I'm referring to, if Joe can't pay his bill. Regardless...
the government has now decided they will force Joe to get insurance or fine him, and no matter what his condition, he will be eligible for insurance. If the insurance co. wants to play, they will have to insure Joe, no matter what the statistical loss. If Joe is young, he will statistically pay more into the system than he will receive in greater proportion than someone older. Look it up. If he elects to opt out, the system will be short 1 more contributor. I don't necessarily think the young will be screwed any more than anyone else. If this all passes your smell test for more efficient and improved health care, I guess I'll just have to scratch my head. If you think the Supreme Court is OK with the government forcing the purchase of contracts, I'll be silent.
Layer might be the wrong word, maybe additional government employees and departments would be more accurate. Do you think all these employees that were hired to implement this program were transferred from the Department of Agriculture? It has to be monitored and the compliance on this deal is a nightmare for businesses that fall under the blanket. You think that businesses with low margins will just soak it up? I really have to sit back and laugh at some of this legislation and wonder if they could really be this stupid.