healthcare for 27 year old "kids"

I am fed up of what is going on in the political arena with the 2012 elections coming up. What really irks me is that I am not seeing too many people talk anything good about Obamacare (aka Patient protection and affordable care act.). There are way too many sound bytes talking about what is not right about it, very few about what is right. NY Times covered a few points well in an Five Obamacare Myths, but we need more. Lots more! I feel like analysts and naysayers are missing the point. I read someplace that "kids who are healthy will be mandated to buy insurance, even though they don't need - just to pay for the older and sicker folks who need more healthcare than them". First of all the people whom that article called "kids" are really full blown 26 year old adults. I say this because, per this new law, "kids" under the age of 26 will be allowed to stay on their parents health insurance, which means they will not have to buy health insurance. About folks who are more than 26, if they don't buy insurance, they either have to be rich or crazy. Consider the case of the rich. Lets say that a rich 27 year old falls sick with a major illness or meets with an accident in which no liability can be proven. This person will have to pay for healthcare from their pocket. If they can project their  expenses to be much lesser than what they will pay for insurance over a few years, by all means they should go without it and stick with the mandated penalties. However, how many people (as a percentage) are actually so rich that they can pay for healthcare without feeling the pinch? Consider those who are too poor or too sick to buy health insurance. What will they do? They wait till they are deathly sick or are in need of emergency healthcare and then off load their entire burden of healthcare upon the taxpayers who in all probability purchasing insurance in the first place. So, as of today, in any case, the taxpayer ends up paying for themselves as well as these people who don't have any insurance. The new law mandates that those who don't have insurance should either buy it or pay penalty. In principle, the new law, actually disallows free rides. Now, there might be tax credits and rebates which allow the poor to get a better deal on insurance than the rich, however, its still better than a free ride. Additionally, I bet that having insurance (and the free preventive healthcare - by law) will lead to better overall health of citizens, which in turn lead to fewer people needing expensive healthcare. In effect, adults who are 27 and above will very likely be better off buying health insurance than not under the new law. I just don't see how they get the short end of the stick.