The "benefit" you cite, of allowing children to get chicken pox is just such a "remedy." First, and most obviously because kids will get a disease they don't need to have: chickenpox. This can be a serious disease with serious consequences, including death. Second, because this will lead to shingles in 2/3 of those children later life; this is also a disease with potentially serious consequences, including permanent paralysis. Third, the medical science you're citing is conjectural. There is no long term study that actually establishes that exposure to infected children boost immunity. These are interesting, but purely conjectural observations by a handful of doctors. Even in the article from the NYT the doctor concedes that the loss of booster immunity is not really going to be a problem -- and he's one of the people who believes the effect exists.
The position that you've taken, is that the risk to children is OK, as long as old geezers are protected [from a disease they can, themselves, get a vaccine or other treatments for.] That is a MUCH greater risk than simply vaccinating children in the first place.