HSA type plans are a great idea, but they only make sense if 1) you are young and healthy or 2) if you otherwise have the cash flow to support them. The yearly cash outlay for fully funding one of these plans can be much higher than a standard plan, because the cost saving is not enough to make up the gap in the higher deductible. Further, since one can spend HSA funds on medical expenses that are not covered by the insurance but still eligible under the HSA rules (think “orthodontist”), one can be covering medical expenses at “retail” and draining the HSA, which has a yearly limit on contributions. So the plans can have the effect of increasing the exposure of the insured to unexpected medical expenses, especially chronic ones that require satisfying a deductible year after year.

Over time and with (again) sufficient cash flow, the above does not matter. But for anyone with a stretched income or worse, it seems very possible to fall into a cycle of financial drainage that never builds the HSA to the level needed for the long run, so that they are, bottom line, simply increasing their medical expenses along with their risk with this approach.

This is the main point of the objection to the way “consumer driven” plans are marketed. It seems quintissentially Republican to create a plan that claims to help the uninsured while requiring a level of cash flow that this group is truly unlikely to have. It proves once again that liberals are hardly unique in pursuing flawed “solutions” that conform to their world view.

Would you want your homeowner’s insurance to cover lightbulbs? Would you want your auto insurance to cover gasoline? Of course not! Why pay a middleman (insurer) when you don’t have to?

Incidentally, this post should be cited on this site whenever opining against “unfair tax cuts for the rich” instead of cuts for the working class. I wonder how a post that admits that a good chunk of the working class doesn’t pay ANY federal income taxes slipped past the Think Progress editors?

I’d like to see some research from unbiased sources, rather than only the Commonwealth Fund.

The United States was founded on an ownership mentality… not an entitlement attitude…

Grow up America – start taking responsiblity for yourself ! I love the Health Savings Account approach… I get to keep my own money and only spend it when I need to!

Additionally, trying to entice people to purchase high deductible medical insurance is not an adequate solution either. They are trying to cater that approach to people who are of low income. Does anyone realize that a low income person will be facing a monumental task of trying to pay the deductible in the event of a catastrophic medical event? This will most likely lead to bankruptcy, but since the fantastic 109th Congress made it more difficult to declare bankruptcy on the grounds of medical expenses, these people are going to be still left to fend for themselves. It really does not solve the problem. Health care, under this proposal, will still largely be a benefit afforded to those who can afford to pay for it. This plan just shifts around how the unemployed or low income people get screwed financially by the system.

Additionally, removing the benefits to work sponsored healthcare plans does a disservice to people who work very hard, who have careers, who may be just scraping by as it is. I personally recently landed a new job, with fantastic medical insurance. Now, under GW’s new plan, I am going to be screwed for having a good job, with excellent medical benefits. Six months later, I’m still trying to pay off my deductibles from the insurance I had at my previous job after having a baby, and other immediate family medical issues.

I say provide medicare/medicaid for the poor, unemployed, uninsured and the uninsurable, and stop screwing the middle class.

I always enjoy when people pull out quotes from various studies that are setup to provide results & conclusions that will support the person’s political belief.

1. If you don’t make any money or pay any taxes, how do you expect to get a tax break?

2. You might want to look at the sample size of their study and the first page that claims non of the results can be conclusive because of the sample size of the data. Who is buying HSAs? Older people – what as crazy as it sounds, most people make more money at the age of 55 and older then that of a 20 something.

3. 40% of the people enrolled in HSAs were previously uninsured! Hmmm – this isn’t a opinion this is a real number! I guess you didn’t read that study….

4. If you were paying for your car and were driving a Mercedes, then all of a sudden you had to trade it in for a Honda, would you be satisfied? Probably not. However, i think that satisfaction would change if you had to make the car payment.

5. FACT – Why do I waste my time responding to people that have no knowledge or experience with health insurance.