Health Savings Accounts Are The Answer

Civil Society Trust ^ | 02/22/2010

[MrB]

If your question is “how do we get the best healthcare system at the lowest cost”, yes, HSA’s are the answer.

But if your question is “how do we control everyone in America”, they are not.

[G Larry]

Silly man.....you actually believe they want solutions!?!?!

They want CONTROL!
They are NOT trying to “fix” anything”!

[Mr. K]

How about we let the employee keep HIS OWN $10,000 and do whatever he wants with it?

Can we vote on that?

[Mr. K]

YOU NAILED IT!!

This has NOTHING TO DO WITH HEALTH CARE. It is ONLY about furthering government control, and as soon as the 20-30 year republican RINO’s realize that, the better.

After this “health care summit” the Republicans should spend every second shouting that from the rooftops

[Sacajaweau]

What the hell do they think Medicare is??? People put thousands and thousands of dollars into Medicare....

and STILL HAVE TO BUY INSURANCE WHEN THEY RETIRE.

IN FACT, THE GOV IS SO KIND, THEY TAKE IT RIGHT OUT OF YOUR SS CHECK.

[Gene Eric]

The Democrats love wackin’ down HSAs.

[Le Chien Rouge]

I love the idea of HSA’s but much of congress and the bureaucrats in the federal government do not because it increases choices for the employed which while lower costs in the long run while reducing the control of the government thereby exposing government programs as the charades they actually are. JMO..

[gitmogrunt]

With an HSA the governmnet, will exclude millions of people from being able to set up an HSA account, because the individuals earn "too much", then they'll limit how much you can put in each year, and for what procedure or or meds you can use it for.

The Government will over regulate, and stifle HSA savings with taxes and limitations just like the IRA savings limit of $5-6,000 per year for retirement is a joke.

[swain_forkbeard]

Give me an HSA and give me good info and let me make the decisions.

[SeekAndFind]

I love the idea of HSA’s but much of congress and the bureaucrats in the federal government do not because it increases choices for the employed

The Democrats main concern is those who are unemployed or underemployed. Hence, if you talk about HSA's, you will hear them respond --- how can those who got laid off who do not have jobs afford to have HSA's, when they don't have the money to put them into that account in the first place ? That would be like asking them to contribute to their 401K when they have no income to contribute.

Just keep this argument in mind when HSA's are brought up because that's what you're going to be hearing.

[swain_forkbeard]

That’s exactly it. How are you going to get working America to pay for non-working America through HSAs?

[SnakeDoctor]

Cash is the real answer.

The problem is we over insure ... which leads to third-party payers for almost all medical transactions ... which leads to extreme price inflation because of the disconnect between the consumer and the retailer.

Insurance should really be for the catastrophic only. Run-of-the-mill predictable medical expenses should be cash ... doctor’s visits, routine checkups, prescriptions, etc.

Just think what you could pay for if you had your ridiculous monthly medical premium back.

SnakeDoc

[Señor Zorro]

THE ANSWER IS THE FREE MARKET!

All right, I feel a little better now...

[Kansas58]

An HSA is VOLUNTARY!

There is no reason for any conservative to oppose the HSA idea.

What you but it is tax deductable. Actually, it never shows up on your taxable income.

What you take out is tax free, as long as it is spent on health related items. The definition is pretty broad here!

Also, do not confuse the HSA with the MSA. The HSA lets you roll the money into an IRA at retirement. An HSA lets you purchase Long Term Care insurance, with the HSA funds.

HSA accounts are very smart, and they are the answer.

[Kansas58]

Actually, the government spends roughly $830.00 PER MONTH, on average, for every Medicare beneficiary.

The fact is, the $96.00 “premium” for Medicare does not even come close to paying for Medicare services.

The fact is, the taxes on income, during your working years, do not even come close to paying for Medicare benefits, for existing Medicare beneficiaries.

[Kansas58]

Non working America has Medicaid.

[swain_forkbeard]

Of course. The argument is that healthcare is a right and ought not be tied to employment status. Which means those who work must pay for those who don’t. And HSAs promote INDIVIDUAL responsibility, not COLLECTIVE responsibility.

But if healthcare is a right - or at least a collective moral responsibility, this must be based on the assumption that healthcare promotes good health. But in general, good food and adequate clothing and shelter are all more fundamental to good health than the services of specialists. So all those things must also be rights and therefore COLLECTIVE responsibilities.

But if food, shelter, clothing, and healthcare are all de-linked from work, then what remains as the primary incentive to work? And without work, there is no productivity, and everybody’s quality of life declines.

So those who argue that healthcare is a right are agruing for a lower quality of life for everyone.

[Kansas58]

put in

not

but it

spell check has its limitations.

[Trust but Verify]

Of course HSA’s are the answer. But the Kommissars in Washington can’t support anything which gives individuals control over their money.