« War on Obesity II | Main | The Difference in Philosophy Between Medical Savings Account and the Present System »

Comments

The saving account is good for healthcare system.In which we get lower cost but best quality.
***********
Jessica
Savings

Do I understand you expect me to pay $500 per month toward tax free trust account and also budget $500/month for medical expenses toward my deductible?
How does a person making under $28,000 year do this!

While MSA's sound like a good idea, they fail to bring about true economic parity because there are still intermediate parties between the provider (physicians) and consumers (patients). Not to mention the fact that 60% of the U.S. workforce is employed by companies with 100 or less employees for whom MSA funding would be an unwanted management and financial burden. What about the 45-50 million persons who don't have $6,000 available to pay their deductible (currently the uninsured)?

No competitive marketplace will exist until the cost/benefit of healthcare is experienced directly by the consumer. The reasons that huge amounts of employees do not take advantage of corporate 401 plans is because they are managed by the corporation and therefore the employee is insulated from its effect and benefit.

The answer is for patients to pay doctors directly. As an uninsured person I can tell you that this absolutely works. Here's an example: My son recently stepped on a rusty nail. We called the local pediatrics group but since we have no insurance and are treated as lepers by the local physician pool, we visited a "Quick Med" clinic staffed by a Nurse Practitioner. Her staff gave us the total price over the phone and we were seen within 15 minutes of arrival. My son received an X-ray, wound cleaning and a lollipop for less than $200.00. The NP didn't give him an unnecessary tetanus booster because he had one before school started. We received the care we needed and this practice received full payment at the time of service - no billing, no codes. Insurance does have a place - as a catastrophic safety net. Sadly, no insurers offer a decent product which fits this description, and they won't until forced by consumers.

I applaud your desire for change (most doctors have built their practice on the current faulty model and are doing all they can just to keep it from collapsing) but a direct provider-consumer relationship with no middle parties is the only thing that will fix our healthcare system.

The insurance industry wants to control the deductible portion of the HSA. This is wrong - the patient should have complete control. Health expenses should be deductible to the patient. HSAs are already allowing preventative services to be paid outside the deductible and there is data to show that this is cost effective. Contributions to HSAs should start at birth. Would it be cost effective for the government to provide a, say, $2000 contribution to an HSA at birth?

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Http://stan.feld.com
My Photo

Subscribe in
NewsGator Online

Subscribe in
Bloglines

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner