DISQUS

Terry · 6 months ago

Wait. If you have a $5000 deductible, and you're in a car accident and the bill is $6000, you have to pay $5000 to the hospital. Health insurance would then pay $1000 to the hospital, so the hospital gets a grand total of $6000. Unless there is a new definition for "deductible," it doesn't mean you pay everything under $5000 and if it's $5001 or more, they pay everything. It means you have to pay the first $5000 of any treatment over $5000. This still isn't a bad idea. If you're in a car wreck, in the hospital for a lengthy time and end up with an $80,000 bill, that $5000 deductible is looking like a pretty good deal. However, most insurance companies understand the majority of hospital visits are under $5,000 in cost.

Dhrumil · 6 months ago

You are correct Terry! I'm sorry, I don't know what I was thinking. I must have been smoking that raw cacao. I've since updated the post and added a thank you in the "Update" section.

Cheers

melissa · 6 months ago

Wait. A hospital bed alone in NYC starts at $3,500 going upwards of $6,000 per night. That's just for the bed. That's not including doctor head nods, IV drips, or $12 ibuprofen. So ANY hospital admittance in NYC is going to easily exhaust that $5,000 deductible. An emergency room visit, without overnight admittance, would be less, of course.

Dhrumil · 6 months ago

The insurance company covers 100% of the cost above the deductible. Not sure
the point you are making.

Mueller · 6 months ago

great article. if anyone knows of a company that can setup HSA accounts in new york, please contact me. i've been looking for one.

Dhrumil Purohit · 6 months ago

(Testing out Facebook comments)

Matt, check out http://www.zanderins.com/health/health.aspx

WendiDee · 6 months ago

Hmm...I'm going to forward this info to Jim. Right now we have coverage through his corporate job. As soon as we head out on our cross-country raw tour we'll be without insurance. We figured we'd just go without it, but maybe this is something we can look into further for our family.

Thanks, Dhrumil!

Lots of love to you,

Wendi
XOXOXO

debbiedoesraw · 6 months ago

Dhru: no danger of Durian accidents here! I smelled it at RSF, whew, not for me!
Thanks for this info, I suppose even someone like me can us this!
love you man!
deb

melissa · 6 months ago

Another point about your meeting the deductible example - the deductible is determined based on the UCR (usual, customary and reasonable rate). So it's very possible that you would be responsible for MORE than $5,000 if the rates that particular hospital was charging or doctor was deemed to be above the UCR.

Dhrumil · 6 months ago

I don't know too much about UCR. I can't comment but I'll look into it
further.

philodygm · 6 months ago

http://www.treas.gov/offices/public-affairs/hsa... :

^
If the money is used for other than qualified medical expenses, the expenditure will be taxed and, for individuals who are not disabled or over age 65, subject to a 10% tax penalty.
^

Like an IRA except even more restricted! Isn't 10% the same penalty as an IRA for withdrawing, too? So you don't even get any advantage on your money for putting up with greater restrictions in the first place. Sorry, Dhrumil, Bush deserves credit for nothing but more of the same old social engineering.

Dhrumil · 6 months ago

Of course the money would be taxed if you take it out before you are 65!!!

The money is meant for retirement. Of course you should pay a penalty if you take it out before you 65.

All retirement accounts have a penalty association with them if you take out the money before the age of 65.

Not sure what you are getting at.

philodygm · 6 months ago

Wow, I never expected to hear such complacency over controlling personal finances for retirement here on a raw vegan site where people ostensibly think for themselves at least marginally more than most other places.

Dhrumil · 6 months ago

I want people to have control over their money. But this account was
designed for 1) insurance 2) retirement.
If you have a better solution for how you handle the issue of insurance I'm
all ears!

philodygm · 6 months ago

Just individual responsibility. It horrifies me government meddling isn't resented, no matter what these HSAs represent as far as some reprieve from it about health. And to credit Bush for anything because of it is simply beyond the pale.

Dhrumil · 6 months ago

Forget Bush. Let's talk about what you do. When it comes to insurance, what
do you do personally? If you were going to give a better alternative to
this, let me know.
Individual responsibility means what? Get insurance? Don't? Just eat raw?

I'm not trying to be smart, I just want to understand what you would do
differently. I want to learn.

philodygm · 6 months ago

I just mean save. We shouldn't need an exception from government to keep it from taxing our money so it can then dictate to us just what is _and isn't_ covered The leverage it grants itself by taxing is first of all completely unconstitutional, and secondly and perhaps ultimately even more importantly the leverage it grants by then _not_ taxing certain things evaporates the thinking around the issue to result in _further_ intrusions being seen as a _good_ thing for being a lesser-evil alternative than its supposed right to either completely control everything or refusing to allow us to keep any of our own money at all in the first place.

A great Digg comment a saw a minute ago sums it up well about health, and I think the exact same applies to finances _about_ health, too:

http://digg.com/politics/Obama_to_sign_sweeping...

^
redcolumbine
Whaaaaa! It's my right as an American to put myself in a wheelchair, on oxygen and public assistance, in between expensive surgeries, and have the rest of you pay for it! You're abridging my basic freedoms! I need a smoke!
^

The idea people are imprudent enough to save for health expenses (again, catastrophic coverage under insurance being a separate issue) has to stop being accepted, and government "incentives" not to cost the rest of us more in "universal coverage" or whatever else _has_ to stop being viewed as an acceptable "alternative" to people living with the consequences of their irresponsibility, ignorance, camplacency, and mindless credulity.

The indie film, "Earthlings", featured recently on Raw Vegan Radio an interview with its creator who points out people must have the stomach to witness the cruelty inherent in the prevailing attitude toward animals in order to introduce its reality as evidence in the debate, and the same must be allowed to hold true of health, and as you know health itself has a critical offshoot into the issue of animal treatment for food as well as a central stake in climate change.

So, forgive me for being unable to stand by while more of the same manipulative garbage gets passed off as a great new alternative and the monster responsible for thousands of deaths and unthinkable environmental devastation and plenty of steak-lovin' gets a tip of the had from someone who really, really ought to know better.

Dhrumil · 6 months ago

This is a savings account and better than putting money in the bank if you
have insurance. If you don't, then we don't need to have this conversation.
I'm not talking about what "should" happen. I'm saying this is the best
option out there for those who are healthy, looking for insurance and who
are willing to put money aside.

Do you have insurance personally? Who love to take this conversation down to
a practical level.

philodygm · 6 months ago

Listen, I'm just trying to make a larger point that "better" is only relative to taxes in this case that you're talking about, and that I, for one, stridently take issue with failing to characterizing it as being so strictly contingent upon that basis. I think it's a disservice to the broader concerns involved to accept it at face value and talk about it purely on a practical level while portraying the crumbs of liberty we're left with as something to give a monster like Bush credit for. It's nice HSAs exist; that doesn't make their existence a nice thing categorically nor who enacted them nice. It's not just semantics, it's the tone of dialogue, and I believe if you hold ideals behind much of what I identify as driving the reasons people eat raw foods, I believe you're doing more harm than good in your presentation of the information, and am calling for a much more reasonable, measured, and responsible tone, that's all.

Personally I have no insurance and resent that I'd have to give up control of my money just to avoid taxes or face peremptive penalties for withdrawing it unless I spend my money on myself exactly how they deem worthy of an exemption, and I can't believe I'm having to spell this basic tenet of prerogative out nor find myself feeling challenged for correctively hilighting it here. I'm sorry I ran counter to your post's point of view, but I think you're missing a lot of very much larger and more important points underlying what makes raw veganism tick.

Dhrumil · 6 months ago

I respect your point. I just wanted to make sure that the larger picture and
the practical picture was noted.
It is easy to talk about how things "should be" and forget about what we are
doing now.

I wanted to know if there was some way you had your self insured and
maintained your world view.

I want people to comment. I appreciate that you did. I also just wanted to
know what you did on a practical level.

Thanks for your comments. There is a place for them and I'm certainly on
board with the larger picture.

Thanks bro

philodygm · 6 months ago

Just do me this favor, Dhrumil: don't turn Bush having benefitted you into reason to praise him, ever again. I can't stomach that and it sets an exceedingly bad standard.

I'd also like to point out that the whole concept of insurance MUST be kept separate from one's personal health expense monies: I might be able to afford insurance, but the only appeal HSAs have exists because of the meddlesome, social-engineering intrusion of tax deductions -- and we all know the game over controlling what's accepted "medicine", even if we eventually wind up winning its war, it's still a wrongful breach of liberty.

So, it's an incredibly dangerous thing to muddy the waters over supporting the idea of a healthcare honeypot like HSAs for the ostensible benefit of regained control of our money tax-free only if we spend it in pre-approved, bureaucratically-determined ways. I think you ought to be ashamed of how you presented it, in all honesty. It's good information, thanks for sharing it, but the mentality, if followed through to its logical conclusions, sets us up for a fall, IMO.

Dhrumil · 6 months ago

Cool man. Thanks for your thoughts. : )

philodygm · 6 months ago

Thanks for your patience.

I just wanted to clarify that, in other words, my reading of the constitution and conception of legality is informed opinion, not world view, and prevents nothing of my ability to insure myself simply because I disagree with the prospect of HSAs, as you yourself pointed out contrasting paying insurance versus socking it away in an HSA which can be done concurrently but remain wholly separate.

The reason I have no insurance is because I barely have enough for food. But that must mean I'm not "manifesting", so who cares what I think since I obviously have so much to learn to allow myself to be blessed. Now, _that_ type of lunacy is "world view", my friend.

Vicki Zerbee · 5 months ago

A HSA sounds like a great health insurance solution for people who prefer to focus on and spend their money on building health. Quality food choices and natural nutrition keep us away from doctors.

eplenista · 4 months ago

Thanks so much for your article Dhrumil. We moved to an HSA and went from $800 / month to just over $400 for a family of 4. What a savings. The high deductible makes sense for us and would make even more sense for those 35 and younger. Our plan even includes well visits free of charge and other visits at a nominal charge similar to co-pays. $10 - $20.

Have you heard that these HSA plans are slated to be discontinued as part of the new Healthcare reform now in congress? This is a worrisome aspect to this new legislation. I just don't understand why such a great idea is set to be eliminated from our series of choices.

Thanks again. If you find out the truth concerning HSA's being eliminated, please update your posts. -e.