It came from this post:
Worst case scenario with a catastrophic-only plan is you end up with $10,000 in debt. That’s a debt load many times smaller than what the Federal government thinks students should take out to get a college degree. We’ll let you borrow $100,000 to get a sociology degree but, we think that $10,000 is an unconscionable amount to pay for medical expenses? So unconscionable that we have to FORCE YOU to buy a plan with more extensive coverage?
I am surprised no one replied about this one, and I do not expect a reply from WC until he recharges his batteries with a power hike up the mountain.
But the high-deductible MSA is the best or only option, no?
This assumes we have a world of opportunity before us, to get a job that leads to a better job that pays off debts if any, and perhaps leads one to a vocation that enables one to pay for health insurance, car insurance, and if you are a sloppy guy, a housekeeper, so your dwelling is not offensive to women.
Maybe you employer, to attract you and your skills and willingness to work hard, will offer you a compensation package that includes health insurance, which today might not be taxed as income. Maybe your employer will compensate you for business travel, and give you a per diem allowance, pay for your plane ticket, and even pay for a Holiday Inn, as opposed to a Motel 6. Or, if you have a tongue ring and tattooed mascara on your male eyes, he/she will not hire you at all.
The government, young man, is going to require you, should you wish not to be a thrall of the state, to buy health insurance that pays for your parents’ sex change operations and their time with psychologists to feel good about their new lives. Your alternative is to go on the dole forever.
Now, what about high-deductible catastrophic policies? Ever think you might be able to save ten grand in your lifetime?