VJW, my HSA plan covers everything my regular health plan covered and is just as much protection against a catastrophic event as it was. The differences being $550 a year less in premiums ($745 on the old plan, $195 on the HSA) but a $3000 deductible vs. $1000 on the old plan. Both plans are 80/20 beyond the deductible and have a maximum out of pocket per year of around 5 grand ($5100 for the HSA, I believe the regular health plan was just a smidge more).

I'm putting the difference in premiums into the HSA where it was matched for 2006 100% up to $500 and it's still there when the year is over (so less money going out the window to premiums.) Next year the match increases to $1250 which I will get into the account ASAP.


I still don't understand how conclusive a study can be on something that at the time had only been around for a year but it's obvious you believe the findings and I have no reason to doubt your legitimate concerns so I'll leave that at that.


On the health insurance responsibility becoming the employer's around WWII...I wasn't being sarcastic when I asked, I didn't know that. I had understood that health care as a benefit had become more common around that time and was offered much more frequently but I did not know it had been the responsibility of employers to provide it. Even today health care is an optional benefit with many (most?) employers. Am I confusing the concept of "provide the option" as opposed to "provide the coverage?"

I think I am, that's my fault.