🔗 Share this article

Out-of-pocket costs. Preferred providers. Out-of-network. Premium health services. Out-of-pocket expenses. Fixed payment. Co-insurance. Benefit advisers. Insurance brokers. Medical advisors. ACA. Health Maintenance Organization. Preferred Provider Organization. Exclusive Provider Organization. Point of Service. High Deductible Health Plan. Health Savings Account. Flexible Spending Account. HRA. EOB. COBRA. SHOP. Single coverage. Dependent coverage. Insurance subsidies.

Confused? You should be. Who understands this complex system? Certainly not the average entrepreneur. Neither the average worker. Selecting the appropriate medical coverage for companies – or for our families – appears to require demands a PhD in medical insurance.

The Healthcare System Is More Than Complicated, It Is Costly

According to recent research, typical households pays $27,000 annually on medical coverage (increasing by 6% from last year). Typical employer health insurance cost is projected to exceed $17,000 for each worker in 2026, a 9.5% jump compared to 2025.

Now the government has ceased functioning because political disagreements over tax credits that experts say will lead to premium increases up to 100% for numerous US citizens.

When Will We Seriously Consider National Health Insurance?

When will we seriously consider universal healthcare coverage in the United States? I'm convinced we're approaching that point because this situation is unsustainable.

I'm not suggesting government-run medicine. I'm proposing for our current Medicare system – an established insurance framework – merely extend to cover everyone. Our infrastructure remains intact. The way our healthcare providers get paid would change. Trust me, they will adjust.

The Way Universal Coverage Would Work

A national health insurance program would require contributions from workers and companies. In comparable systems, an employee earning average wages pays approximately 5.3% toward medical coverage. Their employer must contribute approximately 13.75%.

Does this seem expensive? Unless you contrast it to what the typical US resident spends. I know dozens of businesses who are easily contributing between eight to fifteen percent of payroll costs to their healthcare costs. Remember that in inclusive programs, those payments include pension plans, illness coverage, maternity leave and unemployment benefits along with funding medical services. When including these expenses versus our current spending for our retirement plans, unemployment insurance and paid time off, the difference decreases.

Implementation for America

In the US, a national health premium would raise existing Medicare taxes, a framework already established. It ought to be income-adjusted – wealthier individuals would pay more than those earning less. There would be both an employee and employer contribution. Similar to many federal military, technology, social programs and transportation services, the program should be outsourced to third-party administrators rather than a government office.

Advantages for Entrepreneurs

A national health insurance program would be a significant advantage for small businesses like mine. It would put small companies in equal competition against big corporations that can pay for better plans. It would render administration significantly simpler (automatic payroll withholding remitted like retirement and Medicare taxes, rather than separate payments to benefit firms and coverage administrators).

It would enable it easier to plan expenses our yearly costs, instead of enduring the complex (and ineffective) process of bargaining with the big insurance providers required annually each year. Because it's simplified, there would exist a better understanding about benefits by our employees – contrasted with the current system where they have to interpret the complexities of existing plans. Additionally there would certainly be reduced responsibility for employers as we no longer would be privy to workers' medical records for weighing risks and alternative plans.

Free-Market Viewpoint

I'm as capitalist as they get. But I've learned that public institutions play important functions in society, from providing defense to funding needed infrastructure. Providing healthcare to all via universal healthcare strengthens our economy's infrastructure. It's a better, easier system for entrepreneurs that employ more than half of the country's workers and fund half of our GDP. It enables for workers to enjoy better health, come to work more often and be more productive.

Considering Challenges

Are there numerous factors I haven't covered? Certainly. But with rising medical expenses experienced recently, it's clear that current healthcare legislation is not working very well. I understand that we're not a compact European nation where big changes can be readily adopted. But expanding Medicare for all, despite the additional taxes that would be incurred, would remain a superior and more affordable approach both for managing medical expenses but providing access to everyone.

Need for Realistic Evaluation

We as Americans, we need to tone down national pride. America's medical care isn't exceptional. The US places significantly behind numerous nations in healthcare quality globally, based on major studies. Perhaps a positive aspect in this current situation is that we take a hard look at ourselves and agree that major reforms need to happen.