🔗 Share this article

Deductibles. Preferred providers. Out-of-network. Concierge medical services. Out-of-pocket expenses. Fixed payment. Shared insurance. Benefit advisers. Coverage agents. Healthcare consultants. Affordable Care Act. Health Maintenance Organization. PPO. EPO. POS. HDHP. HSA. Flexible Spending Account. Health Reimbursement Arrangement. Explanation of Benefits. Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act. SHOP. Single coverage. Family coverage. Premium tax credits.

Confused? It's understandable. Who comprehends this complex system? Not the typical business owner. Nor the typical worker. Choosing the appropriate healthcare insurance for companies – or for our families – seems like it requires a PhD in medical insurance.

The Healthcare System Is More Than Complex, It Is Expensive

According to recent research, typical households pays $27,000 annually on medical coverage (up 6% from last year). The average employer health insurance cost is projected to surpass $seventeen thousand for each worker in 2026, an increase of 9.5% compared to 2025.

Currently federal operations has ceased functioning due to political disagreements regarding tax credits that experts say will lead to premium increases up to 100% for numerous US citizens.

When Might We Seriously Consider Universal Healthcare?

How soon might we seriously consider a national health insurance program in the United States? I'm convinced we're approaching that point because this can't continue.

I'm not suggesting national healthcare. I'm proposing for our current Medicare program – an insurance system – simply expand to include all citizens. The existing system remains intact. How medical professionals receive payment changes. Believe me, they'll adapt.

How Universal Coverage Could Function

A national health insurance program would require payments from both workers and companies. In comparable systems, an employee making moderate income pays about five point three percent toward medical coverage. Their employer must contribute approximately 13.75%.

Does this seem expensive? Unless you compare that with what the typical US resident spends. I can name multiple clients who are routinely paying anywhere from eight to fifteen percent of their employee wages for medical benefits. Remember that in inclusive programs, those payments include pension plans, illness coverage, parental benefits and unemployment benefits along with supporting medical services. When you add those costs compared with our current spending on retirement programs, job loss coverage and paid time off, the difference decreases.

Execution in the US

For America, a national health premium would raise our Medicare tax deduction, a system already established. It should be income-adjusted – those at higher income levels would pay more than lower-income earners. There would be both worker and employer contribution. Similar to many federal defense, technology, social programs and infrastructure, the program should be outsourced by private contractors instead of a government office.

Advantages for Entrepreneurs

A national health insurance program represents a significant advantage for entrepreneurs like mine. It would put us on a level playing field against big corporations that can pay for superior coverage. It would make management much easier (automatic payroll withholding processed similarly to social security and healthcare taxes, rather than separate payments to insurance companies and insurance providers).

It would enable it easier to plan expenses our yearly costs, instead of enduring the complicated (and fruitless) theater of bargaining with major insurers required annually each year. Because it's simplified, there would exist improved comprehension about benefits by our employees – contrasted with existing arrangements where they have to interpret the complications of current options. And there would certainly be less liability for companies since we wouldn't would be privy to workers' health histories for purposes of weighing risks and different options.

Free-Market Viewpoint

I'm as capitalist as possible. But I've learned that government has a significant role in society, from providing defense to supporting essential systems. Ensuring medical coverage for everyone through a national insurance system strengthens our economy's infrastructure. It represents superior, easier system for small businesses which hire the majority of the country's workers and fund half of our GDP. It enables for workers to enjoy better health, have better attendance and be more productive.

Considering Challenges

Are there a million considerations I'm not addressing? Of course there are. But with all the healthcare cost increases experienced in recent years, it's clear that the Affordable Care Act isn't functioning effectively. And I realize that we're not a compact European nation where big changes are easier to implement. But expanding Medicare for all, even with increased taxation that would be incurred, would remain a better and more affordable strategy both for controlling healthcare costs and ensuring coverage to everyone.

Time for Realistic Evaluation

As Americans, we need to reduce national pride. Our healthcare system isn't exceptional. We rank well below numerous nations in healthcare quality globally, based on comprehensive research. Perhaps a bright spot amid current situation could be that we take serious examination at ourselves and acknowledge that major reforms are necessary.