🔗 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. Coverage agents. Healthcare consultants. Affordable Care Act. HMO. Preferred Provider Organization. EPO. Point of Service. HDHP. Health Savings Account. Flexible Spending Account. HRA. Explanation of Benefits. Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act. SHOP. Individual coverage. Dependent coverage. Premium tax credits.

Confused? You should be. Who comprehends this complex system? Not the typical business owner. Neither the average employee. Selecting the appropriate medical coverage for companies – or for our families – appears to require demands a PhD in medical insurance.

The Medical System Isn't Just Complicated, It's Expensive

According to recent research, typical households pays $27,000 annually on medical coverage (increasing by 6% compared to last year). The average employer health insurance cost is expected to exceed $17,000 per employee by 2026, an increase of 9.5% from 2025.

Currently federal operations has ceased functioning due to partisan disputes over subsidies that experts say will lead to premium increases up to 100% for millions of Americans.

When Will We Seriously Consider National Health Insurance?

When will we seriously consider a national health insurance program here in America? I'm convinced we're approaching that point because this can't continue.

I'm not suggesting national healthcare. I'm proposing that our already existing Medicare program – an insurance system – simply expand to cover everyone. Our infrastructure doesn't change. The way medical professionals get paid changes. Trust me, they'll adapt.

How Universal Coverage Could Function

Universal healthcare coverage would require payments from employees and employers. In comparable systems, a worker making average wages pays about five point three percent toward medical coverage. Their employer pays approximately thirteen point seventy-five percent.

Does this appear like a lot? Not if you contrast it to what the typical American pays. I can name multiple clients that are routinely paying between 8% to 15% of payroll costs to their healthcare costs. And keep in mind that with comprehensive systems, those payments also cover retirement benefits, sick pay, parental benefits and unemployment benefits in addition to funding medical services. When including those costs versus what we pay on retirement programs, unemployment insurance and paid time off, the gap narrows.

Execution in the US

For America, universal healthcare funding would increase our Medicare tax deduction, a framework that is already in place. It should be income-adjusted – those at higher income levels would contribute higher amounts than those earning less. This includes both an employee and company payments. Similar to many federal defense, IT, welfare services and infrastructure, the system could be managed to third-party administrators rather than a government office.

Advantages for Small Businesses

Universal healthcare coverage represents a huge benefit for small businesses like mine. It would place small companies in equal competition against big corporations who can afford superior coverage. It would make management significantly simpler (automatic payroll withholding remitted like social security and healthcare taxes, rather than individual transactions to benefit firms and coverage administrators).

It would enable it easier for us to budget our yearly costs, rather than enduring the complicated (and ineffective) process of bargaining with major insurers that we must do every year. Because it's simplified, there would exist a better understanding of coverage among workers – as opposed to the current system which require them to decipher the complications of current options. And there would definitely exist less liability for companies as we no longer have access to our employees' health histories for weighing risks and different options.

Capitalist Perspective

I'm as pro-market as possible. However I recognize that public institutions has a significant role in society, including national security to supporting needed infrastructure. Ensuring medical coverage for everyone through a national insurance system strengthens economic foundations. It represents superior, easier system for small businesses which hire the majority of the country's workers and generate half the economic output. It enables employees to be healthier, have better attendance and increase productivity.

Addressing Concerns

Exist a million considerations I haven't covered? Of course there are. But with all the healthcare cost increases experienced in recent years, it's evident that current healthcare legislation is not working very well. I understand that America isn't a small, Scandinavian country where big changes can be readily adopted. But expanding Medicare for all, even with the additional taxes that would be incurred, would still be a superior and less expensive strategy both for managing medical expenses and ensuring coverage to everyone.

Need for Realistic Evaluation

We as Americans, must tone down our own arrogance. America's medical care isn't so great. The US places significantly behind many other countries in healthcare quality in the world, based on major studies. Perhaps a positive aspect in this present circumstances could be that we undertake serious examination in the mirror and agree that big changes are necessary.