🔗 Share this article

Deductibles. Preferred providers. Out-of-network. Premium health services. Personal healthcare costs. Co-payment. Co-insurance. Benefit advisers. Insurance brokers. Medical advisors. Affordable Care Act. HMO. Preferred Provider Organization. Exclusive Provider Organization. POS. HDHP. Health Savings Account. Flexible Spending Account. HRA. EOB. COBRA. SHOP. Individual coverage. Dependent coverage. Premium tax credits.

Confused? You should be. Who understands this complex system? Not the typical business owner. Nor the typical worker. Choosing the right medical coverage for companies – or for our families – seems like it requires a PhD in healthcare.

Our Healthcare System Isn't Just Complex, It Is Expensive

According to recent research, typical households pays $twenty-seven thousand each year on medical coverage (increasing by 6% compared to last year). The average company healthcare expense is expected to exceed $17,000 per employee by 2026, a 9.5% jump from 2025.

Currently federal operations has ceased functioning due to political disagreements regarding tax credits which analysts predict could cause a doubling of premiums for numerous US citizens.

When Might We Truly Examine National Health Insurance?

How soon might we genuinely evaluate a national health insurance program in the United States? I have to believe we're getting closer since this can't continue.

I'm not proposing government-run medicine. I'm proposing that our already existing Medicare system – an established insurance framework – merely extend to include all citizens. Our infrastructure remains intact. The way our healthcare providers receive payment changes. Believe me, they will adjust.

The Way Universal Coverage Could Function

A national health insurance program would require payments from both employees and employers. In comparable systems, a worker making moderate income must contribute about 5.3% toward medical coverage. Their employer pays about thirteen point seventy-five percent.

Does this appear expensive? Not if 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. And keep in mind that with comprehensive systems, those payments also cover pension plans, illness coverage, maternity leave and unemployment benefits along with supporting healthcare facilities. When including those costs compared with what we pay for our retirement plans, job loss coverage and vacation benefits, the difference decreases.

Execution in the US

In the US, a national health premium would increase our Medicare tax deduction, a system already established. It ought to be means-based – wealthier individuals would pay more than lower-income earners. There would be both worker and employer contribution. And, like many federal military, technology, welfare services and transportation services, the system should be outsourced by private contractors instead of federal agencies.

Benefits for Small Businesses

A national health insurance program represents a significant advantage for small businesses like mine. It would place us on a level playing field with our larger competitors who can afford superior coverage. It would make administration much easier (automatic payroll withholding remitted like social security and healthcare taxes, rather than separate payments to benefit firms and coverage administrators).

It would enable simpler to plan expenses our yearly costs, instead of enduring the complicated (and fruitless) theater of negotiating with major insurers required annually each year. Due to simplification, there would be improved comprehension of coverage by our employees – contrasted with existing arrangements which require them to decipher the complications of existing plans. And there would definitely exist reduced responsibility for companies as we no longer would be privy to workers' health histories for purposes of weighing risks and different options.

Capitalist Perspective

I'm as pro-market as possible. However I recognize that government play important functions in society, including national security to funding essential systems. Providing healthcare to all via universal healthcare strengthens our economy's infrastructure. It represents superior, simpler approach for small businesses which hire the majority of American employees and fund half of our GDP. It enables employees to enjoy better health, come to work more often and increase productivity.

Considering Challenges

Are there numerous factors I'm not addressing? Of course there are. Given rising medical expenses experienced recently, it's evident that the Affordable Care Act is not working very well. I understand that America isn't a compact European nation where big changes can be readily adopted. However extending Medicare for all, despite the additional taxes that would be incurred, would remain a better and less expensive approach both for controlling healthcare costs but providing access for all citizens.

Need for Realistic Evaluation

We as Americans, must reduce national pride. Our healthcare system isn't so great. We rank well below many other countries in healthcare quality in the world, based on major studies. Perhaps a bright spot in this current situation is that we take serious examination in the mirror and agree that big changes are necessary.