🔗 Share this article

Deductibles. In-network. Non-preferred providers. Premium health services. Out-of-pocket expenses. Co-payment. Shared insurance. Benefit advisers. Coverage agents. Medical advisors. Affordable Care Act. HMO. Preferred Provider Organization. EPO. POS. High Deductible Health Plan. HSA. Flexible Spending Account. Health Reimbursement Arrangement. EOB. Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act. SHOP. Single coverage. Dependent coverage. Premium tax credits.

Baffled? You should be. Who comprehends all this stuff? Not the typical entrepreneur. Nor the typical employee. Choosing the appropriate medical coverage for companies – or for our families – seems like demands a PhD in healthcare.

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

Based on a recent study, typical households spends $27,000 each year for their health insurance (up 6% compared to last year). The average employer health insurance cost is expected to exceed $17,000 for each worker by 2026, an increase of 9.5% from 2025.

Now federal operations has ceased functioning due to partisan disputes over subsidies which analysts predict could cause a doubling of premiums for numerous US citizens.

When Might We Truly Examine Universal Healthcare?

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 national healthcare. I'm proposing that our already existing Medicare program – an established insurance framework – simply expand to cover everyone. The existing system remains intact. The way medical professionals get paid would change. Trust me, they'll adapt.

The Way National Health Insurance Could Function

A national health insurance program would need contributions from both workers and companies. In similar programs, a worker earning average wages pays about 5.3% toward medical coverage. Their employer must contribute about thirteen point seventy-five percent.

Does this appear like a lot? Unless you contrast it to what the typical US resident spends. I can name dozens of businesses who are easily contributing anywhere from eight to fifteen percent of their employee wages to their healthcare costs. And keep in mind that with comprehensive systems, these contributions include retirement benefits, sick pay, parental benefits and unemployment benefits along with funding healthcare facilities. When you add these expenses versus what we pay for our retirement plans, unemployment insurance and vacation benefits, the difference decreases.

Implementation in the US

In the US, a national health premium would increase existing Medicare taxes, a system that is already in place. It ought to be income-adjusted – wealthier individuals would contribute higher amounts than those earning less. There would be both an employee and employer contribution. Similar to many our government's military, IT, social programs and transportation services, the program should be outsourced to third-party administrators rather than federal agencies.

Advantages for Small Businesses

A national health insurance program would be a significant advantage for entrepreneurs such as my company. It would put us on a level playing field with our larger competitors that can pay for better plans. It would make administration significantly simpler (a payroll deduction processed similarly to social security and healthcare taxes, instead of separate payments to insurance companies and coverage administrators).

It would make it easier for us to budget annual expenditures, instead of enduring the complex (and fruitless) theater of negotiating with major insurers that we must do each year. Because it's simplified, there would be improved comprehension about benefits among workers – contrasted with existing arrangements where they have to interpret the complications of current options. And there would definitely exist less liability for employers as we no longer have access to workers' health histories for purposes of weighing risks and alternative plans.

Capitalist Perspective

I'm as capitalist as they get. But I've learned that public institutions has a significant role in our lives, from providing defense to supporting essential systems. Providing healthcare for everyone through a national insurance system strengthens our economy's infrastructure. It represents superior, easier system for entrepreneurs which hire more than half of the country's workers and fund half the economic output. It enables for workers to enjoy better health, come to work more often and increase productivity.

Considering Challenges

Exist a million considerations I haven't covered? Certainly. Given rising medical expenses we've seen recently, it's evident that current healthcare legislation isn't functioning effectively. I understand that America isn't a compact European nation where major reforms are easier to implement. But expanding Medicare for all, even with increased taxation that would be incurred, would still be a superior and more affordable strategy for not only managing medical expenses and ensuring coverage for all citizens.

Time for Realistic Evaluation

We as Americans, we need to tone down national pride. Our healthcare system isn't exceptional. The US places significantly behind many other countries in healthcare quality in the world, based on major studies. Maybe one bright spot in this present circumstances is that we take a hard look in the mirror and agree that major reforms are necessary.