🔗 Share this article

Out-of-pocket costs. Preferred providers. Out-of-network. Premium health services. Out-of-pocket expenses. Co-payment. Co-insurance. Insurance consultants. Coverage agents. Medical advisors. ACA. HMO. Preferred Provider Organization. EPO. Point of Service. HDHP. Health Savings Account. FSA. HRA. EOB. Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act. Small Business Health Options Program. Single coverage. Dependent coverage. Premium tax credits.

Confused? You should be. Who understands all this stuff? Not the typical entrepreneur. Nor the typical employee. Selecting the appropriate healthcare insurance for companies – or for households – appears to require it requires a PhD in medical insurance.

Our Healthcare System Is More Than Complicated, It Is Expensive

According to recent research, the average family spends $27,000 annually on medical coverage (increasing by 6% compared to last year). Typical company healthcare expense is expected to exceed $seventeen thousand for each worker in 2026, a 9.5% jump from 2025.

Currently federal operations has ceased functioning because political disagreements regarding subsidies that experts say will lead to premium increases up to 100% for millions of Americans.

When Might We Truly Examine National Health Insurance?

When will we seriously consider universal healthcare coverage in the United States? I have to believe we're approaching that point because this can't continue.

I'm not proposing government-run medicine. I'm advocating that our already existing Medicare program – an established insurance framework – merely extend to cover everyone. The existing system doesn't change. How medical professionals get paid changes. Believe me, they will adjust.

The Way National Health Insurance Would Work

Universal healthcare coverage would require contributions from workers and companies. In comparable systems, a worker making average wages pays approximately 5.3% toward medical coverage. The company must contribute approximately 13.75%.

Does this seem like a lot? Unless you contrast it to what the typical American pays. I know multiple clients that are routinely paying anywhere from eight to fifteen percent of their employee wages for medical benefits. And keep in mind that in comprehensive systems, these contributions also cover pension plans, sick pay, maternity leave and job loss protection in addition to supporting medical services. When including those costs compared with what we pay on retirement programs, job loss coverage and paid time off, 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 lower-income earners. There would be both worker and employer contribution. And, like many federal military, IT, welfare services and infrastructure, the program could be managed by private contractors rather than federal agencies.

Advantages for Entrepreneurs

A national health insurance program would be a huge benefit for small businesses like mine. It would place us on a level playing field against big corporations who can afford superior coverage. It would render management significantly simpler (a payroll deduction remitted like retirement and Medicare taxes, rather than separate payments to benefit firms and insurance providers).

It would enable simpler to plan expenses our yearly costs, instead of going through the complicated (and ineffective) process of bargaining with major insurers required annually each year. Due to simplification, there would exist improved comprehension about benefits among workers – contrasted with the current system where they have to interpret the complexities of existing plans. And there would definitely exist less liability for companies as we no longer would be privy to our employees' medical records for purposes of risk assessment and different options.

Free-Market Viewpoint

I'm as pro-market as possible. But I've learned that government play important functions in society, including national security to funding needed infrastructure. Ensuring medical coverage for everyone via universal healthcare strengthens our economy's infrastructure. It represents superior, simpler approach for entrepreneurs that employ more than half of American employees and generate half of our GDP. It enables employees to be healthier, have better attendance and increase productivity.

Considering Challenges

Exist a million considerations I haven't covered? Certainly. But with rising medical expenses we've seen recently, it's evident that current healthcare legislation isn't functioning very well. And I realize that America isn't a small, Scandinavian country where major reforms can be readily adopted. However extending universal Medicare, despite increased taxation required, would remain a superior and more affordable approach both for managing medical expenses and ensuring coverage to everyone.

Need for Honest Assessment

We as Americans, must reduce our own arrogance. America's medical care isn't exceptional. We rank well below numerous nations in healthcare quality globally, based on major studies. Maybe one bright spot in this present circumstances could be that we undertake serious examination in the mirror and agree that major reforms are necessary.