As a Dedicated Free-Market Advocate, But Medicare for All Represents the Top Hope for American Healthcare

Deductibles. Preferred providers. Non-preferred providers. Premium health services. Out-of-pocket expenses. Fixed payment. Co-insurance. Benefit advisers. Coverage agents. Healthcare consultants. ACA. Health Maintenance Organization. Preferred Provider Organization. Exclusive Provider Organization. Point of Service. High Deductible Health Plan. HSA. FSA. HRA. Explanation of Benefits. Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act. SHOP. Individual coverage. Family coverage. Premium tax credits.

Confused? It's understandable. Who comprehends this complex system? Certainly not the average business owner. Nor the typical worker. Selecting the appropriate medical coverage for companies – or for our families – appears to require demands a PhD in healthcare.

The Medical System Isn't Just Complex, It's Costly

According to a recent study, typical households pays $27,000 annually on medical coverage (increasing by 6% compared to last year). The average company healthcare expense is projected to exceed $seventeen thousand for each worker by 2026, a 9.5% jump from 2025.

Now federal operations is shut down 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?

When will we genuinely evaluate a national health insurance program here in America? I'm convinced we're approaching that point since this situation is unsustainable.

I'm not proposing national healthcare. I'm advocating for our current Medicare system – an established insurance framework – simply expand to include all citizens. The existing system doesn't change. The way our healthcare providers get paid would change. Trust me, they'll adapt.

How Universal Coverage Would Work

A national health insurance program would require contributions from both workers and companies. In comparable systems, an employee making average wages must contribute approximately 5.3% toward medical coverage. Their employer pays about 13.75%.

Does this seem expensive? Unless you contrast that with what average American pays. I can name multiple clients who are routinely paying anywhere from 8% to 15% of their employee wages for medical benefits. And keep in mind that in comprehensive systems, those payments also cover retirement benefits, sick pay, parental benefits and job loss protection along with supporting healthcare facilities. When including those costs versus what we pay for our retirement plans, job loss coverage and paid time off, the difference decreases.

Execution in the US

For America, a national health premium would increase our Medicare tax deduction, a framework that is already in place. It should be income-adjusted – wealthier individuals would contribute higher amounts than those earning less. There would be both an employee and company payments. And, like much of federal military, technology, social programs and transportation services, the program could be managed by private contractors instead of a government office.

Benefits for Entrepreneurs

A national health insurance program would be a significant advantage for entrepreneurs like mine. It would put us on a level playing field with our larger competitors who can afford superior coverage. It would make administration significantly simpler (automatic payroll withholding processed similarly to retirement and Medicare taxes, instead of individual transactions to insurance companies and coverage administrators).

It would enable simpler for us to budget our yearly costs, rather than going through the complex (and fruitless) process of bargaining with major insurers required annually each year. Because it's simplified, there would be a better understanding of coverage by our employees – as opposed to the current system which require them to decipher the complexities of current options. Additionally there would definitely exist reduced responsibility for companies as we no longer have access to our employees' medical records for purposes of risk assessment and alternative plans.

Free-Market Viewpoint

I'm as capitalist as possible. However I recognize that public institutions has a significant role in society, from providing defense to supporting needed infrastructure. Ensuring medical coverage for everyone through a national insurance system strengthens our economy's infrastructure. It's a better, easier system for entrepreneurs that employ the majority of American employees and fund half of our GDP. It makes it possible employees to be healthier, come to work more often and increase productivity.

Considering Challenges

Are there numerous factors I haven't covered? Of course there are. Given rising medical expenses experienced in recent years, it's clear that the Affordable Care Act isn't functioning effectively. I understand that we're not a compact European nation where major reforms can be readily adopted. However extending universal Medicare, despite increased taxation that would be incurred, would remain a better and more affordable approach for not only managing medical expenses and ensuring coverage for all citizens.

Time for Realistic Evaluation

We as Americans, must tone down our own arrogance. Our healthcare system isn't exceptional. We rank well below many other countries with the best healthcare globally, according to major studies. Perhaps a positive aspect in this present circumstances could be that we take a hard look at ourselves and acknowledge that big changes need to happen.