🔗 Share this article

Out-of-pocket costs. Preferred providers. Out-of-network. Concierge medical services. Personal healthcare costs. Co-payment. Co-insurance. Insurance consultants. Insurance brokers. Healthcare consultants. ACA. Health Maintenance Organization. Preferred Provider Organization. Exclusive Provider Organization. Point of Service. HDHP. HSA. Flexible Spending Account. Health Reimbursement Arrangement. Explanation of Benefits. COBRA. SHOP. Single coverage. Dependent coverage. Premium tax credits.

Baffled? You should be. Who comprehends all this stuff? Not the typical business owner. Neither the average worker. Choosing the appropriate healthcare insurance for companies – or for our families – seems like it requires a PhD in medical insurance.

The Healthcare System Isn't Just Complicated, It Is Costly

According to a recent study, the average family spends $27,000 annually for their health insurance (increasing by 6% from last year). Typical company healthcare expense is expected to surpass $17,000 per employee by 2026, a 9.5% jump compared to 2025.

Now federal operations has ceased functioning because partisan disputes regarding tax credits that experts say will lead to premium increases up to 100% for numerous US citizens.

When Will We Truly Examine National Health Insurance?

How soon might we genuinely evaluate a national health insurance program here in America? I'm convinced we're getting closer because this situation is unsustainable.

I'm not proposing government-run medicine. I'm proposing that our already existing Medicare program – an established insurance framework – merely extend to cover everyone. The existing system doesn't change. The way our healthcare providers receive payment would change. Believe me, they will adjust.

How National Health Insurance Could Function

A national health insurance program would require payments from both workers and companies. In similar programs, a worker earning average wages must contribute approximately five point three percent to their healthcare. Their employer must contribute approximately thirteen point seventy-five percent.

Does this appear like a lot? Unless you contrast that with what average US resident spends. I can name dozens of businesses that are routinely paying between eight to fifteen percent of their employee wages for medical benefits. Remember that with inclusive programs, those payments also cover retirement benefits, illness coverage, parental benefits and job loss protection in addition to supporting healthcare facilities. When you add these expenses versus our current spending on retirement programs, unemployment insurance and paid time off, the gap narrows.

Execution in the US

In the US, universal healthcare funding would raise our Medicare tax deduction, a framework already established. It ought to be means-based – wealthier individuals would pay more than lower-income earners. There would be both an employee and employer contribution. Similar to many federal defense, technology, welfare services and transportation services, the program should be outsourced to third-party administrators instead of federal agencies.

Advantages for Entrepreneurs

A national health insurance program would be a significant advantage for small businesses like mine. It would put small companies in equal competition against big corporations who can afford better plans. It would make administration much easier (automatic payroll withholding processed similarly to social security and Medicare taxes, rather than individual transactions to benefit firms and coverage administrators).

It would enable simpler to plan expenses annual expenditures, instead of enduring the complex (and ineffective) theater of bargaining with major insurers required annually each year. Due to simplification, there would be improved comprehension about benefits by our employees – as opposed to the current system where they have to decipher the complexities of existing plans. Additionally there would definitely exist reduced responsibility for companies since we wouldn't have access to workers' health histories for purposes of weighing risks and alternative plans.

Free-Market Viewpoint

I'm as pro-market as they get. But I've learned that government play important functions in society, including national security to funding needed infrastructure. Providing healthcare 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 fund half the economic output. It makes it possible for workers to enjoy better health, have better attendance and be more productive.

Considering Challenges

Are there a million considerations I haven't covered? Of course there are. But with all the healthcare cost increases we've seen in recent years, it's evident that current healthcare legislation isn't functioning very well. I understand that we're not a small, Scandinavian country where big changes can be readily adopted. However extending universal Medicare, despite increased taxation required, would still be a superior and less expensive strategy for not only controlling healthcare costs but providing access for all citizens.

Time for Realistic Evaluation

We as Americans, we need to reduce national pride. Our healthcare system isn't so great. We rank significantly behind many other countries in healthcare quality in the world, according to comprehensive research. Perhaps a bright spot amid current situation is that we take a hard look at ourselves and agree that big changes need to happen.