🔗 Share this article

Deductibles. In-network. Out-of-network. Premium health services. Personal healthcare costs. Co-payment. Co-insurance. Benefit advisers. Coverage agents. Healthcare consultants. Affordable Care Act. Health Maintenance Organization. PPO. EPO. Point of Service. HDHP. Health Savings Account. FSA. HRA. EOB. Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act. Small Business Health Options Program. Single coverage. Family coverage. Insurance subsidies.

Baffled? You should be. Who comprehends this complex system? Not the typical entrepreneur. Neither the average employee. Choosing the right medical coverage for companies – or for households – seems like it requires a PhD in medical insurance.

The Healthcare System Is More Than Complex, It's Expensive

Based on recent research, the average family pays $twenty-seven thousand each year on medical coverage (increasing by 6% compared to last year). Typical company healthcare expense is projected to surpass $17,000 per employee in 2026, a 9.5% jump compared to 2025.

Currently federal operations is shut down because political disagreements regarding subsidies that experts say could cause a doubling of premiums for millions of Americans.

When Will We Seriously Consider Universal Healthcare?

When will we seriously consider a national health insurance program here in America? I'm convinced we're getting closer because this can't continue.

I'm not suggesting national healthcare. I'm advocating for our current Medicare system – an established insurance framework – simply expand to include all citizens. Our infrastructure doesn't change. How our healthcare providers receive payment would change. Trust me, they will adjust.

How National Health Insurance Would Work

Universal healthcare coverage would require contributions from employees and employers. In similar programs, a worker earning moderate income pays about five point three percent to their healthcare. The company must contribute approximately thirteen point seventy-five percent.

Does this appear expensive? Not if you contrast it to what the typical American pays. I know dozens of clients who are routinely paying between 8% to 15% of payroll costs for medical benefits. And keep in mind that in inclusive programs, these contributions include retirement benefits, illness coverage, parental benefits and job loss protection in addition to funding healthcare facilities. When including those costs versus our current spending on retirement programs, unemployment insurance and vacation benefits, the difference decreases.

Implementation in the US

In the US, universal healthcare funding would increase existing Medicare taxes, a system that is already in place. It ought to be income-adjusted – those at higher income levels would contribute higher amounts than lower-income earners. This includes both worker and company payments. Similar to many federal defense, IT, welfare services and infrastructure, the program could be managed by private contractors rather than federal agencies.

Advantages for Small Businesses

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 administration significantly simpler (automatic payroll withholding processed similarly to social security and healthcare taxes, rather than separate payments to insurance companies and coverage administrators).

It would make simpler to plan expenses our yearly costs, instead of going through the complex (and ineffective) theater of bargaining with major insurers that we must do every year. Due to simplification, there would exist a better understanding about benefits among workers – contrasted with the current system which require them to interpret the complications of existing plans. Additionally there would definitely exist less liability for companies as we no longer would be privy to workers' medical records for purposes of risk assessment and alternative plans.

Capitalist Perspective

I'm as capitalist as they get. However I recognize that public institutions play important functions in our lives, from providing defense to supporting needed infrastructure. Ensuring medical coverage to all through a national insurance system enhances our economy's infrastructure. It represents superior, simpler approach for small businesses that employ the majority of the country's workers and generate half of our GDP. It makes it possible for workers to enjoy better health, come to work more often and be more productive.

Considering Challenges

Are there a million considerations I haven't covered? Of course there are. But with rising medical expenses experienced recently, it's clear that the Affordable Care Act isn't functioning effectively. I understand that we're not a small, Scandinavian country where big changes can be readily adopted. However extending universal Medicare, despite the additional taxes that would be incurred, would still be a better and more affordable approach both for controlling healthcare costs but providing access for all citizens.

Need for Realistic Evaluation

We as Americans, we need to tone down our own arrogance. America's medical care isn't exceptional. We rank well below many other countries with the best healthcare globally, according to major studies. Perhaps a bright spot in this present circumstances is that we take serious examination at ourselves and acknowledge that major reforms are necessary.