🔗 Share this article

Out-of-pocket costs. In-network. Out-of-network. Premium health services. Personal healthcare costs. Fixed payment. Co-insurance. Benefit advisers. Coverage agents. Healthcare consultants. Affordable Care Act. HMO. Preferred Provider Organization. Exclusive Provider Organization. POS. HDHP. HSA. Flexible Spending Account. HRA. Explanation of Benefits. Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act. SHOP. Individual coverage. Dependent coverage. Insurance subsidies.

Confused? You should be. Who understands this complex system? Not the typical entrepreneur. Neither the average employee. Selecting the right healthcare insurance for companies – or for households – appears to require it requires advanced expertise in healthcare.

Our Medical System Isn't Just Complicated, It's Costly

Based on a recent study, the average family spends $twenty-seven thousand annually on medical coverage (increasing by 6% compared to last year). The average company healthcare expense is projected to surpass $seventeen thousand per employee in 2026, an increase of 9.5% from 2025.

Now the government has ceased functioning because political disagreements over subsidies that experts say will lead to a doubling of premiums for millions of Americans.

When Will We Truly Examine National Health Insurance?

How soon might we seriously consider universal healthcare coverage in the United States? I'm convinced we're getting closer since this situation is unsustainable.

I'm not proposing government-run medicine. I'm proposing for our current Medicare program – an insurance system – simply expand to include all citizens. The existing system doesn't change. How medical professionals receive payment would change. Believe me, they'll adapt.

How Universal Coverage Could Function

Universal healthcare coverage would require contributions from both employees and employers. In similar programs, an employee making average wages must contribute approximately 5.3% toward medical coverage. Their employer pays about 13.75%.

Does this seem like a lot? Not if you contrast it to what average US resident spends. I can name dozens of clients that are easily contributing anywhere from 8% to 15% of payroll costs for medical benefits. Remember that with inclusive programs, those payments also cover pension plans, illness coverage, maternity leave and unemployment benefits in addition to funding medical services. When you add these expenses versus our current spending on retirement programs, job loss coverage and paid time off, the difference decreases.

Implementation for America

In the US, a national health premium would increase existing Medicare taxes, a system that is already in place. It ought to be means-based – those at higher income levels would pay more than those earning less. There would be both worker and company payments. Similar to much of our government's military, 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 represents a significant advantage for small businesses like mine. It would put small companies in equal competition against big corporations who can afford superior coverage. It would render management significantly simpler (automatic payroll withholding remitted like retirement and Medicare taxes, instead of individual transactions to benefit firms and coverage administrators).

It would enable simpler to plan expenses our yearly costs, rather than going through the complicated (and fruitless) theater of negotiating with the big insurance providers that we must do each year. Due to simplification, there would be a better understanding of coverage by our employees – as opposed to the current system where they have to interpret the complications of current options. And there would certainly be reduced responsibility for companies as we no longer have access to workers' medical records for purposes of weighing risks and alternative plans.

Free-Market Viewpoint

I'm as pro-market as possible. However I recognize that government play important functions in society, from providing defense to funding needed infrastructure. Ensuring medical coverage for everyone via universal healthcare strengthens our economy's infrastructure. It represents superior, easier system for small businesses that employ the majority of American employees and fund half the economic output. It makes it possible employees to be healthier, have better attendance and be more productive.

Considering Challenges

Exist numerous factors I'm not addressing? Certainly. Given all the healthcare cost increases experienced recently, it's clear that current healthcare legislation is not working effectively. I understand that we're not a compact European nation where major reforms can be readily adopted. But expanding Medicare for all, even with increased taxation that would be incurred, would still be a better and less expensive approach for not only controlling healthcare costs and ensuring coverage for all citizens.

Time for Realistic Evaluation

We as Americans, we need to tone down our own arrogance. Our healthcare system isn't so great. We rank well below many other countries with the best healthcare globally, based on major studies. Maybe one positive aspect amid present circumstances is that we undertake a hard look at ourselves and agree that major reforms are necessary.