🔗 Share this article

Out-of-pocket costs. Preferred providers. Out-of-network. Concierge medical services. Personal healthcare costs. Fixed payment. Shared insurance. Benefit advisers. Insurance brokers. Medical advisors. ACA. HMO. Preferred Provider Organization. Exclusive Provider Organization. POS. High Deductible Health Plan. Health Savings Account. FSA. HRA. Explanation of Benefits. COBRA. Small Business Health Options Program. Single coverage. Family coverage. Insurance subsidies.

Confused? You should be. Who comprehends all this stuff? Certainly not the average entrepreneur. Neither the average employee. Selecting the appropriate medical coverage for our business – or for our families – appears to require it requires advanced expertise in healthcare.

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

Based on recent research, typical households spends $27,000 annually on medical coverage (up 6% from last year). Typical employer health insurance cost is expected to surpass $17,000 for each worker by 2026, a 9.5% jump compared to 2025.

Now federal operations is shut down because partisan disputes over subsidies that experts say could cause a doubling of premiums for millions of Americans.

When Might We Seriously Consider National Health Insurance?

When will we genuinely evaluate a national health insurance program in the United States? I'm convinced we're approaching that point because this situation is unsustainable.

I'm not proposing national healthcare. I'm proposing for our current Medicare system – an insurance system – merely extend to cover everyone. The existing system remains intact. How medical professionals receive payment changes. Believe me, they'll adapt.

The Way National Health Insurance Could Function

Universal healthcare coverage would require payments from workers and companies. In comparable systems, an employee earning moderate income must contribute about 5.3% toward medical coverage. The company must contribute about thirteen point seventy-five percent.

Does this appear like a lot? Unless you compare it to what the typical US resident spends. I know dozens of clients who are easily contributing anywhere from 8% to 15% of payroll costs for medical benefits. And keep in mind that in comprehensive systems, those payments also cover retirement benefits, illness coverage, parental benefits and job loss protection in addition to funding healthcare facilities. When including these expenses versus our current spending for our retirement plans, job loss coverage and vacation benefits, the difference decreases.

Execution for America

In the US, universal healthcare funding would increase our Medicare tax deduction, a framework that is already in place. It should be income-adjusted – wealthier individuals would pay more than lower-income earners. This includes both worker and employer contribution. Similar to many our government's defense, IT, welfare services and transportation services, the program could be managed to third-party administrators instead of federal agencies.

Benefits for Small Businesses

A national health insurance program represents a significant advantage for small businesses such as my company. It would place us on a level playing field against big corporations who can afford superior coverage. It would render administration much easier (a payroll deduction remitted like retirement and Medicare taxes, rather than separate payments to insurance companies and coverage administrators).

It would make simpler for us to budget our yearly costs, rather than enduring the complicated (and fruitless) theater of bargaining with the big insurance providers required annually each year. Because it's simplified, there would exist a better understanding about benefits among workers – as opposed to the current system which require them to interpret the complexities of current options. And there would certainly be less liability for employers as we no longer would be privy to our employees' medical records for risk assessment and different options.

Free-Market Viewpoint

I'm as capitalist as they get. However I recognize that public institutions play important functions in our lives, from providing defense to funding needed infrastructure. Ensuring medical coverage to all through a national insurance system strengthens our economy's infrastructure. It represents superior, simpler approach for small businesses which hire 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 increase productivity.

Considering Challenges

Exist numerous factors I'm not addressing? Certainly. Given all the healthcare cost increases experienced in recent years, it's clear that the Affordable Care Act isn't functioning very well. And I realize that we're not a compact European nation where big changes are easier to implement. However extending Medicare for all, even with increased taxation that would be incurred, would remain a superior and less expensive strategy for not only managing medical expenses and ensuring coverage to everyone.

Need for Honest Assessment

As Americans, we need to tone down national pride. America's medical care isn't so great. We rank well below many other countries with the best healthcare globally, based on comprehensive research. Perhaps a positive aspect amid current situation is that we take serious examination in the mirror and acknowledge that big changes are necessary.