🔗 Share this article

Deductibles. In-network. Out-of-network. Premium health services. Out-of-pocket expenses. Fixed payment. Shared insurance. Benefit advisers. Coverage agents. Medical advisors. ACA. HMO. Preferred Provider Organization. EPO. POS. HDHP. HSA. FSA. HRA. EOB. Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act. SHOP. Single coverage. Family coverage. Premium tax credits.

Confused? It's understandable. Who understands all this stuff? Not the typical entrepreneur. Nor the typical worker. Selecting the appropriate medical coverage for our business – or for households – appears to require it requires advanced expertise in medical insurance.

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

Based on a recent study, the average family spends $27,000 annually on medical coverage (up 6% from last year). Typical employer health insurance cost is expected to surpass $seventeen thousand per employee by 2026, an increase of 9.5% compared to 2025.

Currently the government has ceased functioning because political disagreements regarding tax credits which analysts predict will lead to premium increases up to 100% for numerous US citizens.

When Will We Truly Examine Universal Healthcare?

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

I'm not proposing national healthcare. I'm advocating that our already existing Medicare system – an insurance system – simply expand to cover everyone. Our infrastructure remains intact. The way our healthcare providers get paid would change. Believe me, they'll adapt.

How National Health Insurance Would Work

A national health insurance program would require payments from both workers and companies. In comparable systems, an employee making average wages must contribute approximately five point three percent toward medical coverage. The company must contribute about thirteen point seventy-five percent.

Does this seem expensive? Unless you contrast it to what the typical US resident spends. I know dozens of businesses who are routinely paying anywhere from eight to fifteen percent of their employee wages for medical benefits. And keep in mind that in comprehensive systems, those payments also cover pension plans, illness coverage, parental benefits and job loss protection in addition to supporting medical services. When including those costs compared with our current spending for our retirement plans, job loss coverage and vacation benefits, the difference decreases.

Implementation in the US

In the US, universal healthcare funding would raise existing Medicare taxes, a system already established. It ought to be means-based – wealthier individuals would contribute higher amounts than those earning less. This includes both an employee and employer contribution. Similar to many our government's military, technology, welfare services and infrastructure, the system could be managed to third-party administrators rather than a government office.

Advantages for Entrepreneurs

A national health insurance program would be a significant advantage for small businesses such as my company. It would place small companies in equal competition with our larger competitors that can pay for better plans. It would make administration much easier (a payroll deduction remitted like retirement and healthcare taxes, instead of separate payments to benefit firms and insurance providers).

It would make simpler to plan expenses our yearly costs, instead of enduring the complicated (and ineffective) process of negotiating with major insurers required annually every year. Due to simplification, there would be a better understanding about benefits among workers – contrasted with the current system where they have to decipher the complexities of current options. Additionally there would certainly be less liability for companies as we no longer would be privy to our employees' health histories for risk assessment 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 to all through a national insurance system strengthens our economy's infrastructure. It represents superior, simpler approach for entrepreneurs that employ more than half of the country's workers and fund half the economic output. It enables employees to enjoy better health, come to work more often and increase productivity.

Considering Challenges

Are there numerous factors I'm not addressing? Certainly. Given rising medical expenses we've seen in recent years, it's evident that current healthcare legislation is not working very well. I understand that we're not a small, Scandinavian country where big changes can be readily adopted. However extending Medicare for all, despite increased taxation required, would remain a superior and more affordable strategy for not only managing medical expenses and ensuring coverage to everyone.

Need for Honest Assessment

As Americans, must tone down our own arrogance. America's medical care isn't exceptional. The US places significantly behind many other countries in healthcare quality globally, according to comprehensive research. Maybe one positive aspect in this present circumstances is that we take a hard look at ourselves and acknowledge that major reforms need to happen.