🔗 Share this article

Out-of-pocket costs. In-network. Non-preferred providers. Premium health services. Out-of-pocket expenses. Fixed payment. Co-insurance. Insurance consultants. Insurance brokers. Healthcare consultants. ACA. HMO. Preferred Provider Organization. EPO. Point of Service. High Deductible Health Plan. Health Savings Account. Flexible Spending Account. Health Reimbursement Arrangement. EOB. Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act. SHOP. Individual coverage. Dependent coverage. Insurance subsidies.

Confused? It's understandable. Who comprehends this complex system? Certainly not the average business owner. Neither the average employee. Choosing the appropriate medical coverage for our business – or for households – appears to require demands advanced expertise in healthcare.

The Medical System Is More Than Complicated, It's Expensive

Based on recent research, typical households pays $27,000 annually on medical coverage (up 6% compared to last year). The average employer health insurance cost is expected to surpass $17,000 per employee by 2026, a 9.5% jump from 2025.

Currently federal operations is shut down due to partisan disputes over tax credits which analysts predict will lead to premium increases up to 100% for millions of Americans.

When Will We Seriously Consider National Health Insurance?

How soon might we seriously consider universal healthcare coverage in the United States? I have to believe we're getting closer because this can't continue.

I'm not suggesting national healthcare. I'm proposing for our current Medicare program – an established insurance framework – merely extend to include all citizens. Our infrastructure doesn't change. How our healthcare providers receive payment would change. Trust me, they'll adapt.

The Way Universal Coverage Would Work

A national health insurance program would need payments from employees and employers. In similar programs, an employee earning moderate income must contribute about 5.3% to their healthcare. The company must contribute about thirteen point seventy-five percent.

Does this appear expensive? Unless you contrast it to what average US resident spends. I can name dozens of clients who are routinely paying anywhere from eight to fifteen percent of payroll costs to their healthcare costs. Remember that with inclusive programs, those payments also cover retirement benefits, sick pay, maternity leave and job loss protection in addition to funding healthcare facilities. When you add those costs versus our current spending for our retirement plans, unemployment insurance and paid time off, the difference decreases.

Execution for America

For America, universal healthcare funding would increase existing Medicare taxes, a framework already established. It should be income-adjusted – those at higher income levels would pay more than lower-income earners. This includes both worker and company payments. And, like many our government's military, technology, welfare services and transportation services, the system should be outsourced to third-party administrators rather than a government office.

Advantages for Entrepreneurs

A national health insurance program represents a significant advantage for entrepreneurs such as my company. It would place us on a level playing field with our larger competitors who can afford superior coverage. It would make management much easier (automatic payroll withholding processed similarly to retirement and Medicare taxes, instead of separate payments to benefit firms and coverage administrators).

It would enable it easier for us to budget our yearly costs, instead of going through the complicated (and fruitless) process of bargaining with major insurers that we must do every year. Because it's simplified, there would be a better understanding about benefits among workers – as opposed to the current system where they have to interpret the complexities of existing plans. Additionally there would certainly be reduced responsibility for companies as we no longer have access to workers' health histories for purposes of weighing risks and different options.

Capitalist Perspective

I'm as capitalist as possible. However I recognize that government play important functions in our lives, including national security to supporting essential systems. Ensuring medical coverage for everyone via universal healthcare enhances economic foundations. It represents superior, simpler approach for entrepreneurs which hire the majority of the country's workers and generate half of our GDP. It makes it possible employees to be healthier, have better attendance and be more productive.

Addressing Concerns

Exist numerous factors I'm not addressing? Certainly. But with all the healthcare cost increases experienced in recent years, it's evident that the Affordable Care Act is not working very well. I understand that America isn't a compact European nation where big changes are easier to implement. However extending Medicare for all, despite increased taxation that would be incurred, would remain a superior and more affordable approach for not only managing medical expenses but providing access to everyone.

Time for Honest Assessment

As Americans, must reduce our own arrogance. America's medical care isn't so great. The US places significantly behind numerous nations in healthcare quality in the world, based on major studies. Perhaps a positive aspect amid present circumstances could be that we undertake a hard look at ourselves and agree that major reforms need to happen.