🔗 Share this article

Out-of-pocket costs. Preferred providers. Out-of-network. Concierge medical services. Out-of-pocket expenses. Fixed payment. Shared insurance. Benefit advisers. Coverage agents. Medical advisors. ACA. HMO. PPO. Exclusive Provider Organization. POS. High Deductible Health Plan. HSA. FSA. Health Reimbursement Arrangement. Explanation of Benefits. Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act. Small Business Health Options Program. Single coverage. Dependent coverage. Insurance subsidies.

Confused? You should be. Who understands all this stuff? Certainly not the average entrepreneur. Neither the average worker. Selecting the right medical coverage for companies – or for our families – appears to require it requires a PhD in medical insurance.

Our Medical System Isn't Just Complex, It's Expensive

Based on recent research, typical households spends $twenty-seven thousand annually on medical coverage (up 6% from last year). The average company healthcare expense is expected to exceed $seventeen thousand for each worker in 2026, an increase of 9.5% compared to 2025.

Now the government has ceased functioning due to partisan disputes regarding subsidies which analysts predict will lead to a doubling of premiums for numerous US citizens.

When Will We Seriously Consider National Health Insurance?

When will we seriously consider 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 government-run medicine. I'm advocating for our current Medicare program – an insurance system – merely extend to cover everyone. The existing system doesn't change. The way medical professionals receive payment would change. Trust me, they will adjust.

The Way National Health Insurance Would Work

A national health insurance program would require contributions from employees and employers. In comparable systems, an employee earning average wages must contribute approximately 5.3% to their healthcare. The company must contribute approximately thirteen point seventy-five percent.

Does this seem expensive? Unless you contrast that with what average US resident spends. I can name multiple clients who are routinely paying between 8% to 15% of their employee wages for medical benefits. Remember that with inclusive programs, these contributions also cover retirement benefits, illness coverage, maternity leave and job loss protection in addition to supporting healthcare facilities. When including these expenses compared with our current spending for our retirement plans, unemployment insurance and vacation benefits, the difference decreases.

Execution in the US

For America, universal healthcare funding would increase existing Medicare taxes, a framework already established. It should be means-based – those at higher income levels would pay more than those earning less. There would be both an employee and employer contribution. Similar to many federal military, technology, welfare services and infrastructure, the program could be managed by private contractors rather than a government office.

Advantages for Entrepreneurs

A national health insurance program would be a huge benefit for small businesses like mine. It would put us on a level playing field against big corporations who can afford better plans. It would make management much easier (automatic payroll withholding remitted like retirement and Medicare taxes, instead of individual transactions to benefit firms and insurance providers).

It would enable it easier to plan expenses our yearly costs, instead of enduring the complicated (and ineffective) theater of negotiating with the big insurance providers that we must do every year. Because it's simplified, there would be a better understanding about benefits among workers – contrasted with the current system where they have to decipher the complexities of existing plans. Additionally there would definitely exist reduced responsibility for companies as we no longer would be privy to workers' health histories for purposes of risk assessment and alternative plans.

Free-Market Viewpoint

I'm as pro-market as possible. However I recognize that government has a significant role in society, from providing defense to funding essential systems. Providing healthcare to all via universal healthcare enhances our economy's infrastructure. It represents superior, easier system for small businesses that employ more than half of the country's workers and fund half the economic output. It makes it possible for workers to enjoy better health, have better attendance and be more productive.

Addressing Concerns

Exist numerous factors I haven't covered? Certainly. But with all the healthcare cost increases we've seen recently, it's evident that the Affordable Care Act isn't functioning effectively. And I realize that we're not a small, Scandinavian country where major reforms can be readily adopted. However extending Medicare for all, despite increased taxation required, would still be a superior and less expensive approach both for managing medical expenses but providing access to everyone.

Need for Honest Assessment

As Americans, must reduce national pride. Our healthcare system isn't exceptional. We rank well below numerous nations in healthcare quality globally, based on comprehensive research. Perhaps a bright spot in this present circumstances could be that we take a hard look in the mirror and agree that big changes are necessary.