As a Dedicated Free-Market Advocate, But Medicare for All Represents the Optimal Solution for American Healthcare

Out-of-pocket costs. Preferred providers. Non-preferred providers. Concierge medical services. Out-of-pocket expenses. Fixed payment. Shared insurance. Benefit advisers. Insurance brokers. Medical advisors. ACA. HMO. Preferred Provider Organization. Exclusive Provider Organization. Point of Service. High Deductible Health Plan. Health Savings Account. Flexible Spending Account. Health Reimbursement Arrangement. EOB. COBRA. SHOP. Individual coverage. Dependent coverage. Insurance subsidies.

Confused? You should be. Who comprehends this complex system? Not the typical business owner. Nor the typical employee. Selecting the right medical coverage for companies – or for our families – seems like it requires advanced expertise in medical insurance.

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

According to a recent study, the average family spends $twenty-seven thousand each year for their health insurance (increasing by 6% from last year). The average company healthcare expense is expected to surpass $seventeen thousand per employee by 2026, an increase of 9.5% from 2025.

Currently the government is shut down due to partisan disputes over subsidies that experts say will lead to a doubling of premiums for numerous US citizens.

When Will We Seriously Consider National Health Insurance?

How soon might we genuinely evaluate a national health insurance program in the United States? I'm convinced we're approaching that point since this situation is unsustainable.

I'm not suggesting national healthcare. I'm proposing that our already existing Medicare system – an insurance system – merely extend to cover everyone. Our infrastructure doesn't change. How medical professionals get paid changes. Believe me, they'll adapt.

The Way National Health Insurance Would Work

Universal healthcare coverage would need payments from both employees and employers. In comparable systems, a worker making moderate income must contribute about 5.3% toward medical coverage. Their employer must contribute about thirteen point seventy-five percent.

Does this seem expensive? Not if you contrast it to what the typical US resident spends. I know multiple clients who are routinely paying between 8% to 15% of payroll costs for medical benefits. Remember that in inclusive programs, these contributions also cover pension plans, sick pay, maternity leave and unemployment benefits along with funding medical services. When you add those costs versus what we pay for our retirement plans, unemployment insurance and paid time off, the gap narrows.

Implementation for America

In the US, 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 lower-income earners. There would be both an employee and company payments. And, like many our government's military, IT, welfare services and transportation services, the program should be outsourced to third-party administrators instead of federal agencies.

Advantages for Small Businesses

A national health insurance program would be a significant advantage for small businesses like mine. It would place small companies in equal competition against big corporations who can afford better plans. It would make administration significantly simpler (a payroll deduction remitted like social security and healthcare taxes, instead of individual transactions to benefit firms and coverage administrators).

It would enable simpler to plan expenses our yearly costs, rather than enduring the complex (and ineffective) theater of bargaining with the big insurance providers required annually each year. Due to simplification, there would be a better understanding of coverage among workers – as opposed to the current system where they have to decipher the complexities of current options. Additionally there would definitely exist less liability for employers as we no longer have access to workers' medical records for purposes of weighing risks and different options.

Capitalist Perspective

I'm as capitalist as possible. But I've learned that government has a significant role in our lives, from providing defense to funding needed infrastructure. Ensuring medical coverage for everyone via universal healthcare strengthens economic foundations. It represents superior, easier system for entrepreneurs that employ the majority of American employees and fund half of our GDP. It enables for workers to enjoy better health, come to work more often and be more productive.

Considering Challenges

Are there numerous factors I haven't covered? Of course there are. But with rising medical expenses experienced in recent years, it's clear that current healthcare legislation is not working effectively. And I realize that America isn't a small, Scandinavian country where big changes are easier to implement. However extending universal Medicare, even with the additional taxes that would be incurred, would still be a superior and less expensive approach for not only controlling healthcare costs and ensuring coverage to everyone.

Need for Honest Assessment

We as Americans, we need to tone down our own arrogance. America's medical care isn't exceptional. We rank well below numerous nations with the best healthcare in the world, according to major studies. Maybe one positive aspect in this present circumstances could be that we take a hard look in the mirror and agree that big changes need to happen.