🔗 Share this article

Out-of-pocket costs. In-network. Non-preferred providers. Premium health services. Out-of-pocket expenses. Co-payment. Shared insurance. Insurance consultants. Coverage agents. Healthcare consultants. Affordable Care Act. HMO. Preferred Provider Organization. Exclusive Provider Organization. POS. HDHP. Health Savings Account. Flexible Spending Account. HRA. Explanation of Benefits. COBRA. SHOP. Single coverage. Family coverage. Premium tax credits.

Baffled? It's understandable. Who understands this complex system? Not the typical entrepreneur. Neither the average employee. Selecting the right medical coverage for companies – or for households – seems like it requires a PhD in healthcare.

Our Medical System Is More Than Complex, It's Costly

According to a recent study, typical households pays $twenty-seven thousand each year for their health insurance (increasing by 6% from last year). The average company healthcare expense is projected to exceed $17,000 for each worker in 2026, a 9.5% jump compared to 2025.

Currently the government has ceased functioning due to political disagreements over tax credits that experts say will lead to premium increases up to 100% for millions of Americans.

When Will We Seriously Consider National Health Insurance?

How soon might we genuinely evaluate universal healthcare coverage in the United States? I have to believe we're approaching that point since this situation is unsustainable.

I'm not suggesting government-run medicine. I'm proposing for our current Medicare program – an insurance system – simply expand to include all citizens. Our infrastructure remains intact. How medical professionals get paid would change. Trust me, they'll adapt.

The Way National Health Insurance Would Work

A national health insurance program would require payments from both workers and companies. In comparable systems, an employee making moderate income must contribute approximately 5.3% toward medical coverage. The company must contribute approximately thirteen point seventy-five percent.

Does this appear like a lot? Unless you contrast it to what the typical US resident spends. I can name dozens of businesses that are routinely paying between eight to fifteen percent of their employee wages for medical benefits. And keep in mind that in inclusive programs, these contributions also cover pension plans, sick pay, maternity leave and job loss protection in addition to funding medical services. When including these expenses compared with our current spending for our retirement plans, unemployment insurance and vacation benefits, the gap narrows.

Execution in the US

In the US, a national health premium would raise existing Medicare taxes, a system already established. It should be income-adjusted – those at higher income levels would contribute higher amounts than those earning less. There would be both worker and company payments. And, like much of federal defense, IT, welfare services and transportation services, the system could be managed to third-party administrators instead of a government office.

Benefits for Entrepreneurs

A national health insurance program would be a huge benefit for entrepreneurs like mine. It would place us on a level playing field against big corporations that can pay for superior coverage. It would render management much easier (automatic payroll withholding remitted like retirement and healthcare taxes, rather than separate payments to insurance companies and coverage administrators).

It would make simpler to plan expenses our yearly costs, rather than going through the complicated (and ineffective) theater of negotiating with the big insurance providers required annually each year. Due to simplification, there would be improved comprehension of coverage by our employees – as opposed to existing arrangements where they have to interpret the complications of existing plans. Additionally there would certainly be reduced responsibility for companies as we no longer would be privy to workers' health histories for purposes of weighing risks and alternative plans.

Free-Market Viewpoint

I'm as pro-market as possible. However I recognize that public institutions has a significant role in our lives, including national security to funding essential systems. Providing healthcare for everyone through a national insurance system strengthens our economy's infrastructure. It represents superior, easier system for entrepreneurs that employ more than half of American employees and generate half the economic output. It makes it possible for workers to enjoy better health, have better attendance and increase productivity.

Addressing Concerns

Exist a million considerations I haven't covered? Certainly. But with rising medical expenses experienced in recent years, it's evident that current healthcare legislation isn't functioning very well. I understand that we're not a compact European nation where major reforms are easier to implement. However extending universal Medicare, even with the additional taxes that would be incurred, would remain a better and less expensive strategy both for managing medical expenses and ensuring coverage for all citizens.

Need for Honest Assessment

As Americans, must reduce our own arrogance. America's medical care isn't so great. We rank well below numerous nations with the best healthcare in the world, according to comprehensive research. Perhaps a positive aspect amid present circumstances is that we take serious examination at ourselves and acknowledge that big changes need to happen.