🔗 Share this article

Out-of-pocket costs. Preferred providers. Out-of-network. Premium health services. Out-of-pocket expenses. Co-payment. Co-insurance. Insurance consultants. Insurance brokers. Medical advisors. ACA. Health Maintenance Organization. Preferred Provider Organization. Exclusive Provider Organization. POS. HDHP. Health Savings Account. Flexible Spending Account. HRA. Explanation of Benefits. Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act. Small Business Health Options Program. Individual coverage. Dependent coverage. Premium tax credits.

Confused? It's understandable. Who comprehends all this stuff? Not the typical entrepreneur. Neither the average employee. Choosing the right medical coverage for companies – or for households – appears to require demands advanced expertise in healthcare.

The Healthcare System Isn't Just Complex, It Is Costly

Based on recent research, typical households spends $twenty-seven thousand each year on medical coverage (increasing by 6% from last year). The average employer health insurance cost is expected to surpass $seventeen thousand per employee in 2026, an increase of 9.5% compared to 2025.

Currently federal operations has ceased functioning due to political disagreements over tax credits which analysts predict will lead to a doubling of premiums for millions of Americans.

When Will We Seriously Consider National Health Insurance?

When will we genuinely evaluate a national health insurance program here in America? I'm convinced we're getting closer because this can't continue.

I'm not suggesting national healthcare. I'm advocating that our already existing Medicare program – an established insurance framework – simply expand to cover everyone. Our infrastructure doesn't change. The way medical professionals receive payment changes. Trust me, they'll adapt.

The Way Universal Coverage Could Function

Universal healthcare coverage would need contributions from both employees and employers. In comparable systems, a worker earning moderate income pays about five point three percent to their healthcare. The company must contribute approximately 13.75%.

Does this appear like a lot? Not if you compare it to what the typical US resident spends. I know multiple clients that are routinely paying anywhere from 8% to 15% of payroll costs to their healthcare costs. Remember that with inclusive programs, those payments also cover pension plans, sick pay, parental benefits and job loss protection in addition to funding medical services. When you add these expenses compared with what we pay on retirement programs, unemployment insurance and paid time off, the difference decreases.

Execution in the US

In the US, a national health premium would raise our Medicare tax deduction, a system that is already in place. It should be means-based – wealthier individuals would pay more than lower-income earners. There would be both worker and company payments. And, like many federal defense, IT, social programs and infrastructure, the system should be outsourced by private contractors instead of federal agencies.

Benefits for Entrepreneurs

A national health insurance program represents a huge benefit for entrepreneurs such as my company. It would place small companies in equal competition against big corporations that can pay for better plans. It would make management much easier (a payroll deduction remitted like retirement and healthcare taxes, rather than individual transactions to insurance companies and insurance providers).

It would make simpler for us to budget our yearly costs, instead of enduring the complicated (and ineffective) theater of bargaining with major insurers required annually each 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 existing plans. And there would certainly be less liability for employers as we no longer have access to our employees' health histories for purposes of weighing risks and different options.

Free-Market Viewpoint

I'm as capitalist as they get. But I've learned that public institutions play important functions in our lives, including national security to funding essential systems. Ensuring medical coverage to all through a national insurance system enhances our economy's infrastructure. It represents superior, easier system for small businesses which hire the majority of American employees and fund half of our GDP. It makes it possible for workers to be healthier, have better attendance and be more productive.

Considering Challenges

Exist a million considerations I'm not addressing? Of course there are. But with all the healthcare cost increases experienced in recent years, it's evident that current healthcare legislation is not working very well. And I realize that we're not a small, Scandinavian country where big changes are easier to implement. However extending Medicare for all, despite increased taxation that would be incurred, would still be a superior and more affordable strategy both for controlling healthcare costs and ensuring coverage for all citizens.

Need for Realistic Evaluation

As Americans, must tone down our own arrogance. Our healthcare system isn't so great. The US places significantly behind many other countries with the best healthcare in the world, based on major studies. Maybe one bright spot amid present circumstances could be that we take a hard look at ourselves and acknowledge that major reforms need to happen.