🔗 Share this article As a Dedicated Free-Market Advocate, But Medicare for All Is the Top Hope for American Health System Deductibles. In-network. Out-of-network. Premium health services. Out-of-pocket expenses. Fixed payment. Shared insurance. Insurance consultants. Insurance brokers. Medical advisors. ACA. HMO. Preferred Provider Organization. EPO. POS. HDHP. HSA. Flexible Spending Account. HRA. 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 business owner. Nor the typical worker. Choosing the right medical coverage for our business – or for households – appears to require demands a PhD in medical insurance. The Healthcare System Is More Than Complex, It's Costly According to a recent study, the average family spends $twenty-seven thousand annually on medical coverage (increasing by 6% from last year). Typical employer health insurance cost is projected to exceed $17,000 for each worker in 2026, a 9.5% jump from 2025. Currently the government is shut down due to partisan disputes regarding subsidies that experts say could cause a doubling of premiums for millions of Americans. When Might We Seriously Consider Universal Healthcare? How soon might we genuinely evaluate a national health insurance program here in America? I'm convinced we're getting closer because this situation is unsustainable. I'm not suggesting government-run medicine. I'm proposing that our already existing Medicare program – an insurance system – merely extend to include all citizens. Our infrastructure doesn't change. How our healthcare providers receive payment would change. Trust me, they'll adapt. How Universal Coverage Would Work A national health insurance program would need contributions from both employees and employers. In comparable systems, an employee making moderate income must contribute approximately 5.3% toward medical coverage. Their employer must contribute approximately thirteen point seventy-five percent. Does this appear like a lot? Unless you compare it to what the typical American pays. I know dozens of clients who are routinely paying anywhere from eight to fifteen percent of their employee wages for medical benefits. And keep in mind that in inclusive programs, those payments include pension plans, illness coverage, maternity leave and job loss protection along with funding medical services. When including those costs versus our current spending for our retirement plans, unemployment insurance and paid time off, the difference decreases. Execution in the US For America, a national health premium would raise existing Medicare taxes, a framework already established. It ought to be means-based – wealthier individuals would contribute higher amounts than those earning less. This includes both an employee and employer contribution. Similar to many federal military, IT, welfare services and infrastructure, the system could be managed by private contractors instead of federal agencies. Advantages for Entrepreneurs A national health insurance program would be a significant advantage 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 render management significantly simpler (automatic payroll withholding remitted like retirement and Medicare taxes, instead of separate payments to insurance companies and coverage administrators). It would enable simpler to plan expenses our yearly costs, rather than enduring the complicated (and fruitless) process of negotiating with major insurers 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 definitely exist less liability for employers since we wouldn't have access to workers' medical records for purposes of weighing risks and different options. Capitalist Perspective I'm as pro-market as possible. But I've learned that government has a significant role in our lives, including national security to supporting needed infrastructure. Providing healthcare for everyone through a national insurance system enhances economic foundations. It represents superior, easier system for entrepreneurs which hire more than half of American employees and generate half of our GDP. It makes it possible employees to enjoy better health, come to work more often and increase productivity. Addressing Concerns Exist numerous factors I haven't covered? Certainly. But with rising medical expenses experienced in recent years, it's clear that the Affordable Care Act isn't functioning effectively. And I realize that America isn't a small, Scandinavian country where major reforms are easier to implement. However extending Medicare for all, even with the additional taxes required, would still be a better and more affordable strategy for not only managing medical expenses but providing access for all citizens. Time for Realistic Evaluation We as Americans, we need to reduce our own arrogance. Our healthcare system isn't exceptional. The US places well below numerous nations with the best healthcare globally, according to major studies. Perhaps a bright spot amid present circumstances could be that we take a hard look in the mirror and acknowledge that big changes need to happen.