I'm a Dedicated Free-Market Advocate, But Universal Medicare Is the Optimal Hope for American Healthcare

Deductibles. In-network. Non-preferred providers. Premium health services. Personal healthcare costs. Fixed payment. Shared insurance. Benefit advisers. Coverage agents. Medical advisors. Affordable Care Act. HMO. Preferred Provider Organization. EPO. Point of Service. High Deductible Health Plan. HSA. FSA. Health Reimbursement Arrangement. EOB. Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act. SHOP. Individual coverage. Dependent coverage. Premium tax credits.

Confused? You should be. Who comprehends all this stuff? Certainly not the average entrepreneur. Nor the typical employee. 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 Complicated, It Is Expensive

According to a recent study, typical households spends $27,000 annually on medical coverage (increasing by 6% from last year). Typical company healthcare expense is expected to surpass $seventeen thousand per employee by 2026, a 9.5% jump compared to 2025.

Currently the government is shut down due to partisan disputes over subsidies that experts say 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 have to believe we're approaching that point because this situation is unsustainable.

I'm not proposing government-run medicine. I'm proposing that our already existing Medicare system – an established insurance framework – merely extend to cover everyone. Our infrastructure remains intact. How medical professionals receive payment changes. Trust me, they'll adapt.

The Way National Health Insurance Could Function

Universal healthcare coverage would require payments from both employees and employers. In comparable systems, an employee earning moderate income pays about five point three percent toward medical coverage. Their employer must contribute approximately thirteen point seventy-five percent.

Does this seem like a lot? Not if you compare it to what the typical American pays. I can name multiple clients that are routinely paying between 8% to 15% of payroll costs to their healthcare costs. Remember that in inclusive programs, these contributions also cover retirement benefits, illness coverage, parental benefits and unemployment benefits along with funding medical services. When you add these expenses versus what we pay on retirement programs, job loss coverage and vacation benefits, the gap narrows.

Execution in the US

For America, universal healthcare funding would increase existing Medicare taxes, a system already established. It ought to be income-adjusted – wealthier individuals would contribute higher amounts than lower-income earners. There would be both worker and company payments. Similar to many federal defense, IT, social programs and infrastructure, the program should be outsourced to third-party administrators instead of federal agencies.

Benefits for Small Businesses

A national health insurance program represents a significant advantage for entrepreneurs such as my company. It would put 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 benefit firms and coverage administrators).

It would enable simpler for us to budget annual expenditures, rather than going through the complicated (and fruitless) process of bargaining with the big insurance providers that we must do every year. Due to simplification, there would exist a better understanding about benefits among workers – contrasted with the current system where they have to interpret the complexities of current options. And there would definitely exist less liability for companies as we no longer have access to workers' 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 has a significant role in society, from providing defense to funding essential systems. Providing healthcare to all through a national insurance system enhances economic foundations. It represents superior, simpler approach for entrepreneurs which hire more than half of the country's workers and fund half the economic output. It enables employees to enjoy better health, have better attendance and increase productivity.

Considering Challenges

Are there numerous factors I haven't covered? Of course there are. But with all the healthcare cost increases we've seen recently, it's clear that the Affordable Care Act is not working very well. And I realize that America isn't a compact European nation where major reforms are easier to implement. But expanding universal Medicare, despite the additional taxes required, would remain a better and more affordable strategy for not only managing medical expenses but providing access to everyone.

Need for Honest Assessment

As Americans, must tone down national pride. America's medical care isn't exceptional. The US places well below many other countries in healthcare quality globally, based on major studies. Perhaps a positive aspect amid present circumstances is that we undertake a hard look at ourselves and agree that major reforms need to happen.