As a Dedicated Free-Market Advocate, But Universal Medicare Represents the Optimal Hope for US Health System
Deductibles. In-network. Non-preferred providers. Concierge medical services. Personal healthcare costs. Fixed payment. Shared insurance. Benefit advisers. Coverage agents. Healthcare consultants. ACA. Health Maintenance Organization. Preferred Provider Organization. Exclusive Provider Organization. POS. High Deductible Health Plan. HSA. FSA. Health Reimbursement Arrangement. Explanation of Benefits. Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act. SHOP. Single coverage. Dependent coverage. Insurance subsidies.
Confused? You should be. Who understands all this stuff? Not the typical entrepreneur. Neither the average employee. Selecting the right medical coverage for companies – or for households – appears to require demands a PhD in healthcare.
The Healthcare System Isn't Just Complex, It Is Expensive
According to recent research, typical households pays $twenty-seven thousand each year for their health insurance (increasing by 6% compared to last year). Typical company healthcare expense is projected to surpass $17,000 for each worker by 2026, an increase of 9.5% from 2025.
Currently the government has ceased functioning because political disagreements over tax credits which analysts predict could cause premium increases up to 100% for numerous US citizens.
When Might We Seriously Consider National Health Insurance?
How soon might we seriously consider a national health insurance program in the United States? I have to believe we're getting closer since this situation is unsustainable.
I'm not proposing national healthcare. I'm proposing for our current Medicare system – an insurance system – simply expand to cover everyone. Our infrastructure doesn't change. How our healthcare providers get paid would change. Believe me, they will adjust.
How Universal Coverage Could Function
Universal healthcare coverage would need contributions from workers and companies. In similar programs, an employee making average wages must contribute approximately 5.3% to their healthcare. Their employer pays approximately 13.75%.
Does this seem expensive? Not if you contrast it to what average US resident spends. I know multiple clients that are easily contributing between eight to fifteen percent of payroll costs to their healthcare costs. And keep in mind that with comprehensive systems, these contributions include retirement benefits, sick pay, maternity leave and job loss protection in addition to supporting healthcare facilities. When including those costs compared with what we pay for our retirement plans, unemployment insurance and vacation benefits, the gap narrows.
Execution for America
For America, a national health premium would increase our Medicare tax deduction, a system that is already in place. It should be income-adjusted – wealthier individuals would contribute higher amounts than those earning less. This includes both worker and company payments. And, like many federal defense, technology, welfare services and infrastructure, the program 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 such as my company. It would place us on a level playing field against big corporations that can pay for superior coverage. It would make administration significantly simpler (a payroll deduction remitted like retirement and healthcare taxes, rather than separate payments to benefit firms and coverage administrators).
It would make simpler to plan expenses annual expenditures, instead of going through the complicated (and ineffective) process of negotiating with major insurers required annually every year. Because it's simplified, there would be a better understanding about benefits among workers – as opposed to existing arrangements which require them to interpret the complexities of current options. Additionally there would definitely exist less liability for employers since we wouldn't have access to workers' medical records for weighing risks and different options.
Free-Market Viewpoint
I'm as capitalist as they get. However I recognize that government play important functions in our lives, from providing defense to funding needed infrastructure. Ensuring medical coverage to all through a national insurance system strengthens economic foundations. It's a better, easier system for small businesses that employ the majority of American employees and fund half the economic output. It makes it possible employees to enjoy better health, have better attendance and be more productive.
Considering Challenges
Exist numerous factors I haven't covered? Certainly. Given rising medical expenses we've seen recently, it's evident that the Affordable Care Act is not working effectively. And I realize that America isn't a compact European nation where major reforms can be readily adopted. But expanding Medicare for all, despite the additional taxes required, would still be a superior and more affordable strategy both for managing medical expenses and ensuring coverage to everyone.
Time for Honest Assessment
As Americans, we need to tone down our own arrogance. America's medical care isn't so great. The US places well below many other countries in healthcare quality in the world, according to comprehensive research. Perhaps a positive aspect in this present circumstances could be that we take a hard look at ourselves and agree that major reforms need to happen.