🔗 Share this article

Out-of-pocket costs. Preferred providers. Out-of-network. Concierge medical services. Out-of-pocket expenses. Co-payment. Co-insurance. Insurance consultants. Insurance brokers. Medical advisors. Affordable Care Act. HMO. Preferred Provider Organization. Exclusive Provider Organization. POS. HDHP. Health Savings Account. Flexible Spending Account. Health Reimbursement Arrangement. EOB. COBRA. Small Business Health Options Program. Individual coverage. Dependent coverage. Insurance subsidies.

Baffled? It's understandable. Who understands this complex system? Not the typical business owner. Nor the typical employee. Selecting the right medical coverage for our business – or for our families – appears to require it requires a PhD in healthcare.

Our Medical System Isn't Just Complicated, It's Expensive

Based on recent research, typical households spends $27,000 annually on medical coverage (increasing by 6% compared to last year). The average company healthcare expense is projected to exceed $17,000 for each worker in 2026, a 9.5% jump from 2025.

Currently the government is shut down because political disagreements regarding tax credits that experts say will lead to premium increases up to 100% for numerous US citizens.

When Will We Seriously Consider National Health Insurance?

How soon might we genuinely evaluate a national health insurance program here in America? I have to believe we're approaching that point because this can't continue.

I'm not suggesting national healthcare. I'm proposing for our current Medicare program – an established insurance framework – simply expand to cover everyone. Our infrastructure doesn't change. The way our healthcare providers receive payment changes. Trust me, they'll adapt.

How National Health Insurance Would Work

A national health insurance program would require contributions from both employees and employers. In comparable systems, an employee making moderate income must contribute about five point three percent to their healthcare. Their employer pays approximately thirteen point seventy-five percent.

Does this seem like a lot? Unless you contrast that with what the typical US resident spends. I know dozens of businesses that are easily contributing anywhere from eight to fifteen percent of payroll costs for medical benefits. And keep in mind that with comprehensive systems, these contributions include retirement benefits, illness coverage, maternity leave and unemployment benefits in addition to funding medical services. When including these expenses versus our current spending on retirement programs, unemployment insurance and paid time off, the difference decreases.

Implementation in the US

In the US, universal healthcare funding would raise our Medicare tax deduction, a framework already established. It should be means-based – wealthier individuals would pay more than those earning less. This includes both an employee and employer contribution. And, like much of our government's defense, technology, social programs and transportation services, the system should be outsourced to third-party administrators instead of federal agencies.

Advantages for Small Businesses

A national health insurance program would be a significant advantage for entrepreneurs such as my company. It would put small companies in equal competition with our larger competitors who can afford better plans. It would render management significantly simpler (a payroll deduction processed similarly to retirement and healthcare taxes, rather than separate payments to insurance companies and coverage administrators).

It would make it easier for us to budget annual expenditures, rather than going through the complex (and fruitless) theater of bargaining with the big insurance providers required annually every year. Because it's simplified, there would be a better understanding about benefits among workers – contrasted with the current system where they have to interpret the complications of existing plans. And there would definitely exist less liability for employers since we wouldn't have access to workers' medical records for weighing risks and alternative plans.

Capitalist Perspective

I'm as pro-market as possible. However I recognize that public institutions play important functions in our lives, from providing defense to funding essential systems. Ensuring medical coverage to all through a national insurance system strengthens our economy's infrastructure. It's a better, simpler approach for small businesses that employ the majority of American employees and generate half of our GDP. It enables for workers to enjoy better health, have better attendance and increase productivity.

Considering Challenges

Exist a million considerations I'm not addressing? Certainly. Given all the healthcare cost increases we've seen recently, it's evident that current healthcare legislation is not working very well. And I realize that America isn't a compact European nation where big changes can be readily adopted. But expanding universal Medicare, even with the additional taxes that would be incurred, would still be a better and more affordable approach both for managing medical expenses and ensuring coverage to everyone.

Need for Realistic Evaluation

As Americans, must reduce our own arrogance. America's medical care isn't exceptional. We rank significantly behind numerous nations with the best healthcare globally, according to major studies. Perhaps a bright spot amid current situation is that we undertake a hard look in the mirror and agree that major reforms need to happen.