🔗 Share this article As a Dedicated Capitalist, But Universal Medicare Represents the Optimal Hope for American Health System Out-of-pocket costs. In-network. Out-of-network. Concierge medical services. Personal healthcare costs. Co-payment. Shared insurance. Benefit advisers. Insurance brokers. Healthcare consultants. Affordable Care Act. HMO. PPO. EPO. Point of Service. High Deductible Health Plan. Health Savings Account. Flexible Spending Account. HRA. Explanation of Benefits. COBRA. SHOP. Single coverage. Dependent coverage. Premium tax credits. Confused? It's understandable. Who comprehends all this stuff? Not the typical entrepreneur. Nor the typical worker. Selecting the appropriate medical coverage for companies – or for our families – seems like demands a PhD in medical insurance. The Healthcare System Is More Than Complex, It Is Expensive Based on recent research, the average family pays $27,000 each year for their health insurance (increasing by 6% compared to last year). The average company healthcare expense is expected to surpass $seventeen thousand per employee in 2026, a 9.5% jump from 2025. Currently the government has ceased functioning because partisan disputes over tax credits that experts say will lead to premium increases up to 100% for numerous US citizens. When Will We Truly Examine National Health Insurance? How soon might we seriously consider a national health insurance program here in America? I have to believe we're getting closer because this situation is unsustainable. I'm not suggesting government-run medicine. I'm advocating for our current Medicare program – an insurance system – simply expand to include all citizens. Our infrastructure remains intact. The way our healthcare providers get paid would change. Trust me, they will adjust. The Way National Health Insurance Could Function A national health insurance program would require contributions from both workers and companies. In comparable systems, an employee making average wages must contribute about 5.3% to their healthcare. The company must contribute about thirteen point seventy-five percent. Does this appear like a lot? Not if you contrast it to what the typical US resident spends. I can name dozens of businesses who are routinely paying anywhere from eight to fifteen percent of their employee wages for medical benefits. And keep in mind that with inclusive programs, those payments also cover retirement benefits, illness coverage, parental benefits and job loss protection in addition to supporting medical services. When including those costs compared with our current spending for our retirement plans, unemployment insurance and vacation benefits, the gap narrows. Execution in the US For America, a national health premium would increase our Medicare tax deduction, a system already established. It ought to be means-based – those at higher income levels would contribute higher amounts than those earning less. There would be both an employee and employer contribution. Similar to many federal defense, IT, social programs and transportation services, the system could be managed by private contractors rather than a government office. Advantages for Entrepreneurs A national health insurance program would be a significant advantage for entrepreneurs like mine. 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 Medicare taxes, instead of individual transactions to benefit firms and insurance providers). It would enable simpler for us to budget annual expenditures, rather than going through the complex (and ineffective) process of bargaining with the big insurance providers required annually each year. Due to simplification, there would be improved comprehension about benefits among workers – as opposed to existing arrangements where they have to decipher the complications of existing plans. And there would definitely exist less liability for companies as we no longer would be privy to our employees' health histories for purposes of weighing risks and alternative plans. Capitalist Perspective I'm as pro-market as they get. But I've learned that government play important functions in our lives, including national security to supporting essential systems. Providing healthcare for everyone via universal healthcare strengthens our economy's infrastructure. It represents superior, simpler approach for small businesses that employ the majority of the country's workers and fund half of our GDP. It enables employees to enjoy better health, have better attendance and increase productivity. Addressing Concerns Exist a million considerations 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 isn't functioning effectively. And I realize that America isn't a compact European nation where big changes can be readily adopted. However extending Medicare for all, despite increased taxation required, would remain a superior and less expensive approach both for controlling healthcare costs and ensuring coverage for all citizens. Time for Realistic Evaluation As Americans, we need to reduce national pride. Our healthcare system isn't exceptional. The US places well below numerous nations in healthcare quality globally, according to comprehensive research. Perhaps a bright spot in this present circumstances could be that we undertake serious examination in the mirror and acknowledge that major reforms need to happen.