As a Committed Capitalist, But Medicare for All Represents the Optimal Solution for US Health System

Out-of-pocket costs. In-network. Out-of-network. Concierge medical services. Out-of-pocket expenses. Co-payment. Shared insurance. Insurance consultants. Insurance brokers. Medical advisors. Affordable Care Act. HMO. PPO. Exclusive Provider Organization. Point of Service. HDHP. Health Savings Account. Flexible Spending Account. HRA. EOB. COBRA. SHOP. Individual coverage. Dependent coverage. Premium tax credits.

Confused? It's understandable. Who understands all this stuff? Not the typical entrepreneur. Neither the average employee. Selecting the right healthcare insurance for our business – or for our families – seems like demands a PhD in medical insurance.

Our Healthcare System Is More Than Complicated, It's Expensive

Based on recent research, typical households pays $twenty-seven thousand each year for their health insurance (increasing by 6% from last year). The average employer health insurance cost is projected to exceed $seventeen thousand for each worker by 2026, a 9.5% jump compared to 2025.

Now federal operations is shut down because partisan disputes regarding tax credits which analysts predict will lead to premium increases up to 100% for numerous US citizens.

When Will We Truly Examine Universal Healthcare?

How soon might we genuinely evaluate a national health insurance program in the United States? I'm convinced we're getting closer because this situation is unsustainable.

I'm not suggesting government-run medicine. I'm advocating that our already existing Medicare program – an established insurance framework – simply expand to include all citizens. The existing system doesn't change. How medical professionals get paid changes. Believe me, they'll adapt.

How National Health Insurance Could Function

A national health insurance program would need contributions from both workers and companies. In similar programs, an employee earning average wages must contribute approximately 5.3% toward medical coverage. Their employer must contribute approximately 13.75%.

Does this appear like a lot? Not if you compare that with what the typical US resident spends. I can name multiple clients who are routinely paying anywhere from 8% to 15% of payroll costs for medical benefits. And keep in mind that with comprehensive systems, these contributions include pension plans, illness coverage, maternity leave and unemployment benefits along with funding medical services. When including those costs compared with what we pay on retirement programs, unemployment insurance and paid time off, the difference decreases.

Execution for America

In the US, universal healthcare funding would raise existing Medicare taxes, a system already established. It should be income-adjusted – wealthier individuals would contribute higher amounts than those earning less. This includes both worker and employer contribution. Similar to many our government's defense, IT, welfare services and transportation services, the system could be managed by private contractors rather than a government office.

Benefits for Entrepreneurs

A national health insurance program would be a significant advantage for entrepreneurs like mine. It would put small companies in equal competition against big corporations that can pay for superior coverage. It would make administration much easier (a payroll deduction processed similarly to social security and healthcare taxes, rather than separate payments to benefit firms and coverage administrators).

It would enable it easier to plan expenses our yearly costs, instead of enduring the complicated (and ineffective) theater of bargaining with major insurers required annually every year. Due to simplification, there would be improved comprehension of coverage by our employees – contrasted with the current system which require them to interpret the complications of current options. And there would definitely exist reduced responsibility for employers since we wouldn't would be privy to our employees' medical records for purposes of risk assessment and different options.

Free-Market Viewpoint

I'm as pro-market as they get. However I recognize that government has a significant role in society, from providing defense to supporting needed infrastructure. Ensuring medical coverage for everyone via universal healthcare enhances our economy's infrastructure. It's a better, easier system for entrepreneurs which hire the majority of the country's workers and generate half the economic output. It enables for workers to be healthier, come to work more often and increase productivity.

Addressing Concerns

Are there a million considerations I haven't covered? Of course there are. But with rising medical expenses 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 are easier to implement. But expanding universal Medicare, despite the additional taxes required, would still be a better and less expensive approach for not only managing medical expenses and ensuring coverage for all citizens.

Time for Honest Assessment

We as Americans, must reduce national pride. Our healthcare system isn't exceptional. We rank well below numerous nations in healthcare quality in the world, based on comprehensive research. Perhaps a bright spot in this present circumstances is that we take serious examination at ourselves and agree that big changes need to happen.