I'm a Committed Capitalist, Yet Universal Medicare Represents the Optimal Solution for US Health System

Deductibles. In-network. Non-preferred providers. Concierge medical services. Personal healthcare costs. Fixed payment. Shared insurance. Benefit advisers. Coverage agents. Medical advisors. Affordable Care Act. HMO. PPO. Exclusive Provider Organization. Point of Service. HDHP. Health Savings Account. Flexible Spending Account. Health Reimbursement Arrangement. Explanation of Benefits. Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act. SHOP. Individual coverage. Family coverage. Premium tax credits.

Confused? You should be. Who comprehends this complex system? Not the typical business owner. Nor the typical employee. Selecting the appropriate medical coverage for our business – or for our families – appears to require it requires a PhD in healthcare.

The Healthcare System Is More Than Complicated, It Is Expensive

According to a recent study, the average family spends $twenty-seven thousand annually on medical coverage (increasing by 6% compared to last year). Typical employer health insurance cost is projected to exceed $17,000 for each worker in 2026, a 9.5% jump compared to 2025.

Currently the government is shut down due to political disagreements regarding tax credits that experts say will lead to a doubling of premiums for millions of Americans.

When Might We Seriously Consider Universal Healthcare?

How soon might we seriously consider a national health insurance program here in America? I have to believe we're getting closer since this situation is unsustainable.

I'm not suggesting national healthcare. I'm advocating for our current Medicare system – an insurance system – simply expand to include all citizens. The existing system remains intact. The way our healthcare providers get paid would change. Trust me, they'll adapt.

The Way National Health Insurance Would Work

Universal healthcare coverage would need contributions from workers and companies. In similar programs, an employee earning average wages pays about five point three percent to their healthcare. The company must contribute approximately 13.75%.

Does this seem expensive? Not if you compare that with what average US resident spends. I can name multiple clients who are routinely paying between eight to fifteen percent of their employee wages to their healthcare costs. And keep in mind that with comprehensive systems, these contributions also cover retirement benefits, sick pay, parental benefits and job loss protection in addition to supporting healthcare facilities. When including these expenses compared with our current spending on retirement programs, unemployment insurance and vacation benefits, the gap narrows.

Implementation in the US

For America, a national health premium would raise existing Medicare taxes, a system that is already in place. It should be income-adjusted – those at higher income levels would contribute higher amounts than lower-income earners. This includes both worker and employer contribution. Similar to much of federal military, IT, social programs and transportation services, the program should be outsourced to third-party administrators rather than federal agencies.

Advantages for Entrepreneurs

A national health insurance program would be a significant advantage for entrepreneurs such as my company. It would place us on a level playing field with our larger competitors who can afford superior coverage. It would render administration significantly simpler (automatic payroll withholding processed similarly to social security and Medicare taxes, rather than individual transactions to benefit firms and insurance providers).

It would enable it easier to plan expenses our yearly costs, rather than enduring the complex (and ineffective) theater of bargaining with major insurers that we must do each year. Due to simplification, there would be a better understanding about benefits by our employees – as opposed to the current system which require them to decipher the complexities of current options. Additionally there would certainly be reduced responsibility for employers since we wouldn't have access to workers' health histories for weighing risks and alternative plans.

Capitalist Perspective

I'm as pro-market as possible. However I recognize that government play important functions in society, from providing defense to supporting essential systems. Providing healthcare to all through a national insurance system strengthens economic foundations. It represents superior, simpler approach for entrepreneurs that employ the majority of American employees and fund half of our GDP. It makes it possible for workers to be healthier, have better attendance and be more productive.

Addressing Concerns

Are there a million considerations I haven't covered? Certainly. Given all the healthcare cost increases experienced recently, it's evident that the Affordable Care Act isn't functioning effectively. And I realize that we're not a compact European nation where big changes can be readily adopted. However extending Medicare for all, despite increased taxation that would be incurred, would still be a better and less expensive strategy both for controlling healthcare costs but providing access to everyone.

Need for Honest Assessment

As Americans, we need to tone down our own arrogance. Our healthcare system isn't exceptional. The US places well below many other countries in healthcare quality in the world, based on major studies. Maybe one bright spot in this present circumstances is that we take serious examination at ourselves and agree that big changes are necessary.