I'm a Committed Free-Market Advocate, But Medicare for All Is the Top Solution for American Health System

Deductibles. In-network. Non-preferred providers. Concierge medical services. Personal healthcare costs. Fixed payment. Co-insurance. Benefit advisers. Coverage agents. Healthcare consultants. ACA. Health Maintenance Organization. PPO. EPO. POS. High Deductible Health Plan. HSA. Flexible Spending Account. HRA. Explanation of Benefits. Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act. SHOP. Individual coverage. Family coverage. Insurance subsidies.

Baffled? You should be. Who comprehends this complex system? Certainly not the average business owner. Nor the typical employee. Selecting the right medical coverage for our business – or for our families – seems like demands advanced expertise in healthcare.

Our Medical System Is More Than Complex, It's Expensive

Based on a recent study, the average family pays $twenty-seven thousand each year for their health insurance (increasing by 6% from last year). The average company healthcare expense is projected to surpass $seventeen thousand for each worker by 2026, a 9.5% jump compared to 2025.

Currently the government is shut down because partisan disputes over tax credits which analysts predict could cause a doubling of premiums for millions of Americans.

When Will We Truly Examine Universal Healthcare?

When will we genuinely evaluate a national health insurance program in the United States? I'm convinced we're approaching that point since this situation is unsustainable.

I'm not proposing government-run medicine. I'm proposing that our already existing Medicare system – an insurance system – merely extend to cover everyone. The existing system remains intact. How our healthcare providers get paid would change. Believe me, they will adjust.

The Way Universal Coverage Would Work

A national health insurance program would require payments from both workers and companies. In comparable systems, an employee making average wages pays approximately five point three percent to their healthcare. The company pays about 13.75%.

Does this seem like a lot? Not if you contrast it to what average US resident spends. I can name dozens of businesses that are easily contributing between eight to fifteen percent of their employee wages for medical benefits. Remember that with comprehensive systems, those payments include pension plans, illness coverage, parental benefits and unemployment benefits along with funding medical services. When including those costs versus our current spending for our retirement plans, job loss coverage and paid time off, the gap narrows.

Implementation in the US

For America, a national health premium would increase our Medicare tax deduction, a system that is already in place. It ought to be income-adjusted – those at higher income levels would contribute higher amounts than those earning less. This includes both an employee and employer contribution. Similar to many federal defense, IT, welfare services and transportation services, the program could be managed to third-party administrators instead of a government office.

Benefits for Small Businesses

A national health insurance program would be a significant advantage for entrepreneurs such as my company. It would put us on a level playing field with our larger competitors that can pay for better plans. It would make management much easier (automatic payroll withholding processed similarly to social security and Medicare taxes, instead of separate payments to benefit firms and coverage administrators).

It would enable it easier to plan expenses annual expenditures, rather than enduring the complex (and ineffective) theater of bargaining with major insurers required annually each year. Due to simplification, there would exist improved comprehension about benefits among workers – as opposed to the current system which require them to interpret the complications of existing plans. Additionally there would definitely exist reduced responsibility for companies as we no longer have access to workers' medical records for weighing risks and different options.

Capitalist Perspective

I'm as pro-market as they get. However I recognize that public institutions play important functions in society, including national security to supporting essential systems. Ensuring medical coverage to all via universal healthcare enhances economic foundations. It's a better, easier system for small businesses that employ the majority of American employees and fund half of our GDP. It enables for workers to be healthier, come to work more often and increase productivity.

Addressing Concerns

Exist numerous factors I haven't covered? Of course there are. But with all the healthcare cost increases experienced in recent years, it's evident that the Affordable Care Act is not working very well. I understand that we're not a compact European nation where big changes can be readily adopted. However extending Medicare for all, even with increased taxation required, would still be a superior and less expensive approach both for controlling healthcare costs and ensuring coverage to everyone.

Time for Realistic Evaluation

As Americans, we need to tone down national pride. America's medical care isn't exceptional. We rank significantly behind many other countries in healthcare quality globally, based on major studies. Perhaps a positive aspect in this present circumstances is that we take a hard look at ourselves and agree that major reforms need to happen.