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

Out-of-pocket costs. Preferred providers. Non-preferred providers. Premium health services. Personal healthcare costs. Fixed payment. Shared insurance. Insurance consultants. Insurance brokers. Medical advisors. ACA. Health Maintenance Organization. Preferred Provider Organization. EPO. Point of Service. HDHP. Health Savings Account. Flexible Spending Account. HRA. Explanation of Benefits. Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act. SHOP. Single coverage. Family coverage. Insurance subsidies.

Confused? It's understandable. Who comprehends this complex system? Not the typical entrepreneur. Nor the typical worker. Choosing the right healthcare insurance for companies – or for households – appears to require demands a PhD in healthcare.

The Medical System Is More Than Complicated, It's Costly

Based on recent research, typical households pays $27,000 annually on medical coverage (increasing by 6% from last year). The average employer health insurance cost is expected to exceed $seventeen thousand per employee by 2026, a 9.5% jump compared to 2025.

Now the government has ceased functioning due to political disagreements over subsidies which analysts predict could cause premium increases up to 100% for numerous US citizens.

When Might We Seriously Consider Universal Healthcare?

When will we genuinely evaluate a national health insurance program here in America? I'm convinced we're approaching that point because this can't continue.

I'm not proposing national healthcare. I'm advocating that our already existing Medicare system – an established insurance framework – merely extend to cover everyone. The existing system remains intact. How medical professionals get paid would change. Believe me, they will adjust.

The Way Universal Coverage Could Function

Universal healthcare coverage would need contributions from employees and employers. In comparable systems, a worker making average wages pays approximately 5.3% toward medical coverage. The company pays about thirteen point seventy-five percent.

Does this appear expensive? Not if you compare that with what the typical American pays. I know multiple clients that are easily contributing anywhere from eight to fifteen percent of payroll costs for medical benefits. Remember that in comprehensive systems, these contributions include pension plans, illness coverage, maternity leave and job loss protection in addition to funding healthcare facilities. When including those costs versus what we pay on retirement programs, job loss coverage and vacation benefits, the gap narrows.

Execution in the US

In the US, a national health premium would increase our Medicare tax deduction, a system that is already in place. It ought to be means-based – those at higher income levels would contribute higher amounts than those earning less. There would be both worker and employer contribution. Similar to much of federal defense, IT, social programs and transportation services, the system should be outsourced by private contractors rather than a government office.

Benefits for Entrepreneurs

A national health insurance program represents a significant advantage for small businesses like mine. It would place small companies in equal competition against big corporations who can afford better plans. It would render administration significantly simpler (automatic payroll withholding remitted like social security and Medicare taxes, instead of individual transactions to benefit firms and coverage administrators).

It would enable simpler for us to budget annual expenditures, instead of enduring the complicated (and ineffective) theater of bargaining with major insurers that we must do every year. Because it's simplified, there would be a better understanding of coverage among workers – as opposed to the current system where they have to interpret the complexities of current options. Additionally there would certainly be reduced responsibility for employers as we no longer would be privy to workers' health histories for risk assessment and alternative plans.

Free-Market Viewpoint

I'm as capitalist as they get. But I've learned that government play important functions in our lives, including national security to funding needed infrastructure. Providing healthcare for everyone via universal healthcare enhances our economy's infrastructure. It's a better, easier system for entrepreneurs which hire more than half of American employees and generate half of our GDP. It enables for workers to enjoy better health, come to work more often and increase productivity.

Considering Challenges

Exist numerous factors I haven't covered? Certainly. Given all the healthcare cost increases experienced recently, it's clear that the Affordable Care Act is not working very well. And I realize that America isn't a small, Scandinavian country where big changes can be readily adopted. But expanding universal Medicare, despite increased taxation that would be incurred, would still be a superior and more affordable approach for not only controlling healthcare costs but providing access to everyone.

Need for Realistic Evaluation

We as Americans, we need to reduce national pride. Our healthcare system isn't exceptional. The US places well below many other countries in healthcare quality globally, according to major studies. Maybe one bright spot amid current situation could be that we take serious examination in the mirror and acknowledge that major reforms are necessary.