🔗 Share this article I'm a Dedicated Capitalist, But Medicare for All Represents the Best Solution for American Health System Deductibles. Preferred providers. Out-of-network. Concierge medical services. Personal healthcare costs. Co-payment. Shared insurance. Benefit advisers. Coverage agents. Healthcare consultants. Affordable Care Act. HMO. Preferred Provider Organization. Exclusive Provider Organization. Point of Service. High Deductible Health Plan. Health Savings Account. FSA. HRA. EOB. Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act. SHOP. Single coverage. Dependent coverage. Insurance subsidies. Confused? It's understandable. Who understands this complex system? Not the typical entrepreneur. Nor the typical worker. Selecting the appropriate medical coverage for our business – or for our families – appears to require it requires a PhD in medical insurance. Our Medical System Isn't Just Complex, It's Expensive According to a recent study, the average family spends $27,000 annually for their health insurance (increasing by 6% from last year). The average company healthcare expense is expected to surpass $17,000 for each worker by 2026, a 9.5% jump from 2025. Currently federal operations is shut down due to political disagreements over subsidies that experts say will lead to premium increases up to 100% for millions of Americans. When Will We Truly Examine National Health Insurance? How soon might we seriously consider a national health insurance program in the United States? I'm convinced we're getting closer since this can't continue. I'm not suggesting national healthcare. I'm advocating for our current Medicare program – an insurance system – simply expand to cover everyone. The existing system remains intact. The way our healthcare providers receive payment would change. Trust me, they'll adapt. The Way Universal Coverage Could Function A national health insurance program would require contributions from both employees and employers. In comparable systems, an employee earning average wages must contribute approximately five point three percent to their healthcare. Their employer pays about 13.75%. Does this appear expensive? Unless you compare it to what average American pays. I know dozens of clients that are easily contributing between eight to fifteen percent of their employee wages for medical benefits. Remember that with inclusive programs, these contributions include pension plans, sick pay, maternity leave and unemployment benefits along with funding medical services. When you add those costs versus our current spending for our retirement plans, job loss coverage and paid time off, the difference decreases. Implementation in the US In the US, a national health premium would raise existing Medicare taxes, 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. There would be both an employee and employer contribution. And, like many our government's defense, technology, welfare services and infrastructure, the program should be outsourced to third-party administrators instead of a government office. Advantages for Entrepreneurs A national health insurance program represents a huge benefit for small businesses such as my company. It would place small companies in equal competition with our larger competitors that can pay for better plans. It would make management 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 make simpler for us to budget annual expenditures, instead of enduring the complex (and ineffective) theater of bargaining with the big insurance providers required annually each year. Due to simplification, there would exist a better understanding about benefits by our employees – contrasted with the current system which require them to interpret the complexities of existing plans. And there would certainly be less liability for employers since we wouldn't have access to our employees' health histories for purposes of risk assessment and alternative plans. Free-Market Viewpoint I'm as pro-market as possible. However I recognize that government play important functions in our lives, including national security to funding essential systems. Ensuring medical coverage to all through a national insurance system enhances economic foundations. It represents superior, easier system for small businesses that employ more than half of American employees and generate half of our GDP. It makes it possible employees to enjoy better health, come to work more often and be more productive. Addressing Concerns Are there a million considerations I'm not addressing? Certainly. But with all the healthcare cost increases experienced in recent years, it's clear that the Affordable Care Act is not working effectively. I understand that America isn't a compact European nation where major reforms are easier to implement. However extending universal Medicare, even with the additional taxes required, would remain a superior and more affordable strategy both for managing medical expenses and ensuring coverage to everyone. Need for Honest Assessment As Americans, we need to tone down national pride. America's medical care isn't exceptional. The US places well below many other countries in healthcare quality globally, according to comprehensive research. Perhaps a positive aspect amid current situation is that we take serious examination in the mirror and agree that big changes are necessary.