I'm a Committed Free-Market Advocate, Yet Medicare for All Represents the Top Hope for American Health System

Out-of-pocket costs. Preferred providers. Non-preferred providers. Concierge medical services. Personal healthcare costs. Fixed payment. Co-insurance. Benefit advisers. Insurance brokers. Healthcare consultants. Affordable Care Act. Health Maintenance Organization. PPO. EPO. Point of Service. High Deductible Health Plan. HSA. FSA. Health Reimbursement Arrangement. Explanation of Benefits. Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act. Small Business Health Options Program. Single coverage. Family coverage. Insurance subsidies.

Confused? It's understandable. Who understands this complex system? Certainly not the average business owner. Neither the average worker. Selecting the appropriate healthcare insurance for our business – or for households – appears to require demands a PhD in medical insurance.

Our Healthcare System Isn't Just Complex, It's Expensive

According to recent research, the average family spends $twenty-seven thousand annually for their health insurance (increasing by 6% from last year). Typical employer health insurance cost is expected to surpass $17,000 for each worker in 2026, a 9.5% jump from 2025.

Now the government is shut down due to partisan disputes regarding subsidies which analysts predict could cause premium increases up to 100% for millions of Americans.

When Will We Truly Examine Universal Healthcare?

When will we genuinely evaluate universal healthcare coverage here in America? I'm convinced we're approaching that point since this situation is unsustainable.

I'm not suggesting national healthcare. I'm advocating for our current Medicare program – an established insurance framework – merely extend to include all citizens. Our infrastructure remains intact. The way medical professionals get paid changes. Believe me, they will adjust.

The Way National Health Insurance Could Function

A national health insurance program would need payments from workers and companies. In similar programs, an employee making moderate income must contribute approximately five point three percent toward medical coverage. The company pays approximately thirteen point seventy-five percent.

Does this appear like a lot? Unless you compare it to what average American pays. I know dozens of clients who are easily contributing anywhere from eight to fifteen percent of their employee wages for medical benefits. Remember that with inclusive programs, these contributions also cover pension plans, illness coverage, parental benefits and job loss protection in addition to funding healthcare facilities. When including those costs compared with our current spending on retirement programs, job loss coverage and vacation benefits, the gap narrows.

Implementation in the US

In the US, universal healthcare funding would raise our Medicare tax deduction, a framework that is already in place. It ought to be means-based – those at higher income levels would pay more than lower-income earners. There would be both an employee and company payments. Similar to much of our government's defense, IT, social programs and infrastructure, the program could be managed by private contractors rather than federal agencies.

Advantages for Small Businesses

A national health insurance program would be a significant advantage for small businesses such as my company. It would put small companies in equal competition against big corporations that can pay for better plans. It would render management much easier (automatic payroll withholding remitted like social security and Medicare taxes, rather than separate payments to benefit firms and coverage administrators).

It would enable simpler to plan expenses annual expenditures, rather than going through the complex (and ineffective) theater of bargaining with the big insurance providers required annually every year. Because it's simplified, there would exist improved comprehension of coverage among workers – as opposed to existing arrangements where they have to interpret the complexities of existing plans. Additionally there would definitely exist less liability for employers as we no longer would be privy to our employees' health histories for weighing risks and alternative plans.

Free-Market Viewpoint

I'm as pro-market as possible. However I recognize that government play important functions in society, including national security to supporting essential systems. Ensuring medical coverage to all via universal healthcare strengthens our economy's infrastructure. It's a better, simpler approach for small businesses that employ more than half of American employees and fund half of our GDP. It makes it possible for workers to enjoy better health, come to work more often and increase productivity.

Considering Challenges

Are there a million considerations I haven't covered? Certainly. But with all the healthcare cost increases experienced recently, it's evident that the Affordable Care Act isn't functioning very well. And I realize that we're not a compact European nation where major reforms can be readily adopted. But expanding Medicare for all, even with increased taxation that would be incurred, would remain a better and more affordable approach both for controlling healthcare costs and ensuring coverage for all citizens.

Time for Realistic Evaluation

We as Americans, we need to tone down our own arrogance. Our healthcare system isn't exceptional. We rank significantly behind many other countries with the best healthcare globally, based on comprehensive research. Maybe one bright spot amid current situation is that we take serious examination in the mirror and acknowledge that big changes are necessary.