I'm a Hardcore Capitalist, Yet Medicare for All Is the Optimal Solution for American Health System

Deductibles. In-network. Out-of-network. Concierge medical services. Out-of-pocket expenses. Fixed payment. Shared insurance. Benefit advisers. Insurance brokers. Medical advisors. Affordable Care Act. HMO. PPO. Exclusive Provider Organization. Point of Service. HDHP. HSA. FSA. Health Reimbursement Arrangement. Explanation of Benefits. Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act. Small Business Health Options Program. Individual coverage. Family coverage. Insurance subsidies.

Confused? You should be. Who comprehends this complex system? Certainly not the average business owner. Neither the average worker. Choosing the right healthcare insurance for our business – or for households – appears to require demands a PhD in medical insurance.

The Medical System Isn't Just Complex, It Is Costly

According to a recent study, typical households pays $twenty-seven thousand annually on medical coverage (up 6% compared to last year). The average company healthcare expense is expected to exceed $17,000 for each worker in 2026, a 9.5% jump from 2025.

Currently the government has ceased functioning because political disagreements over subsidies that experts say could cause a doubling of premiums for numerous US citizens.

When Will We Truly Examine National Health Insurance?

How soon might we genuinely evaluate universal healthcare coverage in the United States? I have to believe we're approaching that point because this situation is unsustainable.

I'm not suggesting national healthcare. I'm proposing for our current Medicare system – an established insurance framework – merely extend to cover everyone. The existing system remains intact. The way medical professionals get paid changes. Believe me, they'll adapt.

How Universal Coverage Would Work

A national health insurance program would require payments from both workers and companies. In similar programs, a worker earning moderate income must contribute about 5.3% toward medical coverage. The company must contribute about 13.75%.

Does this appear like a lot? Unless you contrast it to what average US resident spends. I know dozens of businesses who are routinely paying anywhere from eight to fifteen percent of payroll costs to their healthcare costs. And keep in mind that in comprehensive systems, these contributions also cover pension plans, illness coverage, parental benefits and job loss protection in addition to supporting healthcare facilities. When including those costs versus our current spending on retirement programs, job loss coverage and paid time off, the gap narrows.

Implementation in the US

In the US, a national health premium would raise our Medicare tax deduction, a system that is already in place. It ought to be means-based – wealthier individuals would contribute higher amounts than those earning less. There would be both worker and employer contribution. And, like many our government's military, technology, social programs and infrastructure, the system could be managed by private contractors instead of a government office.

Advantages for Small Businesses

A national health insurance program represents a huge benefit for entrepreneurs such as my company. It would put us on a level playing field with our larger competitors that can pay for superior coverage. It would make administration significantly simpler (a payroll deduction processed similarly to retirement and healthcare taxes, instead of individual transactions to benefit firms and insurance providers).

It would make it easier to plan expenses our yearly costs, rather than going through the complex (and ineffective) theater of negotiating with the big insurance providers that we must do each year. Due to simplification, there would be improved comprehension about benefits by our employees – contrasted with existing arrangements which require them to decipher the complexities of existing plans. Additionally there would definitely exist reduced responsibility for companies as we no longer would be privy to workers' medical records for weighing risks and different options.

Free-Market Viewpoint

I'm as capitalist as possible. But I've learned that government play important functions in society, including national security to supporting needed infrastructure. Providing healthcare to all via universal healthcare enhances economic foundations. It's a better, simpler approach for small businesses which hire more than half of American employees and fund half of our GDP. It enables employees to be healthier, have better attendance and increase productivity.

Addressing Concerns

Exist a million considerations I'm not addressing? Certainly. Given rising medical expenses experienced in recent years, it's clear that current healthcare legislation is not working very well. I understand that America isn't a compact European nation where major reforms are easier to implement. However extending universal Medicare, despite increased taxation required, would still be a superior and less expensive approach for not only managing medical expenses but providing access to everyone.

Need for Realistic Evaluation

As Americans, must tone down our own arrogance. Our healthcare system isn't exceptional. The US places significantly behind many other countries in healthcare quality in the world, based on major studies. Perhaps a bright spot amid current situation could be that we undertake a hard look at ourselves and acknowledge that big changes are necessary.