As a Dedicated Capitalist, Yet Medicare for All Represents the Optimal Solution for US Healthcare

Deductibles. In-network. Out-of-network. Premium health services. Personal healthcare costs. Fixed payment. Shared insurance. Benefit advisers. Insurance brokers. Healthcare consultants. Affordable Care Act. Health Maintenance Organization. Preferred Provider Organization. Exclusive Provider Organization. POS. HDHP. Health Savings Account. FSA. Health Reimbursement Arrangement. Explanation of Benefits. COBRA. SHOP. Individual coverage. Family coverage. Premium tax credits.

Baffled? You should be. Who understands this complex system? Certainly not the average business owner. Neither the average employee. Selecting the right medical coverage for our business – or for households – seems like demands a PhD in healthcare.

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

According to a recent study, the average family spends $27,000 each year for their health insurance (up 6% from last year). Typical company healthcare expense is projected to surpass $17,000 for each worker in 2026, an increase of 9.5% from 2025.

Currently federal operations has ceased functioning due to political disagreements regarding subsidies that experts say could cause a doubling of premiums for millions of Americans.

When Might We Seriously Consider National Health Insurance?

How soon might we seriously consider universal healthcare coverage in the United States? I'm convinced we're getting closer because this can't continue.

I'm not suggesting national healthcare. I'm advocating that our already existing Medicare system – an insurance system – merely extend to include all citizens. The existing system doesn't change. How our healthcare providers get paid would change. Believe me, they'll adapt.

The Way National Health Insurance Could Function

A national health insurance program would require contributions from employees and employers. In comparable systems, a worker earning average wages must contribute approximately 5.3% to their healthcare. The company pays approximately thirteen point seventy-five percent.

Does this appear expensive? Not if you contrast it to what average American pays. I know multiple clients who are routinely paying anywhere from eight to fifteen percent of payroll costs for medical benefits. Remember that with comprehensive systems, those payments also cover retirement benefits, illness coverage, maternity leave and unemployment benefits in addition to supporting healthcare facilities. When you add these expenses versus what we pay on retirement programs, unemployment insurance and paid time off, the difference decreases.

Execution for America

For America, a national health premium would raise our Medicare tax deduction, a framework already established. It should be income-adjusted – wealthier individuals would pay more than those earning less. There would be both worker and company payments. Similar to much of our government's defense, technology, social programs and infrastructure, the system could be managed by private contractors instead of federal agencies.

Advantages for Entrepreneurs

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 against big corporations who can afford better plans. It would make management much easier (a payroll deduction processed similarly to social security and Medicare taxes, instead of individual transactions to benefit firms and insurance providers).

It would make it easier for us to budget annual expenditures, instead of going through the complicated (and ineffective) process of bargaining with the big insurance providers that we must do every year. Due to simplification, there would exist a better understanding about benefits among workers – as opposed to the current system where they have to interpret the complexities of existing plans. Additionally there would definitely exist reduced responsibility for employers as we no longer have access to our employees' health histories for weighing risks and different options.

Capitalist Perspective

I'm as pro-market as they get. However I recognize that government play important functions in our lives, including national security to funding needed infrastructure. Providing healthcare for everyone through a national insurance system strengthens economic foundations. It's a better, simpler approach for entrepreneurs that employ the majority of American employees and generate half the economic output. It makes it possible employees to enjoy better health, have better attendance and be more productive.

Considering Challenges

Exist numerous factors I'm not addressing? Certainly. But with rising medical expenses we've seen recently, it's evident that the Affordable Care Act isn't functioning very well. I understand that America isn't a compact European nation where major reforms can be readily adopted. But expanding Medicare for all, even with the additional taxes that would be incurred, would still be a superior and more affordable strategy both for controlling healthcare costs but providing access for all citizens.

Need for Honest Assessment

As Americans, must tone down our own arrogance. Our healthcare system isn't exceptional. We rank well below many other countries with the best healthcare globally, based on major studies. Maybe one positive aspect amid current situation could be that we undertake serious examination at ourselves and agree that major reforms are necessary.