As a Committed Capitalist, But Medicare for All Is the Optimal Solution for American Health System

Deductibles. Preferred providers. Non-preferred providers. Premium health services. Personal healthcare costs. Co-payment. Shared insurance. Benefit advisers. Coverage agents. Medical advisors. ACA. HMO. PPO. EPO. POS. High Deductible Health Plan. Health Savings Account. FSA. Health Reimbursement Arrangement. Explanation of Benefits. COBRA. Small Business Health Options Program. Single coverage. Dependent coverage. Insurance subsidies.

Confused? It's understandable. Who understands this complex system? Not the typical business owner. Nor the typical employee. Selecting the right medical coverage for our business – or for households – appears to require it requires a PhD in medical insurance.

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

Based on a recent study, typical households pays $twenty-seven thousand each year for their health insurance (increasing by 6% compared to last year). The average employer health insurance cost is expected to surpass $seventeen thousand per employee in 2026, a 9.5% jump compared to 2025.

Currently federal operations has ceased functioning due to political disagreements over subsidies which analysts predict could cause a doubling of premiums for millions of Americans.

When Might We Truly Examine Universal Healthcare?

How soon might we seriously consider universal healthcare coverage here in America? I'm convinced we're getting closer since this can't continue.

I'm not proposing government-run medicine. I'm advocating that our already existing Medicare system – an insurance system – simply expand to include all citizens. The existing system remains intact. The way medical professionals get paid changes. Believe me, they will adjust.

The Way Universal Coverage Could Function

A national health insurance program would need payments from both workers and companies. In comparable systems, an employee making moderate income must contribute about five point three percent toward medical coverage. Their employer must contribute about thirteen point seventy-five percent.

Does this seem like a lot? Unless you contrast that with what average US resident spends. I can name dozens of clients who are easily contributing anywhere from 8% to 15% of their employee wages for medical benefits. And keep in mind that in comprehensive systems, those payments include pension plans, illness coverage, maternity leave and unemployment benefits along with supporting medical services. When you add these expenses versus our current spending on retirement programs, unemployment insurance and paid time off, the difference decreases.

Implementation for America

In the US, a national health premium would raise our Medicare tax deduction, a framework that is already in place. It should be means-based – wealthier individuals would contribute higher amounts than lower-income earners. This includes both worker and employer contribution. And, like many federal military, technology, social programs and transportation services, the system should be outsourced by private contractors instead of federal agencies.

Advantages for Small Businesses

A national health insurance program represents a significant advantage for entrepreneurs such as my company. It would put us on a level playing field against big corporations who can afford superior coverage. It would render management significantly simpler (automatic payroll withholding remitted like retirement and Medicare taxes, rather than individual transactions to benefit firms and coverage administrators).

It would make simpler for us to budget annual expenditures, instead of enduring the complex (and ineffective) theater of negotiating with the big insurance providers that we must do every year. Because it's simplified, there would exist a better understanding about benefits among workers – as opposed to the current system where they have to decipher the complexities of existing plans. Additionally there would definitely exist reduced responsibility for companies as we no longer have access to workers' medical records for purposes of weighing risks and alternative plans.

Free-Market Viewpoint

I'm as pro-market as they get. However I recognize that government has a significant role in society, including national security to funding needed infrastructure. Providing healthcare for everyone through a national insurance system strengthens economic foundations. It represents superior, easier system for entrepreneurs which hire more than half of American employees and generate half the economic output. It enables for workers to enjoy better health, have better attendance and be more productive.

Considering Challenges

Exist a million considerations I haven't covered? Of course there are. But with rising medical expenses experienced in recent years, it's evident that current healthcare legislation isn't functioning very well. And I realize that America isn't a compact European nation where major reforms can be readily adopted. But expanding universal Medicare, despite increased taxation required, would remain a superior and more affordable strategy for not only controlling healthcare costs and ensuring coverage for all citizens.

Time for Realistic Evaluation

As Americans, we need to reduce our own arrogance. America's medical care isn't so great. We rank well below numerous nations with the best healthcare in the world, according to comprehensive research. Perhaps a bright spot amid present circumstances is that we undertake a hard look at ourselves and agree that major reforms are necessary.