I'm a Hardcore Free-Market Advocate, But Universal Medicare Represents the Top Solution for US Health System

Out-of-pocket costs. Preferred providers. Out-of-network. Concierge medical services. Out-of-pocket expenses. Fixed payment. Co-insurance. Insurance consultants. Insurance brokers. Medical advisors. Affordable Care Act. Health Maintenance Organization. PPO. Exclusive Provider Organization. Point of Service. HDHP. HSA. FSA. Health Reimbursement Arrangement. EOB. COBRA. Small Business Health Options Program. Single coverage. Dependent coverage. Premium tax credits.

Baffled? You should be. Who understands this complex system? Certainly not the average entrepreneur. Neither the average worker. Choosing the right medical coverage for our business – or for households – seems like it requires advanced expertise in healthcare.

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

Based on recent research, typical households spends $27,000 annually on medical coverage (up 6% compared to last year). Typical employer health insurance cost is expected to exceed $17,000 for each worker in 2026, an increase of 9.5% compared to 2025.

Currently federal operations is shut down because partisan disputes regarding subsidies which analysts predict could cause a doubling of premiums for millions of Americans.

When Will We Truly Examine National Health Insurance?

How soon might we genuinely evaluate universal healthcare coverage here in America? I'm convinced we're getting closer because this can't continue.

I'm not proposing national healthcare. I'm advocating that our already existing Medicare program – an insurance system – simply expand to cover everyone. The existing system remains intact. How medical professionals receive payment would change. Believe me, they'll adapt.

How National Health Insurance Could Function

A national health insurance program would need contributions from both employees and employers. In comparable systems, a worker making moderate income must contribute approximately five point three percent toward medical coverage. The company pays about thirteen point seventy-five percent.

Does this appear expensive? Unless you compare that with what average US resident spends. I know dozens of clients that are easily contributing between 8% to 15% of their employee wages for medical benefits. And keep in mind that in comprehensive systems, those payments also cover retirement benefits, illness coverage, parental benefits and job loss protection along with funding medical services. When you add these expenses compared with what we pay for our retirement plans, job loss coverage and vacation benefits, the difference decreases.

Execution in the US

In the US, a national health premium would increase our Medicare tax deduction, a system that is already in place. It should be income-adjusted – those at higher income levels would pay more than lower-income earners. There would be both worker and employer contribution. And, like many federal defense, technology, social programs and transportation services, the system should be outsourced to third-party administrators rather than federal agencies.

Advantages for Small Businesses

A national health insurance program represents a huge benefit for small businesses like mine. It would place small companies in equal competition against big corporations who can afford superior coverage. It would make management significantly simpler (a payroll deduction processed similarly to retirement and healthcare taxes, rather than individual transactions to benefit firms and insurance providers).

It would make it easier for us to budget our yearly costs, rather than enduring the complicated (and fruitless) theater of bargaining with major insurers that we must do every year. Because it's simplified, there would exist improved comprehension about benefits by our employees – contrasted with existing arrangements which require them to decipher the complexities of existing plans. And there would certainly be reduced responsibility for companies since we wouldn't have access to workers' medical records for purposes of risk assessment and alternative plans.

Free-Market Viewpoint

I'm as pro-market as they get. But I've learned that government has a significant role in our lives, from providing defense to funding needed infrastructure. Providing healthcare for everyone via universal healthcare enhances economic foundations. It's a better, easier system for small businesses which hire more than half of the country's workers and fund half the economic output. It enables for workers to be healthier, come to work more often and increase productivity.

Considering Challenges

Are there a million considerations I haven't covered? Of course there are. 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 small, Scandinavian country where big changes can be readily adopted. But expanding Medicare for all, despite increased taxation that would be incurred, would remain a superior and less expensive strategy for not only managing medical expenses but providing access for all citizens.

Need for Honest Assessment

We as Americans, must tone down our own arrogance. Our healthcare system isn't exceptional. We rank significantly behind many other countries with the best healthcare in the world, according to major studies. Maybe one bright spot amid present circumstances could be that we undertake a hard look at ourselves and agree that big changes are necessary.