🔗 Share this article I'm a Hardcore Capitalist, But Medicare for All Is the Top Solution for American Healthcare Out-of-pocket costs. Preferred providers. Out-of-network. Concierge medical services. Personal healthcare costs. Fixed payment. Co-insurance. Benefit advisers. Coverage agents. Medical advisors. ACA. Health Maintenance Organization. Preferred Provider Organization. Exclusive Provider Organization. POS. HDHP. Health Savings Account. Flexible Spending Account. HRA. EOB. COBRA. SHOP. Single coverage. Family coverage. Premium tax credits. Confused? You should be. Who understands this complex system? Certainly not the average business owner. Nor the typical worker. Selecting the appropriate medical coverage for companies – or for households – seems like it requires advanced expertise in healthcare. The Healthcare System Is More Than Complicated, It's Expensive According to recent research, typical households spends $27,000 each year on medical coverage (up 6% compared to last year). Typical company healthcare expense is expected to surpass $17,000 for each worker in 2026, a 9.5% jump compared to 2025. Now the government 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 Seriously Consider National Health Insurance? How soon might we genuinely evaluate a national health insurance program in the United States? I have to believe we're getting closer because this can't continue. I'm not proposing government-run medicine. I'm advocating that our already existing Medicare system – an insurance system – merely extend to include all citizens. The existing system remains intact. How medical professionals receive payment would change. Trust me, they will adjust. The Way Universal Coverage Could Function Universal healthcare coverage would need contributions from both workers and companies. In similar programs, an employee earning average wages pays about five point three percent to their healthcare. Their employer pays approximately thirteen point seventy-five percent. Does this appear expensive? Unless you compare it to what the typical American pays. I can name dozens of clients that are routinely paying anywhere from 8% to 15% of payroll costs to their healthcare costs. Remember that with comprehensive systems, those payments include pension plans, sick pay, parental benefits and job loss protection in addition to funding healthcare facilities. When including these expenses compared with what we pay on retirement programs, job loss coverage and paid time off, the difference decreases. Execution in the US In the US, universal healthcare funding would raise our Medicare tax deduction, a system that is already in place. It ought to be income-adjusted – those at higher income levels would pay more than lower-income earners. This includes both an employee and employer contribution. Similar to much of our government's military, IT, social programs and infrastructure, the system should be outsourced by private contractors rather than federal agencies. Advantages for Entrepreneurs A national health insurance program represents a significant advantage for entrepreneurs like mine. It would put us on a level playing field with our larger competitors that can pay for superior coverage. It would render management much easier (automatic payroll withholding remitted like social security and healthcare taxes, rather than individual transactions to benefit firms and insurance providers). It would enable simpler to plan expenses our yearly costs, instead of enduring the complicated (and ineffective) theater of negotiating with major insurers required annually every year. Due to simplification, there would be a better understanding about benefits among workers – contrasted with the current system which require them to decipher the complexities of existing plans. Additionally there would certainly be reduced responsibility for employers since we wouldn't would be privy to workers' medical records for purposes of risk assessment and alternative plans. Capitalist Perspective 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 enhances our economy's infrastructure. It's a better, easier system for entrepreneurs which hire the majority of American employees and generate half of our GDP. It makes it possible employees to enjoy better health, come to work more often and be more productive. Addressing Concerns Are there a million considerations I haven't covered? Of course there are. Given all the healthcare cost increases experienced recently, it's evident that current healthcare legislation isn't functioning very well. I understand that we're not a small, Scandinavian country where major reforms can be readily adopted. However extending Medicare for all, even with the additional taxes that would be incurred, would remain a superior and more affordable strategy both for managing medical expenses and ensuring coverage for all citizens. Need for Honest Assessment We as Americans, must reduce our own arrogance. Our healthcare system isn't so great. The US places significantly behind numerous nations with the best healthcare globally, according to major studies. Perhaps a positive aspect in this current situation could be that we take a hard look at ourselves and acknowledge that big changes need to happen.