Universal Health Care Funding in the U.S. and Tax Considerations

Universal health care has become a focal point of national debate, particularly in the United States. One of the most pressing questions is: where will the necessary funds originate? While other countries have successfully implemented universal health care systems, the U.S. faces unique challenges and resistance from those benefiting from the current system.

Many believe that universal health care can be funded much like it is in other countries—through tax revenue. The dismantling of profit-making insurance companies could lead to significant cost savings that would feed into a universal health care system. For instance, simple as it might seem, asking the 35 more compassionate countries worldwide could provide valuable insights into the effective funding of such systems at a fraction of the cost.

Interestingly, the U.S. is already allocating substantial tax money to healthcare, with figures indicating that healthcare spending has surpassed that of high-tech industries since around 2015. This means that the financial returns on investment in healthcare far exceed those in high-tech sectors. However, the current system heavily favors insurers who profit from high-cost healthcare, often resulting in some of the worst healthcare outcomes in developed nations. Therefore, the profits from human misery must be cut out to make universal health care a viable option.

Without the profits from private insurance companies, the U.S. could already afford universal health care without increasing taxes for the general public. Instead, the burden might shift from middle and lower-income brackets to the wealthiest income brackets, where a smaller tax increase would be more manageable. This tax increase would be significantly less than the current premiums that are not only expensive but also do not cover everything, are not portable, require five-figure deductibles and copays, and underperform in terms of patient longevity, maternal and newborn death rates, and the treatment of chronic conditions.

Additionally, eliminating insurance company premiums would result in immediate cost savings. Under a government-mandated single-payer system, like in Canada, the majority of individuals would experience a net savings. The loss of profit from the system would mean no more combined premiums paid by employers and employees, and presumably, the increase in taxes would be minimized for most taxpayers. For individuals who currently pay their own premiums, the savings would be even more substantial and obvious.

Another important factor to consider is the taxation of billionaires. High-net-worth individuals have benefited greatly from the current profit-driven healthcare system. By taxing these individuals, the financing of a universal health care system would become more equitable and feasible. This shift would not only fund the system but also address the underlying inequities in healthcare access and affordability.

In conclusion, the funding for universal health care in the U.S. can be achieved through a combination of eliminating unnecessary profits from insurance companies, reallocating existing tax dollars, and potentially increasing taxes on the wealthiest individuals. By adopting a more compassionate and equitable approach, the U.S. can ensure that all citizens have access to quality healthcare without the burden of expensive private insurance.