If the US intends to keep doing private health insurance-based healthcare (as opposed to single payer, universal healthcare, or a medicare-advantage like model)

If the US intends to keep doing private health insurance-based healthcare (as opposed to single payer, universal healthcare, or a medicare-advantage like model) then they need to seriously evaluate if employer linked health insurance is a healthy model. The ACA ("Obamacare") Marketplace was the right model, but it failed. It failed largely because insurance consumers were largely put into two "buckets" those with employer provided insurance (more wealthy; more healthy; more profitable) and those without employer provided health insurance (less wealthy/startups/unemployed/sicker/less profitable/etc). To use an analogy, imagine for a second what would happen if everyone got their car insurance through their employer. You'd expect car insurance for the employed to get a little cheaper, and the car insurance for those buying it independently to shoot through the roof. If everyone purchased their insurance privately, and employers could only provide money for that via the pre-existing HSA accounts (tax free), then everyone would get to pay the same rates. In that scenario the unemployed would pay the same as federal employees. Why is scrapping employer provided health insurance never discussed in the US healthcare debate? We already have the mechanism for employers to pay for employee's health insurance tax free (HSAs), all we need to do is ban employers from picking an employee's insurance company for them. Everyone always talks about competition in the US. But how can there be competition when an employer can dictate just one or two different insurance companies their employees are forced to take? And only one or two tiers of care?