Employers should get the benefit of healthy employees, but not incur the cost?

Employers are presumably paying taxes, so funding it through taxes is not letting them off the hook. Additionally, what about people who are unemployed (which is now >20% by U6 in the US) or work in jobs that don't offer healthcare? And what if you get fired? Or you want to change jobs but have a health condition which means you'll be in trouble without health insurance? Or your employer changes health insurance providers without consulting you and now your coverage or doctor has changed? These aren't hypotheticals, they're the daily reality of millions of people in the US.

I don't understand this weirdly business-centric view that folks from the US have on the topic of healthcare. Surely a more productive view is that it is the best interests of society that we keep our fellow citizens as healthy as possible? Even ignoring the ethical arguments (which should be more than enough), healthy citizens make healthy workers and reduce long-term healthcare costs caused by preventable illnesses.

Health insurance shouldn't depend on work or the size of your employer, period. Not only should employers have healthy employees, but the applicants should be too.

Separation of healthcare and employers also removes a huge barrier to entrepreneurship.

The entire notion of employer-provided healthcare is one of the reasons the US scores so low on economic freedom studies.

Employers get a lot of benefits from a well-functioning society: Roads, Healthy employees, Peace and Law.

As long as we make sure they pay sufficient taxes for those benefits, it seems like the best deal for everyone.

Not sure why you immediately jump to a negative take. Insurance should be independent of employers, available at reasonable cost to anyone.

It's an absurdist notion that I should be obligated to work for specific-size companies to ensure I can afford the health and welfare of my family.

That model applies to livestock, not humans.