Restoring The Patient-Doctor Relationship
Unencumbered by third party intervention, Fee-For-Service describes the physician-patient relationship as one that is based on the principle of mutually beneficial exchange of value between the physician and patient.
“The market directs the individual’s activities into those channels in which he best serves the wants of his fellow men. There is in the operation of the market no compulsion and coercion.” – Ludwig Von Mises
To some, the idea of receiving healthcare services off a menu with transparent prices is unethical, but this misconception roots from the idea that exchange is exploitative as opposed to a consensual model that provides mutual benefits, leaving both parties better off than they were before. Kalispell healthcare entrepreneur Jack Brown’s latest column explains how a return to a fee-for-service model can help to solve many of the problems seen in today’s healthcare system.
“The once transparent, agreed-upon fees between patient and physician have all but disappeared. Today, payment is no longer agreed to by the patient and the physician. Payment is primarily negotiated between insurers and other payers and not available for patients to see.”
“By undermining the direct physician/patient relationship, bureaucrats have created the very moral hazards they supposedly try to cure; the moral hazard described by the term Fee-For-Service, which has been corrupted by the third-party payer relationship.”
“Unencumbered by third party intervention, Fee-For-Service describes the physician-patient relationship as one that is based on the principle of mutually beneficial exchange of value between the physician and patient.”
“As we remove the moral hazards created by third party payers, we may find that Fee-For-Service in medicine can be both good medical practice and moral.”
You can read the entire article here.
Montana Cities are the Problem, & the Solution to Housing
Frontier’s guest author Daniel Woislaw, an attorney with the Pacific Legal Foundation, wrote a column explaining how cities can increase affordable housing by removing locally imposed barriers that raise the cost of housing. Be sure to check out the entire article.
“Excessive impact fees, exclusionary zoning, and myriad other government-imposed obstacles to development continue to stifle the supply of housing in Montana and cities across the country. Until local or state governments begin relaxing these restrictions, residents of those cities and states will continue to feel the pinch of increased housing prices with precious little relief—particularly during times of heightened demand.”
Montana Leads on 2022 Tax Climate
The Tax Foundation released their 2022 State Business Tax Climate Index. Montana is among some most favorable tax environments, coming in at 5th place.
Our Take:The research is clear that a state with a good tax environment will be more competitive at attracting new businesses, while also being more effective at generating economic and employment growth. Montana’s tax policy is one of the reasons why our state was named the best state to open a small business in 2021. While we should celebrate our state’s pro-business environment, the report also demonstrates that there are areas in which Montana has room to improve, which could potentially enable Montana to move to first place.
Parental Participation in Education
A poll conducted by American political analyst and pollster Scott Rassmusen found overwhelming support for parents playing a significant role in their child’s education.
Parents have a fundamental right to direct their child’s education. Parents have first hand knowledge as to what type of learning their child needs, but under today’s one-size-fits-all education model parents have few options at meaningfully participating in their child’s education.