Healthcare Innovation & Cost Control

Globally, many on the left support for single-payer government healthcare systems. After all, everybody deserves healthcare. On the right, the preference is for personally-owned, optional, healthcare insurance accounts or even pay-as-you-go healthcare.

Both approaches have fundamental issues. Government-subsidized (or even third-party paid) services in any industry inevitably lead to price inflation, rationing or both. In addition, the lack of a profit motive kills innovation – sacrificing future patients for present savings. Meanwhile, purely private systems will deprive people of life.

In our attempts to split the difference we end up highly bureaucratic systems that ration care, inhibit innovation and watch helplessly as costs steadily rise.

The Potentialist Party understands this problem. That is why we support Private Treatment Accounts. The concept is simple. If a patient receives a diagnosis, his or her Private Treatment Account is funded based on that diagnosis. The funding is set at 90% of the median cost of the diagnosis in their area – based on a 5-year moving average. If the patient spends more than the funds in their account, they must make up the difference; they could use private insurance to do so.

But if they spend less, they keep the difference.

The way this system is set up, there is constant price and quality pressure. Customers have an incentive to shop for the best and highest quality outcomes. These pressures constantly push the costs downwards while ensuring quality is not sacrificed.

Of course, the system has built in systems to protect against fraud, exploitation and rapidly changing emergency diagnoses.

To learn more, see Private Treatment Accounts.