"The IRS doesn't allow patients to use their tax-deductible Health Savings Accounts to pay direct primary care doctors. "

Trust your care to your IRS agent. She has all the ejakashun to decide for you.

I am ancient enough to remember when that was the way doctors used to operate. AND they made house calls. The lure of getting "free" hospital care, which eventually expanded into the quicksand horror that we have today has vividly illustrated why government controlled or regulated anything doesn't work and can never work.

Isn't it amazing that when one lets the market compensate, everyone is better off?

Great videos on healthcare being treated by free market capitalists which lowers costs and improves care. Follow other suggested videos and you will find a woman doctor who has built her business on cash and remaining debt free, makes more money and has more time for patients and her family.
Unfortunately when the state finds out that this is draining money away from their scheme they will outlaw it. Twenty years ago I was working in Sacramento and heard a radio interview with a doctor who had done this, lowered his cost of repairing a broken bone from $1500.00 to $150.00. He was treating more people and making more money than when he was involved with the state. Unfortunately other doctors complained about it, forced him back into the system and his prices went back up. I suspect the same thing will happen where ever people try to devise a way to eliminate the state from their practice. Will be interesting to see if free market survives this plan to kill it.

RINOs should be careful. The next revolution, possibly triggered by Healthcare killing us, might be more 1794 French than 1776 American. I think America could deliver one, or more, Robespierres.

The big issue for the socialists will be that the people who can pay for their own healthcare will be able to get better care than the people who want others to pay for it.

Anything that makes the collectivist system look bad will eventually be forbidden.

I joined a DPC and purchased a catastrophic plan to cover anything above what the DPC didn't cover.

I got fined at the end of the year $600 for not having "health insurance"..

That made me angry.

for the past 3 years I have gone to a primary care medical facility. my cost $79.00 per month. all exams regardless of the number of times I chose to call for an appointment which is normally within two days or sooner if necessary are taken care of by the payment. almost all meds are at the wholesale price. almost all blood tests for my yearly physical are taken care of.. bottom line at least two other groups have opened in grand junction.
the other thing I like is that for the first time in years I have a doctor who has a devotion to his medical practice and the well being of his patients and takes his time with each of us.
to one and all see if you have the same type of business open where you live.

It’s sad that we have articles like this saying, “Here’s an exciting new concept: People pay for services and providers go outside their industry’s cartel and just try to win business honestly.” Sadly, this basic concept is something special enough to merit an article.

I agree with this article completely.

One small nit: I think it's wrong about having a subscription bars you contributing to an HSA. You just need an HSA-compatible insurance plan to contribute to an HSA. I max out HSA every year, never taking any out. At the same time, I buy most of my family's healthcare from providers completely unaffiliated with the insurance plan, although not by subscription. Even if it were by subscription, I think I'd be eligible for an HSA as long as I maintain the HSA-compatible plan.
I also don't think it's right that private pay patients can't use an HSA. I'm private pay and have never heard that, although I've never used the HSA. I just keep it all invested. You can use it for things like acupuncture. You used to be able to buy OTCs meds with it. I'd be shocked if you can't use it for private pay care.

False dichotomy. You risk unintended consequences either way and always, don’t you?

First thought was free market and lo- and behold the web site. Second the AMA will get in the way but how, see freedomforall's comment.

Yet there are consequences to not intervening, as in both sides of all decisions. I happen to conclude the consequences of not allowing gov’t intervention are, on balance, much more beneficial

The idea even preceded the two decade old book by Dr Jane Orient (Tucson, AZ) entitled "The Doctor is NOT In."