If not every hospital is dying to contain everything, if for example, a firm may do MRI, every medic would forward every MRI-needing patient, there.
Next, if another firm may want to do MRI, they may (probably) not found it at that town/city - unless the MRI is very busy. This is free-market.
I have thought of this example, when I read a few Newsweek (mid-1994) articles, about welfare-reform. An article, titled "Remember Cost Control" (July25,1994), contrasted USA vs. Canada and to quote a sentence: "There are more MRIs in Atlanta, than all of Canada." (That article suggested that USA is more biased to high-tech, expensive options.)
Another article, titled "With or without you" (Aug.15,1994), referred to the cost-reduction, when two hospitals in a city, merge - and there was an MRI example in it, too. To optimize the cost, then, every hospital must merge! (That may please the socialists, but it is a nightmare for a free-market.)
Therefore, I infer that, we would have the finest remedy, if we take it at the finest level. i.e: Let every resource to work in the free-market, and let them infirmaze with other infirmazer-people. An infirmazer-rep (cf. an M.D.) may tell the patient where the MRI, or CT is. It is only the taxi - not tax. And if the free-market people, as expected, may optimize the location, then even the taxi is less often needed. The (right-type of) test-center (MRI, blood-test, etc.) is next to (or, among) where it is needed, most.
To firm a (yet another) function-firm, is the firmaze way, for any needed function. It is the inherent-remedy, to avoid those duplicate-expenses, too. No need to pile a giant of a tax-state, or a giant-corp, if a taxi may win. Let people prefer, with their own.
It does not end with cost-optimization. Here are a few other bonuses, with freedom,