Letters to the Editor

Legislation protects seller's market

After a recent dental visit, my dentist tells me I need four crowns. The breakdown: 1) $7,008 (total amount

before insurance), 2) $3,479 (amount the insurance picks up), and 3) $3,529 (amount I owe after insurance). To break this down further, after insurance, my cost for the first two crowns factors out to be $888.50 each.

With the exception that nearly one hundred percent of North Carolinians and Americans do not have the same option available to them that I have, why would I have this work done here, in the United States, when I can get the same thing done in France, which I fully intend to do, for $1,200, total (after national health insurance there, this factors out to $300 a crown).

Regardless of whether it is within North Carolina’s General Assembly or the U.S. Congress, including the ACA (the Democrat / Obama plan) or AHCA (the Republican / Ryan / Trump plan), every purported effort to deliver the type of healthcare reform that actually reduces price (not cost) is intentionally undermined by those who, through protective legislation benefiting those profiting from the free market, only manage to assist in driving the price of medical costs and healthcare coverage higher.

"Big government" doesn’t drive the “cost” of healthcare up through over-regulation. That's done through legislation that protects the free market, which only makes things so expensive any potential for real competition is eliminated.

If the free market really reduces price, why cannot Americans buy a $300 crown?

John Rhodes