Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (46511)	10/15/2010 7:30:56 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

I don't object to comparing per capita, I just wasn't doing it initially. Also generally anything driving the total cost up (except the increase in population, or things that drive an increase in population), also drive the per-capita cost up. But then I did go ahead and consider per-capita costs ----- "Real cost per capita (considering all Americans, whether or not they are currently covered), would probably go up, because of the reasons mentioned above, and also because more covered people creates more demand for medical services, and more cost insulation for those services." Message 26882795