Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Unfortunately, liberals think that the only way to care for the weak, old, poor and lame, is by huge government programs and handouts.
So is it Liberals that created multi billion dollar (govt. charity) programs that propped up the real estate industry for years?
& was it (only) liberals who instituted the multi-billion dollar bailout programs for the banks?....& the 8K tax credit which is bailing out the in-effecient (& parasitic) homebuilders?
"Liberals" & so called "Conservatives" are both at fault (& both hypocrites). If the "American Idol loving" electorate would choose a boring bean counter for President instead of nominating a bunch of rock stars we'd be better off.
[quote=hound 109;11954068"Liberals" & so called "Conservatives" are both at fault (& both hypocrites). If the "American Idol loving" electorate would choose a boring bean counter for President instead of nominating a bunch of rock stars we'd be better off.[/quote]
You got it! Remember Ross Perot? He made sense and it worked against him. He was brilliant enough to dumb it down so even people like me could understand what the heck was going on.
Infant mortality is concerning worldwide, there's no doubt about that. It's necessary to point out however that The United States has the world's third largest population according to the United Nations 2009 Population Division. Only India and China have more people, and their IMR is 55.0/1000 and 23.0/1000, respectively. We have the largest population of all countries in the G8 and Russia leads the infant mortality rate in the G8 at 16.6/1000 ... so your claim that the US is "by far" the highest was incorrect.
Here's the population figures for the G8 countries as of 7/09:
We have over twice the population of the next closest country in size, which is Russia. (I was actually surprised to learn this, as I thought Japan would be number 2). We have more pregnancies in the U.S. than any other country each year. More pregnancies = higher mortality rate. There are a couple other reasons on top of that why the US mortality rate is so high, though.
The World Health Organization defines live birth as "any born human being who demonstrates independent signs of life including breathing, voluntary muscle movement, or heartbeat". The United States is one of very few countries however who use a different definition for live birth. The U.S. counts an infant that exhibits ANY sign of life as being "live", no matter the month of gestation or size. So a five-month old fetus born prematurely and kept alive with a respirator until it's clear that it stands no chance of life is considered a live birth here. Many other countries consider a premature birth a miscarriage, and not a live birth. This skews numbers even further. Because of our advanced medicine which allows the progression of pregnancies that would naturally terminate in many other countries, the United States has a much higher rate of high-risk and premature births than its European counterparts, so our numbers are much higher - and this causes an alarmingly high number on the statistics chart. Because many other countries only count as live births cases where an infant breathes on its own at birth, it results in a lower IMR number.
As another example of how the numbers can be interpreted, look at the mortality rate in China - a whopping 23 out of 1000. Once you look into that number further though, you discover that the selective infanticide of female babies plays a large part of that figure.
I'm not downplaying the information that you posted - but I encourage people to research further, rather than take numbers thrown out at face-value and come to the conclusion that the U.S. is negligent in caring for its' newborns. Once you scratch below the surface you can find that there is a lot of disparity in the figures we hear. UNICEF has apparently pled with countries to adopt a singular system of reporting, but to no avail ... so I don't know if we'll really ever get factual data on the world's mortality rates.
I can understand that there is a lack of uniformity per terminology and stats per infant mortality across the world. I still think the concern is that we are lacking at all, considering that we are at the very top per GDP. An aside...are we talking numbers or percentage? I was referring to percentage, per infant mortality RATE, and my understanding is that that stat is commonly referred to as a %.
Well, however you put it, the main concern is the red flag that the stat is connected to, in that so many Americans either cannot afford proper health care or lack access to the same, in a G8 country in which you would presume wealth trickles down to health for the population as a whole. The concern would also involve the poor educational standards/testing of our children, which is also far lower than the first place showing of our GDP, along with many basic issues that are basic quality of life indicators.
The gist is that the wealth in our country has become FAR more skewed towards the top, and that our poor, and increasingly blue-collar and middle-class, are losing ground per those basic Q of L indicators, with that disparity approaching the gulf of rich and poor seen in what most would consider third world countries.
per the current recession, these issues are coming to a fore. Just yesterday yahoo showcased an article stating that food banks are overwhelmed across the nation, with many seniors and formerly middle-class folks who never availed themselves of such being seen in the same. I personally see it every day even here in Austin, one of the wealthier metros in the US. I started volunteering for a few recently, and I'm shocked at how many needy families/individuals are out here. I'm also starting to notice far more folks standing in intersections with signs looking for help.
Times are bad all over, regardless of how you slice it, what stats you use, or what political persuasion you go by. I'm frankly not sure where we are headed as a country 10-20 years out. Even per relocation moves, people just seem to be running away from hard-pressed cities/metros. If it gets any worse, there will be no place here(US) to run to or hide from anyway.
Reps for you! I can remember when this was taken care of by individuals and the churches and other such institutions out of true compassion. It does not HAVE to be the government doing it. Making it that is more about making everyone else live by YOUR moral standards and making them make the decisions that YOU think they should, than it is about true compassion. In fact, it's just about the furthest thing from true compassion that I can imagine, especially since, also having worked for the government, I know just how inefficient governmental operations can be (and how people who ARE efficient in government positions are penalized for being more efficient than their peers, funds being transferred from the more efficient departments to those that waste money so that the legislature won't reduce funding in the next period) - it's all about control of the money and behavior of others, not about helping the disadvantaged.
Of course, I'm also of the "Give a man a fish, you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, and you feed him for a lifetime" school. If we're going to help the disadvantaged, financial support for living expenses should be limited to those who truly cannot support themselves for serious reasons. All others should be financially supported in getting themselves self-supporting. It's the moral and compassionate thing to do, not keeping them down by supporting them so that we can feel good about ourselves (which is the other motivation that has NOTHING to do with the disadvantaged and everything to do with the person telling themselves how compassionate they are).
If you put your time on the line volunteering at any of the non-profit agencies available, more power to you. That's how it should be, not the government throwing money (inefficiently) at the problem. We've all seen how effective that is in solving various problems, right?
THL, another problem is the bureaucratic inefficiency of non-profit organizations such as United Way, some of whom pay their top people very large salaries. UW was caught committing outright theft of monies, and was shut down for a time.
Per gov't inefficiency, I can relate as well. I don't think that a panacea either. I DO think that our huge wealth disparity between rich and poor, approaching third-world numbers, should be rectified in some way per some kind of regulation. Nothing wrong with taxing in some way those who are making millions/billions, however, they make the rules/laws, and you can vouchsafe that it is one hell of a road to go down to get any of that wealth to filter down. It's all about equity and wealth, and ours in the USA is heading down a very scary path per the same. If it continues, you will see far far more needy/struggling people in the USA, and very likely somthing akin to a revolution to shake out income disparities.
here's a really good wiki article on the same...and a good season to look at it, as Christmas time seems to be the one time that brings this to light, and opens up our debt/bond to ALL of our fellowmen..
THL, another problem is the bureaucratic inefficiency of non-profit organizations such as United Way, some of whom pay their top people very large salaries. UW was caught committing outright theft of monies, and was shut down for a time.
Per gov't inefficiency, I can relate as well. I don't think that a panacea either. I DO think that our huge wealth disparity between rich and poor, approaching third-world numbers, should be rectified in some way per some kind of regulation. Nothing wrong with taxing in some way those who are making millions/billions, however, they make the rules/laws, and you can vouchsafe that it is one hell of a road to go down to get any of that wealth to filter down. It's all about equity and wealth, and ours in the USA is heading down a very scary path per the same. If it continues, you will see far far more needy/struggling people in the USA, and very likely somthing akin to a revolution to shake out income disparities.
here's a really good wiki article on the same...and a good season to look at it, as Christmas time seems to be the one time that brings this to light, and opens up our debt/bond to ALL of our fellowmen..
The Wealth disparity argument is a farce. What is the opposite of wealth disparity? Wealth equality for all. How do you get that? Communism. Give me capitalism any day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by inthecut
THL, another problem is the bureaucratic inefficiency of non-profit organizations such as United Way, some of whom pay their top people very large salaries. UW was caught committing outright theft of monies, and was shut down for a time.
Per gov't inefficiency, I can relate as well. I don't think that a panacea either. I DO think that our huge wealth disparity between rich and poor, approaching third-world numbers, should be rectified in some way per some kind of regulation. Nothing wrong with taxing in some way those who are making millions/billions, however, they make the rules/laws, and you can vouchsafe that it is one hell of a road to go down to get any of that wealth to filter down. It's all about equity and wealth, and ours in the USA is heading down a very scary path per the same. If it continues, you will see far far more needy/struggling people in the USA, and very likely somthing akin to a revolution to shake out income disparities.
here's a really good wiki article on the same...and a good season to look at it, as Christmas time seems to be the one time that brings this to light, and opens up our debt/bond to ALL of our fellowmen..
United way is a total racket. Give your money directly to the food bank, Salvation Army, or other charitable organization. Cut out the middle man.
SA is top ranked in every survey per reputability.....good point..and this is the season where the kettles are outside the stores....toss 'em that spare change, and you can bet it will get to someone who needs it directly...
The Wealth disparity argument is a farce. What is the opposite of wealth disparity? Wealth equality for all. How do you get that? Communism. Give me capitalism any day.
I don't think its a farce. Not only is it not, it is directly responsible for the USA's p*ss poor showing on just about every measurement you can make per basic quality of life issues.....the farce is that the trickle-down concept started by Milton Freedman and friends in the early 80's, and spouted by Reagan, ever held weight at all. Just an excuse to rip apart a bunch of companies per predatory and leveraged buyouts, and decimate basic fed/state/local services, including education, and such......if anything, corporate welfare is the farce, and that of all time as well...
And it isn't wealth equality for all...just that some safeguards are left in place so the top dogs don't raid our countries' collective current and future wealth, and outsource/offshore whatever is not nailed down.....
Of course it is a farce. If the USA is so p*ss poor on these so called quality of life measurements, then why do people from other countries continue FLOCKING HERE year after year in droves? Why is it when I travel to Europe (Italy, England, Scotland, Netherlands, Spain, Germany, Austria), I thank GOD when I come home to the good ole' USA, with our "horrible quality of life"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by inthecut
I don't think its a farce. Not only is it not, it is directly responsible for the USA's p*ss poor showing on just about every measurement you can make per basic quality of life issues.....the farce is that the trickle-down concept started by Milton Freedman and friends in the early 80's, and spouted by Reagan, ever held weight at all. Just an excuse to rip apart a bunch of companies per predatory and leveraged buyouts, and decimate basic fed/state/local services, including education, and such......if anything, corporate welfare is the farce, and that of all time as well...
And it isn't wealth equality for all...just that some safeguards are left in place so the top dogs don't raid our countries' collective current and future wealth, and outsource/offshore whatever is not nailed down.....
Of course it is a farce. If the USA is so p*ss poor on these so called quality of life measurements, then why do people from other countries continue FLOCKING HERE year after year in droves? Why is it when I travel to Europe (Italy, England, Scotland, Netherlands, Spain, Germany, Austria), I thank GOD when I come home to the good ole' USA, with our "horrible quality of life"?
A better question is why do you keep going to Europe? Is it for economic opportunity (your company sends you there) or as a tourist (aka quality of life)?
People are also flocking to Europe from Africa, Middle East and Asia.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
