Economics - Human Index

[John Simkin]

Interesting article by Ashley Seager

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/jul...development.usa

Despite spending $230m (£115m) an hour on healthcare, Americans live shorter lives than citizens of almost every other developed country. And while it has the second-highest income per head in the world, the United States ranks 42nd in terms of life expectancy.

These are some of the startling conclusions from a major new report which attempts to explain why the world's number-one economy has slipped to 12th place - from 2nd in 1990- in terms of human development.

The American Human Development Report, which applies rankings of health, education and income to the US, paints a surprising picture of a country that spends well over $5bn each day on healthcare - more per person than any other country.

The report, Measure of America, was funded by Oxfam America, the Conrad Hilton Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation. It shows each of the 11 countries that rank higher than the US in human development has a lower per-capita income.

Those countries score better on the health and knowledge indices that make up the overall human development index (HDI), which is calculated each year by the United Nations Development Programme.

And each has achieved better outcomes in areas such as infant mortality and longevity, with less spending per head.

Japanese, for example, can expect to outlive Americans, on average, by more than four years. In fact, citizens of Israel, Greece, Singapore, Costa Rica, South Korea and every western European and Nordic country save one can expect to live longer than Americans.

There are also wider differences, the report shows. The average Asian woman, for example, lives for almost 89 years, while African-American women live until 76. For men of the same groups, the difference is 14 years.

One of the main problems faced by the US, says the report, is that one in six Americans, or about 47 million people, are not covered by health insurance and so have limited access to healthcare.

As a result, the US is ranked 42nd in global life expectancy and 34th in terms of infants surviving to age one. The US infant mortality rate is on a par with that of Croatia, Cuba, Estonia and Poland. If the US could match top-ranked Sweden, about 20,000 more American babies a year would live to their first birthday.

"Human development is concerned with what I take to be the basic development idea: namely, advancing the richness of human life, rather than the richness of the economy in which human beings live, which is only a part of it," said the Nobel laureate economist Amartya Sen, who developed the HDI in 1990.

"We get in this report ... an evaluation of what the limitations of human development are in the US but also ... how the relative place of America has been slipping in comparison with other countries over recent years."

The US has a higher percentage of children living in poverty than any of the world's richest countries.

In fact, the report shows that 15% of American children - 10.7 million - live in families with incomes of less than $1,500 per month.

It also reveals 14% of the population - some 40 million Americans - lack the literacy skills to perform simple, everyday tasks such as understanding newspaper articles and instruction manuals.

And while in much of Europe, Canada, Japan and Russia, levels of enrolment of three and four-year-olds in pre-school are running at about 75%, in the US it is little more than 50%.

The report not only highlights the differences between the US and other countries, it also picks up on the huge discrepancies between states, the country's 436 congressional districts and between ethnic groups.

"The Measure of America reveals huge gaps among some groups in our country to access opportunity and reach their potential," said the report's co-author, Sarah Burd-Sharps. "Some Americans are living anywhere from 30 to 50 years behind others when it comes to issues we all care about: health, education and standard of living.

"For example, the state human development index shows that people in last-ranked Mississippi are living 30 years behind those in first-ranked Connecticut."

Inequality remains stark. The richest fifth of Americans earn on average $168,170 a year, almost 15 times the average of the lowest fifth, who make do with $11,352.

The US is far behind many other countries in the support given to working families, particularly in terms of family leave, sick leave and childcare. The country has no federally mandated maternity leave.

The US also ranks first among the 30 rich countries of the Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development in terms of the number of people in prison, both in absolute terms and as a percentage of the total population.

It has 5% of the world's people but 24% of its prisoners.

[Craig Lamson]

Interesting article by Ashley Seager

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/jul...development.usa

Despite spending $230m (£115m) an hour on healthcare, Americans live shorter lives than citizens of almost every other developed country. And while it has the second-highest income per head in the world, the United States ranks 42nd in terms of life expectancy.

These are some of the startling conclusions from a major new report which attempts to explain why the world's number-one economy has slipped to 12th place - from 2nd in 1990- in terms of human development.

The American Human Development Report, which applies rankings of health, education and income to the US, paints a surprising picture of a country that spends well over $5bn each day on healthcare - more per person than any other country.

The report, Measure of America, was funded by Oxfam America, the Conrad Hilton Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation. It shows each of the 11 countries that rank higher than the US in human development has a lower per-capita income.

Those countries score better on the health and knowledge indices that make up the overall human development index (HDI), which is calculated each year by the United Nations Development Programme.

And each has achieved better outcomes in areas such as infant mortality and longevity, with less spending per head.

Japanese, for example, can expect to outlive Americans, on average, by more than four years. In fact, citizens of Israel, Greece, Singapore, Costa Rica, South Korea and every western European and Nordic country save one can expect to live longer than Americans.

There are also wider differences, the report shows. The average Asian woman, for example, lives for almost 89 years, while African-American women live until 76. For men of the same groups, the difference is 14 years.

One of the main problems faced by the US, says the report, is that one in six Americans, or about 47 million people, are not covered by health insurance and so have limited access to healthcare.

As a result, the US is ranked 42nd in global life expectancy and 34th in terms of infants surviving to age one. The US infant mortality rate is on a par with that of Croatia, Cuba, Estonia and Poland. If the US could match top-ranked Sweden, about 20,000 more American babies a year would live to their first birthday.

"Human development is concerned with what I take to be the basic development idea: namely, advancing the richness of human life, rather than the richness of the economy in which human beings live, which is only a part of it," said the Nobel laureate economist Amartya Sen, who developed the HDI in 1990.

"We get in this report ... an evaluation of what the limitations of human development are in the US but also ... how the relative place of America has been slipping in comparison with other countries over recent years."

The US has a higher percentage of children living in poverty than any of the world's richest countries.

In fact, the report shows that 15% of American children - 10.7 million - live in families with incomes of less than $1,500 per month.

It also reveals 14% of the population - some 40 million Americans - lack the literacy skills to perform simple, everyday tasks such as understanding newspaper articles and instruction manuals.

And while in much of Europe, Canada, Japan and Russia, levels of enrolment of three and four-year-olds in pre-school are running at about 75%, in the US it is little more than 50%.

The report not only highlights the differences between the US and other countries, it also picks up on the huge discrepancies between states, the country's 436 congressional districts and between ethnic groups.

"The Measure of America reveals huge gaps among some groups in our country to access opportunity and reach their potential," said the report's co-author, Sarah Burd-Sharps. "Some Americans are living anywhere from 30 to 50 years behind others when it comes to issues we all care about: health, education and standard of living.

"For example, the state human development index shows that people in last-ranked Mississippi are living 30 years behind those in first-ranked Connecticut."

Inequality remains stark. The richest fifth of Americans earn on average $168,170 a year, almost 15 times the average of the lowest fifth, who make do with $11,352.

The US is far behind many other countries in the support given to working families, particularly in terms of family leave, sick leave and childcare. The country has no federally mandated maternity leave.

The US also ranks first among the 30 rich countries of the Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development in terms of the number of people in prison, both in absolute terms and as a percentage of the total population.

It has 5% of the world's people but 24% of its prisoners.

Ah yes, America sucks, thats why so may risk death to get here....and then become a veryu large part of the problems listed above.

[Maggie Hansen]

Interesting article by Ashley Seager

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/jul...development.usa

Despite spending $230m (£115m) an hour on healthcare, Americans live shorter lives than citizens of almost every other developed country. And while it has the second-highest income per head in the world, the United States ranks 42nd in terms of life expectancy.

These are some of the startling conclusions from a major new report which attempts to explain why the world's number-one economy has slipped to 12th place - from 2nd in 1990- in terms of human development.

The American Human Development Report, which applies rankings of health, education and income to the US, paints a surprising picture of a country that spends well over $5bn each day on healthcare - more per person than any other country.

The report, Measure of America, was funded by Oxfam America, the Conrad Hilton Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation. It shows each of the 11 countries that rank higher than the US in human development has a lower per-capita income.

Those countries score better on the health and knowledge indices that make up the overall human development index (HDI), which is calculated each year by the United Nations Development Programme.

And each has achieved better outcomes in areas such as infant mortality and longevity, with less spending per head.

Japanese, for example, can expect to outlive Americans, on average, by more than four years. In fact, citizens of Israel, Greece, Singapore, Costa Rica, South Korea and every western European and Nordic country save one can expect to live longer than Americans.

There are also wider differences, the report shows. The average Asian woman, for example, lives for almost 89 years, while African-American women live until 76. For men of the same groups, the difference is 14 years.

One of the main problems faced by the US, says the report, is that one in six Americans, or about 47 million people, are not covered by health insurance and so have limited access to healthcare.

As a result, the US is ranked 42nd in global life expectancy and 34th in terms of infants surviving to age one. The US infant mortality rate is on a par with that of Croatia, Cuba, Estonia and Poland. If the US could match top-ranked Sweden, about 20,000 more American babies a year would live to their first birthday.

"Human development is concerned with what I take to be the basic development idea: namely, advancing the richness of human life, rather than the richness of the economy in which human beings live, which is only a part of it," said the Nobel laureate economist Amartya Sen, who developed the HDI in 1990.

"We get in this report ... an evaluation of what the limitations of human development are in the US but also ... how the relative place of America has been slipping in comparison with other countries over recent years."

The US has a higher percentage of children living in poverty than any of the world's richest countries.

In fact, the report shows that 15% of American children - 10.7 million - live in families with incomes of less than $1,500 per month.

It also reveals 14% of the population - some 40 million Americans - lack the literacy skills to perform simple, everyday tasks such as understanding newspaper articles and instruction manuals.

And while in much of Europe, Canada, Japan and Russia, levels of enrolment of three and four-year-olds in pre-school are running at about 75%, in the US it is little more than 50%.

The report not only highlights the differences between the US and other countries, it also picks up on the huge discrepancies between states, the country's 436 congressional districts and between ethnic groups.

"The Measure of America reveals huge gaps among some groups in our country to access opportunity and reach their potential," said the report's co-author, Sarah Burd-Sharps. "Some Americans are living anywhere from 30 to 50 years behind others when it comes to issues we all care about: health, education and standard of living.

"For example, the state human development index shows that people in last-ranked Mississippi are living 30 years behind those in first-ranked Connecticut."

Inequality remains stark. The richest fifth of Americans earn on average $168,170 a year, almost 15 times the average of the lowest fifth, who make do with $11,352.

The US is far behind many other countries in the support given to working families, particularly in terms of family leave, sick leave and childcare. The country has no federally mandated maternity leave.

The US also ranks first among the 30 rich countries of the Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development in terms of the number of people in prison, both in absolute terms and as a percentage of the total population.

It has 5% of the world's people but 24% of its prisoners.

Ah yes, America sucks, thats why so may risk death to get here....and then become a veryu large part of the problems listed above.

Very racist of you Craig. Blame the victim. American culture would be nothing with out its immigrants (not counting First Nation people) both the forced and poor willing ones who've watched too many hollywood movies and think that is real life there. Just a bunch of uptight, humourless God botherers otherwise. Rock and roll, jazz, Tex-Mex food, pizza, zydeco, boogie. All the fun and groovy things. Then there is all that cheap labour provided by that group. Great for employers wanting to maximize those profits. This has already been discussed in the Political Discussions where it was posted by Paul Rigby (http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=13162).

Yes, America does suck. That a nation as wealthy in so many resources can allow their people to exist like this is criminal. It is nothing more than slow motion genocide on the poor.

[Mark Stapleton]

Ah yes, America sucks, thats why so may risk death to get here....and then become a veryu large part of the problems listed above.

I'm not sure if it's nationalism or capitalism (or a purely American blend of both), but something has supplanted your morality, Craig. You ignore the subject matter of the article, or maybe you approve of it.

The fact that people from Mexico, Cuba and other third world economies attempt to enter the US is easily explained by the fact the US is still a very wealthy country by comparison.

[Evan Burton]

I'm sure those statistics are reasonably accurate but lies, damned lies, and statistics.

Are they telling us a reason, or just a result?

IMO, I was pretty shocked about the amount of fast food the "average" American ate when I visited the US. There were a large number of people who were seriously obese. Obesity will certainly reduce a person's lifespan, I'm guessing in spite of even the best medical facilities in the world.

And yet I saw lots of people who jogged regularly (by their fitness level).

Fast food / obesity are probably only just some reasons why those figures portray the image they do. IMO.

[Craig Lamson]

Interesting article by Ashley Seager

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/jul...development.usa

Despite spending $230m (£115m) an hour on healthcare, Americans live shorter lives than citizens of almost every other developed country. And while it has the second-highest income per head in the world, the United States ranks 42nd in terms of life expectancy.

These are some of the startling conclusions from a major new report which attempts to explain why the world's number-one economy has slipped to 12th place - from 2nd in 1990- in terms of human development.

The American Human Development Report, which applies rankings of health, education and income to the US, paints a surprising picture of a country that spends well over $5bn each day on healthcare - more per person than any other country.

The report, Measure of America, was funded by Oxfam America, the Conrad Hilton Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation. It shows each of the 11 countries that rank higher than the US in human development has a lower per-capita income.

Those countries score better on the health and knowledge indices that make up the overall human development index (HDI), which is calculated each year by the United Nations Development Programme.

And each has achieved better outcomes in areas such as infant mortality and longevity, with less spending per head.

Japanese, for example, can expect to outlive Americans, on average, by more than four years. In fact, citizens of Israel, Greece, Singapore, Costa Rica, South Korea and every western European and Nordic country save one can expect to live longer than Americans.

There are also wider differences, the report shows. The average Asian woman, for example, lives for almost 89 years, while African-American women live until 76. For men of the same groups, the difference is 14 years.

One of the main problems faced by the US, says the report, is that one in six Americans, or about 47 million people, are not covered by health insurance and so have limited access to healthcare.

As a result, the US is ranked 42nd in global life expectancy and 34th in terms of infants surviving to age one. The US infant mortality rate is on a par with that of Croatia, Cuba, Estonia and Poland. If the US could match top-ranked Sweden, about 20,000 more American babies a year would live to their first birthday.

"Human development is concerned with what I take to be the basic development idea: namely, advancing the richness of human life, rather than the richness of the economy in which human beings live, which is only a part of it," said the Nobel laureate economist Amartya Sen, who developed the HDI in 1990.

"We get in this report ... an evaluation of what the limitations of human development are in the US but also ... how the relative place of America has been slipping in comparison with other countries over recent years."

The US has a higher percentage of children living in poverty than any of the world's richest countries.

In fact, the report shows that 15% of American children - 10.7 million - live in families with incomes of less than $1,500 per month.

It also reveals 14% of the population - some 40 million Americans - lack the literacy skills to perform simple, everyday tasks such as understanding newspaper articles and instruction manuals.

And while in much of Europe, Canada, Japan and Russia, levels of enrolment of three and four-year-olds in pre-school are running at about 75%, in the US it is little more than 50%.

The report not only highlights the differences between the US and other countries, it also picks up on the huge discrepancies between states, the country's 436 congressional districts and between ethnic groups.

"The Measure of America reveals huge gaps among some groups in our country to access opportunity and reach their potential," said the report's co-author, Sarah Burd-Sharps. "Some Americans are living anywhere from 30 to 50 years behind others when it comes to issues we all care about: health, education and standard of living.

"For example, the state human development index shows that people in last-ranked Mississippi are living 30 years behind those in first-ranked Connecticut."

Inequality remains stark. The richest fifth of Americans earn on average $168,170 a year, almost 15 times the average of the lowest fifth, who make do with $11,352.

The US is far behind many other countries in the support given to working families, particularly in terms of family leave, sick leave and childcare. The country has no federally mandated maternity leave.

The US also ranks first among the 30 rich countries of the Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development in terms of the number of people in prison, both in absolute terms and as a percentage of the total population.

It has 5% of the world's people but 24% of its prisoners.

Ah yes, America sucks, thats why so may risk death to get here....and then become a veryu large part of the problems listed above.

Very racist of you Craig. Blame the victim. American culture would be nothing with out its immigrants (not counting First Nation people) both the forced and poor willing ones who've watched too many hollywood movies and think that is real life there. Just a bunch of uptight, humourless God botherers otherwise. Rock and roll, jazz, Tex-Mex food, pizza, zydeco, boogie. All the fun and groovy things. Then there is all that cheap labour provided by that group. Great for employers wanting to maximize those profits. This has already been discussed in the Political Discussions where it was posted by Paul Rigby (http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=13162).

Yes, America does suck. That a nation as wealthy in so many resources can allow their people to exist like this is criminal. It is nothing more than slow motion genocide on the poor.

The ILLEGALS are victims? Now I've heard everything. First off ILLEGALS are NOT immigrants. Immigrants are VERY welcome, just come in through the FRONT door. As for theose employers whou prey on illegals I'm quite happy to see them busted and punished. I live by the rules and thats what I expect from everyone.

[Craig Lamson]

Ah yes, America sucks, thats why so may risk death to get here....and then become a veryu large part of the problems listed above.

I'm not sure if it's nationalism or capitalism (or a purely American blend of both), but something has supplanted your morality, Craig. You ignore the subject matter of the article, or maybe you approve of it.

The fact that people from Mexico, Cuba and other third world economies attempt to enter the US is easily explained by the fact the US is still a very wealthy country by comparison.

America is all about personal freedom, despite of the best efforts of those who want to curtail both. If your choices mean you live in poverty, for the most part the blame lies with you. If your choices mean you are here illegally you deal with the bad things that choice entails. It you choose to smoke like a chimney and it kills you at 50, thats the price of your choice. Want to eat fast food, take drugs, smoke/drink/drug while pregnant, drive too fast, not have health insurance, not take advantage of a free education etc...those are personal choices and you should be expected to live by the results of your choices. Its about personal responsibility and, at least IMHO the nanny state destroys that.

I've ignored nothing in the article. Here people have choices. Choice DEMANDS personal responsibility. It not my job to fix the poor choices of others.

[John Simkin]

America is all about personal freedom, despite of the best efforts of those who want to curtail both. If your choices mean you live in poverty, for the most part the blame lies with you. If your choices mean you are here illegally you deal with the bad things that choice entails. It you choose to smoke like a chimney and it kills you at 50, thats the price of your choice. Want to eat fast food, take drugs, smoke/drink/drug while pregnant, drive too fast, not have health insurance, not take advantage of a free education etc...those are personal choices and you should be expected to live by the results of your choices. Its about personal responsibility and, at least IMHO the nanny state destroys that.

I've ignored nothing in the article. Here people have choices. Choice DEMANDS personal responsibility. It not my job to fix the poor choices of others.

All countries suffer from people who do things that damage their health. There is no evidence that America suffers from a higher percentage of these people than other countries. As the article points out: “Despite spending $230m (£115m) an hour on healthcare, Americans live shorter lives than citizens of almost every other developed country. And while it has the second-highest income per head in the world, the United States ranks 42nd in terms of life expectancy.”

In fact, the article goes on to say that the US “spends well over $5bn each day on healthcare - more per person than any other country”. The problem is, that the US is the most unequal country in the world. Therefore, while the rich receive excellent health care, a very high percentage of the population, suffer from standards equal to those on offer in the Third World. The report goes on to say: “As a result, the US is ranked 42nd in global life expectancy and 34th in terms of infants surviving to age one. The US infant mortality rate is on a par with that of Croatia, Cuba, Estonia and Poland. If the US could match top-ranked Sweden, about 20,000 more American babies a year would live to their first birthday.”

If I was you I would be morally troubled by these figures. Surely these 20,000 babies a year should not be victims to an economic system that is based on the idea of “personal freedom”. This is a phrase that has little meaning to those who die because the political system has been created to protect the wealthy rather than the poor.

[Craig Lamson]

America is all about personal freedom, despite of the best efforts of those who want to curtail both. If your choices mean you live in poverty, for the most part the blame lies with you. If your choices mean you are here illegally you deal with the bad things that choice entails. It you choose to smoke like a chimney and it kills you at 50, thats the price of your choice. Want to eat fast food, take drugs, smoke/drink/drug while pregnant, drive too fast, not have health insurance, not take advantage of a free education etc...those are personal choices and you should be expected to live by the results of your choices. Its about personal responsibility and, at least IMHO the nanny state destroys that.

I've ignored nothing in the article. Here people have choices. Choice DEMANDS personal responsibility. It not my job to fix the poor choices of others.

All countries suffer from people who do things that damage their health. There is no evidence that America suffers from a higher percentage of these people than other countries. As the article points out: “Despite spending $230m (£115m) an hour on healthcare, Americans live shorter lives than citizens of almost every other developed country. And while it has the second-highest income per head in the world, the United States ranks 42nd in terms of life expectancy.”

In fact, the article goes on to say that the US “spends well over $5bn each day on healthcare - more per person than any other country”. The problem is, that the US is the most unequal country in the world. Therefore, while the rich receive excellent health care, a very high percentage of the population, suffer from standards equal to those on offer in the Third World. The report goes on to say: “As a result, the US is ranked 42nd in global life expectancy and 34th in terms of infants surviving to age one. The US infant mortality rate is on a par with that of Croatia, Cuba, Estonia and Poland. If the US could match top-ranked Sweden, about 20,000 more American babies a year would live to their first birthday.”

If I was you I would be morally troubled by these figures. Surely these 20,000 babies a year should not be victims to an economic system that is based on the idea of “personal freedom”. This is a phrase that has little meaning to those who die because the political system has been created to protect the wealthy rather than the poor.

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. In a free society some people will choose the do the wrong things and chose not to avail themself of the governmental systems and private systems designed to provide assistance. We have plenty of these programs here to help those who need it.

But when you cut to the chase, does the US actually have a higher rate of infant mortality, or is it that we report more live births?

Edited July 29, 2008 by Craig Lamson

[Evan Burton]

You can lead a horse to water abut you can't make it drink. In a free society some people will choose the do the wrong things and chose not to avail themself of the governmental systems and private systems designed to provide assistance. We have plenty of these programs here to help those who need it.

I actually agree quite strongly with this. You see many people who seem to be intent on self-destructive behaviour despite everything that is done to try and prevent it. Many times I feel that you should let these people remove themselves from society - as long as their withdrawal does not hurt other people.

[John Simkin]

You can lead a horse to water abut you can't make it drink. In a free society some people will choose the do the wrong things and chose not to avail themself of the governmental systems and private systems designed to provide assistance. We have plenty of these programs here to help those who need it.

I actually agree quite strongly with this. You see many people who seem to be intent on self-destructive behaviour despite everything that is done to try and prevent it. Many times I feel that you should let these people remove themselves from society - as long as their withdrawal does not hurt other people.

Do you really believe this is the main reason for the high US infant mortality rate? To be considered a civilized society, governments need to do what they can to protect the most vulnerable members of society. How can you claim that the 20,000 unnecessary infant deaths a year is an example of "leading a horse to water but you can't make it drink". Surely, you can make a better excuse for your selfish views on this issue.

[Maggie Hansen]

You can lead a horse to water abut you can't make it drink. In a free society some people will choose the do the wrong things and chose not to avail themself of the governmental systems and private systems designed to provide assistance. We have plenty of these programs here to help those who need it.

I actually agree quite strongly with this. You see many people who seem to be intent on self-destructive behaviour despite everything that is done to try and prevent it. Many times I feel that you should let these people remove themselves from society - as long as their withdrawal does not hurt other people.

You are, however, assuming that these are grown adults, fully informed and educated ones, at that, and with equal access to any and all resources. Well life just isn't like that. The genes, the money, the brains, the opportunities, the power, the means are not distributed equally or fairly. I also have no problem with certain people leaving the gene pool, especially the smug, self-centred, narrow minded, mean spirited, middle class ones. I'm alright Jack. Yes, let them eat cake!

It is the people with the power and resources who are leading us all on the road to extinction that are exhibiting self-destructive behaviour that worry me.

[Craig Lamson]

You can lead a horse to water abut you can't make it drink. In a free society some people will choose the do the wrong things and chose not to avail themself of the governmental systems and private systems designed to provide assistance. We have plenty of these programs here to help those who need it.

I actually agree quite strongly with this. You see many people who seem to be intent on self-destructive behaviour despite everything that is done to try and prevent it. Many times I feel that you should let these people remove themselves from society - as long as their withdrawal does not hurt other people.

Do you really believe this is the main reason for the high US infant mortality rate? To be considered a civilized society, governments need to do what they can to protect the most vulnerable members of society. How can you claim that the 20,000 unnecessary infant deaths a year is an example of "leading a horse to water but you can't make it drink". Surely, you can make a better excuse for your selfish views on this issue.

Its a REALLY big part of it. There are two main factors in infant mortality in the US. Low birth rate and premature birth. Premies are mostly the result of fertility drugs. Low birth weight is mostly the result of poor personal habits of the mother. In a free scoiety you can't force someone to behave. Its not always about money or access.

When you cut to the chase is a country that simply lets premies under a certain size die a civilized society or is it the US who goes to great lengths to keep these babies alive the civilized society?

Bottom line. IF mothers used good judgement more babies would survive. This is a question of personal choice and personal responsibility, not governmental intervention.

BTW, if your claims that poverty and lack of access to medical treatment is the main cause of infant mortality in the US , then why in the US do Latinos have a much lower IM rate than blacks? They are lower on the economic and educational scale than blacks?

Edited July 29, 2008 by Craig Lamson

[Maggie Hansen]

BTW, if your claims that poverty and lack of access to medical treatment is the main cause of infant mortality in the US , then why in the US do Latinos have a much lower IM rate than blacks? They are lower on the economic and educational scale than blacks?

Because they are still higher than the white wealthy group. If there are differences between Latinos and blacks it could be due to any number of other variables besides income and education - religious, cultural practices, environmental, residential location, average age of mother etc. One thing both groups have in common is that they do not share the same access to health care that wealthy white groups do and one of the results is higher infant mortality. Not slack mothering. Wealthy white parents are happy enough to out source their child rearing to Latinos and Blacks.

[Craig Lamson]

BTW, if your claims that poverty and lack of access to medical treatment is the main cause of infant mortality in the US , then why in the US do Latinos have a much lower IM rate than blacks? They are lower on the economic and educational scale than blacks?

Because they are still higher than the white wealthy group. If there are differences between Latinos and blacks it could be due to any number of other variables besides income and education - religious, cultural practices, environmental, residential location, average age of mother etc. One thing both groups have in common is that they do not share the same access to health care that wealthy white groups do and one of the results is higher infant mortality. Not slack mothering. Wealthy white parents are happy enough to out source their child rearing to Latinos and Blacks.

What about poor whites? They are no different than poor black or latinos and their rates are not as high as blacks. All have access to education etc. It does not take a rocket scientist nor access to medical care to know that if you do drugs, drink, smoke, eat crappy food and generally live a risky lifestyle the chances of having a low birthweight baby increases.

Personal responsibility. First formost and always.

You need to get over your class envy.