The United States in #1....(just check out all of these facts!!!) - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 07-14-2002, 10:25 PM   #1
Refugee
 
Danospano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,415
Local Time: 09:44 AM
The United States in #1....(just check out all of these facts!!!)

Among the top 20 industrialized nations, the United States is #1 in….:
o Millionaires
o Billionaires
o Military spending
o Firearm deaths
o Beef production
o Per capita energy use
o Carbon dioxide emissions (more than Australia, Brazil, Canda, France, India, Indonesia, Germany, Italy, Mexico, and the United Kingdom combined).
o Total and per capita municipal waste (720 kilograms per person per year).
o Hazardous waste produced (by a factor of more than 20x our nearest competitor, Germany).
o Oil consumption
o Natural gas consumption
o The least amount of tax revenue generated (as a % of gross domestic product).
oThe least amount of federal and state government expenditure (as a percentage of GDP).
o Budget deficit (as a percentage of GDP).
o Daily per capita consumption of calories.
o Lowest voter turnout.
o Number of political parties represented in the lower or single house.
o Recorded rapes (by a factor of almost 3x our nearest competitor—Canada).
o Births to mothers under the age of 20 (again, more than twice as many as Canada, and nearly twice as many as #2 New Zealand).
o Number of international human rights treaties not signed.
o Among countries in the United Nations with a legally constituted government to not ratify the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
o Number of known execution of child offenders.
o Likelihood of children under the age of 15 to commit suicide with a gun.
o Likelihood of children under the age of 15 to die from gunfire.
o Lowest 8th grade math scores.
o Becoming the first society in history in which the poorest group in the population are children
__________________

__________________
Danospano is offline  
Old 07-14-2002, 10:44 PM   #2
I serve MacPhisto
 
z edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: the HORROR
Posts: 4,022
Local Time: 08:44 AM
Re: The United States in #1....(just check out all of these facts!!!)

Quote:
Originally posted by Danospano
Among the top 20 industrialized nations, the United States is #1 in….:
o Millionaires
o Billionaires
o Military spending

Quote:

o Carbon dioxide emissions (more than Australia, Brazil, Canda, France, India, Indonesia, Germany, Italy, Mexico, and the United Kingdom combined).
how is this measured??


Quote:

o Recorded rapes (by a factor of almost 3x our nearest competitor—Canada).
o Births to mothers under the age of 20 (again, more than twice as many as Canada, and nearly twice as many as #2 New Zealand).
are these 2 related?

Quote:

o Number of international human rights treaties not signed.
o Among countries in the United Nations with a legally constituted government to not ratify the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
I am not familiar with these

Quote:

o Likelihood of children under the age of 15 to die from gunfire.
this just probably hasn't caught on elsewhere yet, God forbid.

Quote:

o Becoming the first society in history in which the poorest group in the population are children
I don't get this one, our children are supposed to be rich??
__________________

__________________
z edge is offline  
Old 07-14-2002, 11:18 PM   #3
I'm a chauvinist leprechaun
 
Lemonite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Notre Dame, IN, 46556
Posts: 1,072
Local Time: 02:44 PM

Don't forget the Largest Number of 40 Oz Prime Rib Cut Steaks Consumed.

L.Unplugged
__________________
"When People Feel Uncertain, they'd rather have somebody who is Strong and Wrong than somebody who is Weak and Right."

--Bill Clinton
Lemonite is offline  
Old 07-14-2002, 11:33 PM   #4
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: NYC
Posts: 18
Local Time: 02:44 PM
Normal

Alot of your points are attriutable to the size of the US. We have 250 million people.

Canada has 30 million.

What is the purpose of your post?

Mick
__________________
Buy low, sell high
McGlinn is offline  
Old 07-15-2002, 12:00 AM   #5
War Child
 
U2002revolution!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Tucson, AZ ....USA
Posts: 528
Local Time: 06:44 AM
Normal







....America's pretty good if ya ask me
__________________
U2002revolution! is offline  
Old 07-15-2002, 01:08 AM   #6
Babyface
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Dunedin, New Zealand
Posts: 28
Local Time: 02:44 AM
where is your list of references?

you should mention that you are only referring to first world countries----that is, if these 'facts' have any basis.
__________________
Anoosh Vs. God is offline  
Old 07-15-2002, 01:20 AM   #7
you are what you is
 
Salome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 22,016
Local Time: 03:44 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by McGlinn
Alot of your points are attriutable to the size of the US. We have 250 million people.
I was thinking the same thing
__________________
“Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe.”
~Frank Zappa
Salome is offline  
Old 07-15-2002, 04:30 AM   #8
Jesus Online
 
Angela Harlem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: a glass castle
Posts: 30,163
Local Time: 01:44 AM
Apart from the population factor, Im wondering how this was calculated too.
If it is per capita etc, then some of these categories cannot be compared. Like the NZ birth rates. I bet you would find a certain percentage of those are Maori girls who have a whole different set of socio-economic factors to be worrying about. America has different gun laws to many others. I dont think figures like this really do reflect poorly, or well on any given country. Westernised, or industrialised, you cannot compare many countries. You may have more gas emissions, but we have the biggest hole in the Ozone.
!

Yay score one for Aus!!!

__________________
Angela Harlem is offline  
Old 07-15-2002, 10:55 AM   #9
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
speedracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: MD
Posts: 7,573
Local Time: 09:44 AM
Re: The United States in #1....(just check out all of these facts!!!)

Quote:
Originally posted by Danospano
Among the top 20 industrialized nations, the United States is #1 in?.:
Some of these are very legitimate concerns, but for brevity's sake (and also to appear as a cantankerous crank) I'll only address the ones I disagree with.

Quote:
o Millionaires
o Billionaires
o Military spending
Nothing wrong with any of these.

Quote:
o Beef production
Ditto.

Quote:
o Per capita energy use
o Carbon dioxide emissions (more than Australia, Brazil, Canda, France, India, Indonesia, Germany, Italy, Mexico, and the United Kingdom combined).
o Oil consumption
Also consider that the US is geographically much less dense than other industrialized nations. Therefore, we have to drive around a lot more than people in other countries.

Quote:
o Likelihood of children under the age of 15 to commit suicide with a gun.
The number of these is most likely so small as to be statistically insignificant.

Quote:
o Lowest 8th grade math scores.
The US still has the finest universities in the world. It's true.

Quote:
o Becoming the first society in history in which the poorest group in the population are children
Kids don't work.

Rich, career-driven people tend not to have kids or to have kids later in life. What's your point?
__________________
speedracer is offline  
Old 07-15-2002, 11:24 AM   #10
pax
ONE
love, blood, life
 
pax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ewen's new American home
Posts: 11,412
Local Time: 10:44 AM
To balance this thread a bit, I want to mention that I think the child poverty statistics refers to just that--children living in poverty. As in, their families are living in poverty.

A stunning number of families in this nation live below, at, or near the poverty line, and research has been done into the living conditions of the working poor, which are sometimes worse than the conditions of those on public assistance.

That said, I must admit that some of these factors are no doubt attributable to the size of the USA--unless they have been adjusted to percentages.
__________________
and you hunger for the time
time to heal, desire, time


Join Amnesty.
pax is offline  
Old 07-15-2002, 11:38 AM   #11
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 320
Local Time: 02:44 PM
From ABC news ....

Fewer babies died in the first year of life, and fewer teenage girls had babies. Smoking dropped among eighth- and 10th-graders. More preschoolers ate a healthy diet.
Those are the conclusions from an annual report released today that offers an overview of the most recent data available on the health, economics and education of some 70 million children living in the United States. Compiled by the Federal Interagency Forum on Child and Family Statistics, "America's Children: Key National Indicators of Well-Being" draws from research conducted across the federal government. (Read the report at http://childstats.gov.)


Officials celebrated the successes but noted there was no improvement on many measures of well-being.

The best news might be a substantial drop in infant mortality. In 1999, the report said, seven of every 1,000 babies under age 1 died. That was down from 7.2 in 1998 after declining throughout the 1990s.

The rate fell again in 2000, said a separate report also being released today, to 6.9 deaths per 1,000 babies.

"It's a triumph of science and health performance," said Dr. Duane Alexander, director of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

Alexander attributed the reduction to clinical improvements in treatment of respiratory distress syndrome and a reduction in Sudden Infant Death Syndrome, achieved largely through a campaign to put babies to sleep on their backs.

At the same time, births among girls ages 15-17 dropped from 29 per 1,000 in 1999 to 27 per 1,000 in 2000.

Other positive trends include:

More children were covered by health insurance, up from 87 percent in 1999 to 88 percent in 2000. Officials credited the relatively new State Children's Health Insurance Program, which covers children in working poor families.

Fewer eighth- and 10th-graders smoked, though smoking rates for high school seniors were statistically unchanged. Last year, 5.5 percent of eighth-graders smoked, down from 7.4 percent in 2000; among 10th-graders, 12 percent smoked, down from 14 percent.

More children were read to every day by a family member, 58 percent last year, up from 54 percent in 1999.

More youngsters ages 2 to 5 had a good diet — 27 percent in 1998, up from 21 percent in 1996.

Numerous measures did not change: In 2000, 16 percent of children lived in poverty, 76 percent of toddlers got the recommended immunizations and 87 percent of young adults finished high school. Drug and alcohol use among junior high and high school students held steady.

Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson urged Americans "to rededicate our efforts as a nation, and as individuals, to protect children, provide them opportunity and good examples, and build foundations that will last their lifetimes."

In a special feature this year, the report found that in 2001, 19 percent of children had at least one parent born outside the United States, up from 14 percent in 1994.


Copyright 2002 The Associated Press.
__________________
dream wanderer is offline  
Old 07-15-2002, 11:38 AM   #12
Refugee
 
Achtung Bubba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: One Nation. Under God.
Posts: 1,513
Local Time: 09:44 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by paxetaurora
To balance this thread a bit, I want to mention that I think the child poverty statistics refers to just that--children living in poverty. As in, their families are living in poverty.

A stunning number of families in this nation live below, at, or near the poverty line, and research has been done into the living conditions of the working poor, which are sometimes worse than the conditions of those on public assistance.

That said, I must admit that some of these factors are no doubt attributable to the size of the USA--unless they have been adjusted to percentages.
However, I believe that the U.S. has among the richest poor in the world, that many of the poor have their own cars, refrigerators, and color televisions.

Certainly, there are those living in absolute squalor, but poverty seems to be defined by the living condititions compared to America's middle class, rather than the poor throughout the rest of the world.

Seriously, if the measuring stick was the same for us and other nations (and if we adjusted for population differences) would the number of Americans at/below the poverty line still be "stunning" compared to say, India and China?


That said, I do believe that if you're right about the conditions of the working poor being worse than those on assistance, then the argument that assistance is a disincentive to work seems even more valid.
__________________
DISCLAIMER: The author of the preceding is known
for engaing in very long discussions.
Achtung Bubba is offline  
Old 07-15-2002, 11:43 AM   #13
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 320
Local Time: 02:44 PM
QUEZON CITY, Philippines, August 24, 2001 - Pollution in Asia has worsened since last year and is directly responsible for the death of thousands in Beijing, Jakarta, Seoul, Bangkok and Manila. This is according to the World Bank and the Stockholm Development Institute (SDI), which is currently implementing an Atmospheric Environment Program in Asia with the Swedish International Development Agency (SIDA).

SDI revealed that sulfur dioxide, ammonia and nitrogen oxides have been rising steadily over the past few decades and ground level ozone concentration has increased. Air pollution in the continent has now surpassed the combined emissions in Europe and North America.

Already, the adverse impacts, felt in Europe over the century, are being experienced. The World Bank said in its 2000 Annual Review that in Manila alone, more than 4,000 Filipinos die because of air pollution. The mortality figure is the third highest for a city in the East Asian region after Beijing and Jakarta. Bangkok and Seoul were ranked 4th and 5th.

Beside the deaths, 90,000 Filipinos in Manila also suffer from severe chronic bronchitis, costing the government seven percent of its gross domestic product in terms of health costs, the World Bank said, citing statistics from the World Health Organization (WHO), which did pollution and health studies in 126 countries last year.

However, the air pollution death figures in other parts of the world are higher, Bank said, noting that yearly, over 40,000 die in India, 6,400 in Mexico City, over 5,000 deaths in Sao Paulo and Rio de Janeiro.

As rapid urbanization associated with growth in industry and transportation systems spread in Asia, sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions have sky-rocketed. The pollutants come from fossil fuel combustion used by energy, industry and transportation sectors all over the Asia-Pacific region. It is aggravated by the use of low quality fuel, inefficient methods of energy production and use, poor condition of vehicles and traffic congestion, SDI said.

SDI added that pollutants from neighboring countries know no political boundaries as they can travel thousands of kilometers. Thus, the so-called "transboundary" pollution problem cannot be tackled by individual countries successfully. There is a need for regional intergovernmental cooperation.

Air pollution in the Asian region has worsened in the past two years resulting to two dangerous effects to health-premature mortality and excess cases of bronchitis, both caused by exposure to high levels of fine particulate matter. The deaths, caused by fine particulate matter in the atmosphere, far exceed those caused by sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, ozone and lead, World Bank said in expressing alarm over the worsening phenomenon.

The damage to human health caused not only by air emissions but also solid waste and effluents is the highest among all the costs if urban environmental degradation. Health costs in major Asian cities now reach 15 to 18 percent of urban income, the Bank said.

As cities in developing countries are indeed becoming unhealthy places to live in, people have to contend not only with dangerous air fumes but also solid waste and effluent pollution. These are direct factors behind water-related diseases such as diarrhea, dysentery, cholera and typhoid.

.

I think its safe to say its nasty all over....


dream wanderer
__________________
dream wanderer is offline  
Old 07-15-2002, 01:49 PM   #14
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
hiphop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the jungle
Posts: 7,410
Local Time: 04:44 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by dream wanderer


SDI revealed that sulfur dioxide, ammonia and nitrogen oxides have been rising steadily over the past few decades and ground level ozone concentration has increased. Air pollution in the continent has now surpassed the combined emissions in Europe and North America.

Already, the adverse impacts, felt in Europe over the century, are being experienced. The World Bank said in its 2000 Annual Review that in Manila alone, more than 4,000 Filipinos die because of air pollution. The mortality figure is the third highest for a city in the East Asian region after Beijing and Jakarta. Bangkok and Seoul were ranked 4th and 5th.

Beside the deaths, 90,000 Filipinos in Manila also suffer from severe chronic bronchitis, costing the government seven percent of its gross domestic product in terms of health costs, the World Bank said, citing statistics from the World Health Organization (WHO), which did pollution and health studies in 126 countries last year.

However, the air pollution death figures in other parts of the world are higher, Bank said, noting that yearly, over 40,000 die in India, 6,400 in Mexico City, over 5,000 deaths in Sao Paulo and Rio de Janeiro.

As rapid urbanization associated with growth in industry and transportation systems spread in Asia, sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions have sky-rocketed. The pollutants come from fossil fuel combustion used by energy, industry and transportation sectors all over the Asia-Pacific region. It is aggravated by the use of low quality fuel, inefficient methods of energy production and use, poor condition of vehicles and traffic congestion, SDI said.

As cities in developing countries are indeed becoming unhealthy places to live in, people have to contend not only with dangerous air fumes but also solid waste and effluent pollution. These are direct factors behind water-related diseases such as diarrhea, dysentery, cholera and typhoid.

.

I think its safe to say its nasty all over....


dream wanderer

Who has written this article?

It would be typical for this journalist, - like for many (trying to lick the a**** of the elite, that doesn´t care a shit about them, hehe) - to tell only half of the story (apart from not researching properly anymore, those bastards, they are too lazy!).

It is very cynical (but such a cruel cynicism) of the World Bank to blah blah about pollution, but to forget to mention that it was THEM who gave out credits to build up the big part of this polluting industry. Why did they do this you may ask? Because capital, as it was decided, has to stay in the flow. Bigger profits, you know, and you can´t park all of it, you need to reinvest. So, let´s give the developing countries low interests first, and increase them later.

The real fact behind this is that "capitalism" has, for the last twenty years or so, successfully changed its strategy; putting the production in cheaper places throughout the world, therefore cutting jobs of AMERICANS (be sure that capitalism gives a damn about the middle class - if you don´t believe me, you´re just naive), to lower production costs. Yeah, and it´s beautiful, we can do everything we fucking want there: low quality fuel, for example? No laws against that there...

And then, the article doesn´t mention that it´s not mainly the Chinese who are wearing Nike or Benetton, or the Koreans who drive the cars they produced, or Thailand using the computers they built. Mainly the consumers of all that products are Europeans and Americans. Needless to say that WE also have the financial control.

z edge, I think your post shows how much a nation can be inhibited by its own culture. First, you try to seem cool by popping off one sentence per 3 points. But then, there are nearly no arguments

(I would go as far as saying zero intellectual output - except of your valid assumption, speedracer - your post goes a little into the same direction - , that U.S. universities are amongst the best of the world - no wonder, they´re also the most expensive ones, so thank your parents more than twice when you are allowed to go to college),

but just throwing fiddlesticks, like "how is this measured?" or "are these two related?", or "I am not familiar with these".
Well, if you´re not familiar with these or about measuring methods, educate yourself!

And live up to your nick, or at least try to give the impression that you´re trying to.
__________________
hiphop is offline  
Old 07-15-2002, 02:38 PM   #15
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 320
Local Time: 02:44 PM
Sorry...I accidently edited out the author's name. He is Michael A. Bergwayan...and you can find a copy of the article (and a lot of other things) at www.earthvision.net.


dream wanderer
__________________

__________________
dream wanderer is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com