• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

US worst industrialised country to be a mom

American said:
So what you're saying is that blacks are the problem. I looked at the video, first people I saw were two black women. I see where you are coming from.
Click to expand...

Wow.. :wow:
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
I love how it's a "liberal" crack baby. That's hilarious. Does that make the babies with fetal alcohol syndrome conservative?
Click to expand...

No. You can by plenty of 40s in the ghetto.
 
stonewall50 said:
Al Jazeera...yea...you are going with real reliable information huh? Where did they get this? W.H.O.? lol. Why not take an opinion poll?
Click to expand...

:roll:
AlJazeera is one of the most respected news outlets in the world.. But since you dont like it how bout this then:
The Best and Worst Countries for Moms, in One Map - Olga Khazan - The Atlantic

Oh and since you seem to have trouble listening to the information its not from the WHO its from Save The Children and here is the study
http://www.savethechildren.org.uk/sites/default/files/images/State_of_World_Mothers_2013.pdf
 
TheDemSocialist said:
:roll:
AlJazeera is one of the most respected news outlets in the world.. But since you dont like it how bout this then:
The Best and Worst Countries for Moms, in One Map - Olga Khazan - The Atlantic

Oh and since you seem to have trouble listening to the information its not from the WHO its from Save The Children and here is the study
http://www.savethechildren.org.uk/sites/default/files/images/State_of_World_Mothers_2013.pdf
Click to expand...

Choosing to ignore me instead of do the research and actually learn something? You seem to be very quick on finding things that support your view but seem to want to ignore or minimize those that don't. In one of your post, you stated you were still a student, tell me, what would your teachers think of a report/research based project if you turned in such incomplete data as you have been doing here?

I asked the questions of you attempting to look beyond what you "already know" and consider other facts that might relate. But alas, I guess at your age, you know it all already and have all the answers so there is not need to actually spend time learning something else.

Here is one piece that I was trying to get you to learn.

"Stillbirths and newborn deaths are 50% higher among infants born to adolescent mothers than among those born to mothers aged 20-29 years." WHO | Adolescent pregnancy

From Prevalence of teenage pregnancy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

US live birth rate for teens is 41.5/1000 (2008)

Countries at the top of your list
Finland--don't see it
Sweden--5.9/1000
Norway--9.5
Iceland--14.5
Netherlands--5.3

This is just one of the data points I was trying to get you to open your mind to and learn on your own, try looking up some of the rest.

Your a student, Learn.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
:roll:
AlJazeera is one of the most respected news outlets in the world.. But since you dont like it how bout this then:
The Best and Worst Countries for Moms, in One Map - Olga Khazan - The Atlantic
Click to expand...

No I don't like Al Jazeera. They are the equivalent of Fox or MSNBC for the Middle East. Biased and unpredictable.

Oh and since you seem to have trouble listening to the information its not from the WHO its from Save The Children and here is the study
http://www.savethechildren.org.uk/sites/default/files/images/State_of_World_Mothers_2013.pdf
Click to expand...

I guess you don't read footnotes? Not only is UNICEF one of their primary sources...but the WHO numbers are used as part of their data. And UNICEF and WHO have joint reporting standards as they are BOTH a part of...THE UN!!! Seriously. It took me 5 minutes to just look at your sources and tell you that (5 because my computer didn't load the document fast enough). Seriously dude.

Those numbers rely on the national reporting agencies which have DIFFERENT standards and the United States has a much stricter standard of measurement when it comes to children. And this is shown across the board even in crime statistics listed by the WHO. Let me know when you start reading your own footnotes.
 
humbolt said:
Morning Pol. Doing well, I trust. Al Jazeera says the U. S. is "the" rotten place to be a mother. Course, China's just peachy. They only forcibly abort about a third of all pregnancies. Great place to be a mom.
Click to expand...

Mexico as well. Apparently running across the border pregnant is an accident? Who knew?
 
Northern Light said:
With health care in such a bad condition, and now food security is joining the ranks of the most major problems, I am glad to not be there anymore.

I will never understand how we can spend trillions on war and bailing out failed corporations, yet we mysteriously don't have money to make a proper healthcare system happen, or to repair the nation's aging infrastructure.

Our priorities are sickening.
Click to expand...

Interestingly, all the people that want universal Healthcare and want to keep Obamacare won't move out like you did. Go Figure.
 
Henrin said:
Interestingly, all the people that want universal Healthcare and want to keep Obamacare won't move out like you did. Go Figure.
Click to expand...

Obamacare is a handout to the corporations, and does nothing to reform the exhorbitant fees in the hospitals themselves. A friend of mine went to the hospital a month ago for a migraine from hell. He got a cat scan, among other things. His itemized bill put the aspirin they gave him at $200, for 2 pills. Outrageous. Obamacare does nothing to stop that kind of price gouging.

Obamacare is not UHC. Not even close. I don't support it, and what the other sheep believe is their business.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Single Party Universal Healthcare.
Click to expand...

That won't do a single thing to improve the quality of healthcare, in The United States. Now, how do you propose that improve the quality of healthcare?
 
Fisher said:
yeah our healthcare system cannot save the lives of every liberal crack baby so sue us.
Click to expand...

Is that all you got: "Liberal Crack baby?" Sheesh. I bet your pro-life too. Aren't ya?
 
calamity said:
Is that all you got: "Liberal Crack baby?" Sheesh. I bet your pro-life too. Aren't ya?
Click to expand...

No, I am anti-abortion but it does not change the fact that we have a horrible crack epidemic and that transfers to the delivery room. Fetal alcohol syndrome, crack, babies having babies-- take your pick.

Other than the title, the youtube is about a program that helps new mothers with no relevance to the assertion and no support for the allegation that the US is such a wretched place for mothers and kids to be born.
 
Here's another interesting stat to throw into the mix for consideration - Age of women at first childbirth. Fits nicely with the infant mortality stats posted by the CIA factbook.

It seems there are less deaths when the mother is older. So many factors play in all of this that the conclusions drawn thus far from the data look very much like the old rapist nuns statistics joke. The correlations made may very well be false. Could easily boil down to social structure with mothers in the more socialist societies more willing to be part of the village and give themselves over for help and care, and mothers in the more individualistic socities avoiding their childbirth being a community project.
 
Fisher said:
1. No, I am anti-abortion but it does not change the fact that we have a horrible crack epidemic and that transfers to the delivery room. Fetal alcohol syndrome, crack, babies having babies-- take your pick.

2. Other than the title, the youtube is about a program that helps new mothers with no relevance to the assertion and no support for the allegation that the US is such a wretched place for mothers and kids to be born.
Click to expand...
1.So that's yes. You are pro-life. And. No. Most poor people with babies are not crack or alcohol addicted. They are just poor people who could use better access to healthcare.

2.Nonsense. Everyone knows US healthcare for impoverished mothers and their children is atrocious. This is especially so for the working poor.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Single Party Universal Healthcare.
Click to expand...

Another homework assignment for you, give a detailed and complete evaluation of differences between our healthcare and other healthcare systems based upon factors such as technological availability, waiting times for surgeries, etc and not just based upon affordability or accessibility. How does the US actually do in comparison to others when "universal care" is not a weighted factor? If you include statistics such as life expectancy and child mortality rates, then also include break downs of different factors affecting those statistics and not just "they have better healthcare".

In other words, prove that your suggestion is actually better, other than that the "poor" have greater access.
 
apdst said:
That won't do a single thing to improve the quality of healthcare, in The United States. Now, how do you propose that improve the quality of healthcare?
Click to expand...

Explain to me why ever industrialized western nation has that form of healthcare or some form of public option but the quality is better?
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Explain to me why ever industrialized western nation has that form of healthcare or some form of public option but the quality is better?
Click to expand...

No. Why don't YOU explain to me why that's the case and try and sell me on the idea of totally governmet run healthcare.
 
apdst said:
No. Why don't YOU explain to me why that's the case and try and sell me on the idea of totally governmet run healthcare.
Click to expand...

Let see here; studies show it to be more efficient, better quality, more fair.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Let see here; studies show it to be more efficient, better quality, more fair.
Click to expand...

Ok, tell us WHY.

I see nothing that would convince me that the simple act of the government paying for everyone's healthcare would improve the quality of the average doctor. Maybe you can explain how that could happen?
 
apdst said:
Ok, tell us WHY.

I see nothing that would convince me that the simple act of the government paying for everyone's healthcare would improve the quality of the average doctor. Maybe you can explain how that could happen?
Click to expand...

Well lets see here when 45,000 Americans die on average a year for lack of insurance, that drives our "quality" down pretty big.
 
calamity said:
1.So that's yes. You are pro-life. And. No. Most poor people with babies are not crack or alcohol addicted. They are just poor people who could use better access to healthcare.

2.Nonsense. Everyone knows US healthcare for impoverished mothers and their children is atrocious. This is especially so for the working poor.
Click to expand...

1. So no, I am anti-abortion. I am pro-death in a lot of circumstances, and the list is growing with liberal policies rewarding anti-social behavior :2wave:

and

2. Of course it is non sense to you because you do not see that all those great government programs for poor people and their kids do not work. You have yet to refute the list I provided from the CDC. How would a trillion dollars in free medical care prevent genetic abnormalities? Answer the question or don't bother responding.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom