Slashdot Mirror

Cuba has a great medical system...as long as you are one of the elites.

US has per capita GDP 10x of Cuba ( 43,500 vs 4,000 That any comparison can be made between the health care system in Cuba and the US says there is something seriously wrong with the health care system in US, especially because the US spends highest percentage of GDP of any nation in the world

A huge per capita GDP coupled with spending with the highest percentage of the GDP ought to produce the best health care system in the world by an indisputable margin but it doesn't.

Cuba has a great medical system...as long as you are one of the elites.

US has per capita GDP 10x of Cuba ( 43,500 vs 4,000 That any comparison can be made between the health care system in Cuba and the US says there is something seriously wrong with the health care system in US, especially because the US spends highest percentage of GDP of any nation in the world

A huge per capita GDP coupled with spending with the highest percentage of the GDP ought to produce the best health care system in the world by an indisputable margin but it doesn't.

Ignoring your misunderstanding of Iran (it's a democracy that's elected itself a theocracy)

The armed takeover in 1980, and the subsequent fascist-style secret police raids against anyone who spoke out against the new leadership, would tend to disagree with you there...

The CIA tends to disagree with you...

reference

Following the election of the reformist Hojjat ol-Eslam Mohammad KHATAMI as president in 1997 and similarly a reformist Majles (parliament) in 2000, a campaign to foster political reform in response to popular dissatisfaction was initiated. The movement floundered as conservative politicians prevented reform measures from being enacted, increased repressive measures, and made electoral gains against reformers. Starting with nationwide municipal elections in 2003 and continuing through Majles elections in 2004, conservatives reestablished control over Iran's elected government institutions, which culminated with the August 2005 inauguration of an ultra-conservative layman as president.

I Dont feel sorry for some European nations (Im not even going to name them) despite the fact people die waiting to see a doctor there its their health care system and for whatever reason they like what they got.

You do realize that the US ranks 45th in the world in terms of life expectancy, right below Saint Helena and right above Cyprus, right? The average life expectancy in Cuba, an impoverished nation which is under an embargo that covers much medical technology is only one year less than that in the US, the wealthiest nation on the planet. Meanwhile, we spend twice as much as anyone else for this worse care. Check out all of the cited studies linked from that page, too.

While I agree with some of what you say, infant deaths rates are LOWER in Cuba then the US https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world -factbook/rankorder/2091rank.html Cuba has invested in educating the people. On a trip there last year I required a hospital stay and will clearly state that their health system is well run, funded and staffed. Compare the health related section between Cuba http://globalis.gvu.unu.edu/country.cfm?country=CU and the US http://globalis.gvu.unu.edu/country.cfm?country=US and it is clear that they while they may do a lot of stuff to the negative of their people, health care is not one of them.

Quote from the parent comment: In the case of the CIA, "collecting information" is their job description.

Ignorance of government: Not only are most U.S. citizens ignorant of the activities of their government, they are willfully ignorant, in that they hold strong opinions with little or no attempt to educate themselves.

The CIA "Directorate of Operations", at present called the "Clandestine Service" is responsible for most of the U.S. government's problems in the Middle East today. That part of the CIA destroys governments and kills people. For example, see these documents collected by George Washington University: The Secret CIA History of the Iran Coup, 1953.

That part of the CIA: 1) Breaks laws at will, 2) Inserts lies into newspapers, radio, TV, and magazines, 3) Kills people they decide they want to kill, 4) Is not under any real control, 5) Hides how much money is spent, 6) Often acts to protect the profits of wealthy people in the U.S., sometimes spending $100 of taxpayer money to protect $1 of private profit, 7) Is not honest about its purposes, and 8) Generally acts as a secret police and an arm of a hidden government that resembles a dictatorship rather than a democracy.

If you really love your country, you will learn about your government. I love the U.S., and that's why I've educated myself about both the good and the bad.

that would be a great skit for the daily show John Stewart: "And in other news today, President Bush thanked the CIA for all their hard work" ((President Bush staring blankly at the camera for 60 seconds)) http://www.foia.cia.gov/browse_docs.asp?doc_no=000 1038412&title=PRESIDENT+BUSH+THANKS+CIA&abstract=& no_pages=0004&pub_date=9%2F27%2F2001&release_date= 1%2F23%2F2004&keywords=GEPHARDT&case_no=F-2004-002 41&copyright=0&release_dec=RIPPUB&classification=U &showPage=0001

You think thats bad, check out this 'declassified' report

http://www.foia.cia.gov/browse_docs.asp?doc_no=000 1038412&title=PRESIDENT+BUSH+THANKS+CIA&abstract=& no_pages=0004&pub_date=9%2F27%2F2001&release_date= 1%2F23%2F2004&keywords=GEPHARDT&case_no=F-2004-002 41&copyright=0&release_dec=RIPPUB&classification=U &showPage=0001

According to the
Nonetheless the literacy rate is over 90% and the average GDP (PPP) is $1,200... so combined with the inequality between rich and poor you can expect to find some well educated people in the cities. Probably enough for Google's needs, or else they wouldn't be building there!

Investment is also one way to boost the economy of a country. Give them jobs and skills, the rest will follow. Even a market for adwords.

Great post. If you want to hide your head in the sand, that is. Let me just shatter the myth that you're perpetuating in your first paragraph.

1. The US is by far the biggest polluter per capita.

Compare apples with apples, instead of of apples with oranges, by looking at per capita figures. The CIA World Factbook lists the population of China as 1,321,851,888 (July 2007 est.) and the population of the US as 301,139,947 (July 2007 est.).

You wouldn't compare the carbon dioxide emissions output of the US with that of a tiny nation like Bermuda, so play fair and use the most sensible measure to compare who's contributing how much.

A quick mental calculation will show you that, in carbon dioxide terms alone, the US produces four times as much domestically as China does.

2. China makes goods for the US, not the other way around.

All those goods that China makes that the US consumes (clothing, electronics, etc) have an associated cost in terms of carbon dioxide and other pollution. But, of course, the figures that you've latched onto don't attribute those to the country of consumption, only to the country of origin.

Put simply, when a Chinese factory makes something that an American will buy, it's at least partially (if not fully) pollution caused by the American consumer. So, a large chunk of the pollution caused by China, etc is due to the US (and other consumer nations) as well.

The US has five percent of the world's population. The US consumes roughly 25-30 percent of the world's goods, and hence is responsible for 25-30 percent of the pollution. To sustain everybody on the planet at the current US level of consumption would take five to six Earth's worth of resources and create a similar amount of pollution.

Now do you see why the US plays such a big part in this and should be taking positive, proactive steps to try to address the issues instead of trying to shift the blame to others?

As for your closing complaint that "This is more government micromanagement that will do nothing but further bring us down", well, I could not disagree more. The free market alone will never make the necessary steps to do what's necessary by itself, no matter what you might think. Want an example? Then just look at how car manufacturers fought tooth and nail against mandatory installation of seatbelts in cars. Same shit, different decade, that's all.

Please take your head out of the sand for a minute to think about it.

That should have been: ...current birth/death rates...

Before I start this, I should probably mention: I believe Contra Costa should pay IBM. I'm not by NATURE socialistic or anti-corporate. I don't think you need to be a socialist to believe in fairer distribution of wealth. But hey, don't take my word for it, here's the CIA Factbook:

The US has... a per capita GDP [PPP] of $42,000... The [recent] onrush of technology largely explains the gradual development of a "two-tier labor market"... Since 1975, practically all the gains in household income have gone to the top 20% of households... The rise in GDP in 2004 and 2005 was undergirded by substantial gains in labor productivity... Long-term problems include inadequate investment in economic infrastructure, rapidly rising medical and pension costs of an aging population, sizable trade and budget deficits, and stagnation of family income in the lower economic groups. -CIA factbook on the US economy, 2005 https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world -factbook/geos/us.html#Econ

The increase in productivity profit is being eaten up primarily by the people who already had the money. And, as a 401K holder and a pension owner, I am a shareholder. But I'm also a human being. Wealth inequity is a societal problem, and CEO pay is but one of a number of factors in that. As a member of society and a thinking human, I have every right to question those decisions.

OK, dualing anecdotes: "Relatives said Rodriguez was vomiting blood and writhing in pain for 45 minutes while she was at a hospital waiting area. Experts have said she could have survived had she been treated" Ignored By 911, Woman Dies In Hospital

Point? Go with the actuarial tables of life expectancy: U.S. at 78, Cuba at 77.08. Pretty damn good for a 3rd world country at pennies on the dollar. CIA factbook (obviously a commie liberal tool, right?)

Looking at the hospitals isn't the key. Early intervention public health is the key.

Thank you for your contribution, especially since all those stupid die-hard communists seem to think infant mortality in Cuba is less than that of the US.

For instance:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world -factbook/rankorder/2091rank.html ... oops

You mean like Costa Rica?

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world -factbook/geos/cs.html

(Ok, they're not completely without a military, but getting pretty close to it)

Poland is about 300 miles away from Russia via belarus(and moscow MUCH further). Czech is even further away. And that assumes border to border. That would be == to Miami to the futherest point south on cuba. And to be honest, considering where Russia places their missiles, then it it more like Atlanta to Venezuela. That is the more fair comparisions. These missles will do not good at targeting ANYTHING from russia to America/Canada (but almost certainly, we will have something in one of the 2).

Poland is about 300 miles away from Russia via belarus(and moscow MUCH further). Czech is even further away. And that assumes border to border. That would be == to Miami to the futherest point south on cuba. And to be honest, considering where Russia places their missiles, then it it more like Atlanta to Venezuela. That is the more fair comparisions. These missles will do not good at targeting ANYTHING from russia to America/Canada (but almost certainly, we will have something in one of the 2).

Poland is about 300 miles away from Russia via belarus(and moscow MUCH further). Czech is even further away. And that assumes border to border. That would be == to Miami to the futherest point south on cuba. And to be honest, considering where Russia places their missiles, then it it more like Atlanta to Venezuela. That is the more fair comparisions. These missles will do not good at targeting ANYTHING from russia to America/Canada (but almost certainly, we will have something in one of the 2).

Our economies are NOT tied together. In fact, China is doing all that it can to avoid that. China exports roughly 250 BILLION to usa yearly. OTH, they import about 50 Billion from USA. They ARE making us dependent on them. Right now, China has more than 1 trillion dollars and has the means to buy some of our technology to move to a green environment. But are they? Nope. They are insisting that EU and America should give them the tech knowledge to clean up. They do not want to have an intertwined economy. They DO want USA dependent on them. Otherwise, they would release their money from being tied to ours.

In addition, another big issue is that China is creating a generation that will have 10-15% of their males without having brides. Chinese leadership is NOT stopping this. Instead, they are encouraging the single males to join the military. They are aware that they have 5 x the size of the military, but it is our tech that gives us an edge. But that is why China is busy stealing it, and even approaching Bill Gates to give them tech. and have America open up our knowledge to them. The only high-tech that is kept from them has either dual-use or even just single use of military.

No doubt you view it as cold war era. But the difference is that as long as a small group of ppl in control a country AND we are not intertwined, then we are heading towards a problem.

(data is from '96, couldn't find more recent data using a quick google search and I'm too lazy to keep on looking).

For some other sources, check this graphic for per-capita emissions in 2002. For the US, we have about 19.8 tons, while for China it's about 2.2 tons. Using the CIA World Factbook for current population numbers, we get:

• For the US, a population of 301,139,947, giving an annual CO2 output of 5,962,570,951 tons.
• For China, a population of 1,321,851,888, giving an annual CO2 output of 2,908,074,154 tons.

Of course, there is also Wikipedia:

• For total CO2 emissions, we have 5,872,278,000 tons listed for the US, and 3,300,371,000 tons for China (numbers from 2002).
• Per capita in 2003, we have the US listed with 19.8 metric tons of CO2 for 2003, and China with 3.2 tons. Leaders of the pack are the US Virgin Islands at 121.3 tons, followed by Qatar at 63.1.

(data is from '96, couldn't find more recent data using a quick google search and I'm too lazy to keep on looking).

For some other sources, check this graphic for per-capita emissions in 2002. For the US, we have about 19.8 tons, while for China it's about 2.2 tons. Using the CIA World Factbook for current population numbers, we get:

• For the US, a population of 301,139,947, giving an annual CO2 output of 5,962,570,951 tons.
• For China, a population of 1,321,851,888, giving an annual CO2 output of 2,908,074,154 tons.

Of course, there is also Wikipedia:

• For total CO2 emissions, we have 5,872,278,000 tons listed for the US, and 3,300,371,000 tons for China (numbers from 2002).
• Per capita in 2003, we have the US listed with 19.8 metric tons of CO2 for 2003, and China with 3.2 tons. Leaders of the pack are the US Virgin Islands at 121.3 tons, followed by Qatar at 63.1.

(data is from '96, couldn't find more recent data using a quick google search and I'm too lazy to keep on looking).

For some other sources, check this graphic for per-capita emissions in 2002. For the US, we have about 19.8 tons, while for China it's about 2.2 tons. Using the CIA World Factbook for current population numbers, we get:

• For the US, a population of 301,139,947, giving an annual CO2 output of 5,962,570,951 tons.
• For China, a population of 1,321,851,888, giving an annual CO2 output of 2,908,074,154 tons.

Of course, there is also Wikipedia:

• For total CO2 emissions, we have 5,872,278,000 tons listed for the US, and 3,300,371,000 tons for China (numbers from 2002).
• Per capita in 2003, we have the US listed with 19.8 metric tons of CO2 for 2003, and China with 3.2 tons. Leaders of the pack are the US Virgin Islands at 121.3 tons, followed by Qatar at 63.1.

South America still native? I'd hardly call it that. Let's look at the actual statistics. From https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world -factbook/index.html

Argentina, 40,301,927 people: 97% white (mostly Spanish and Italian), 3% mestizo (mixed white and Amerindian ancestry), Amerindian, or other non-white groups

Brazil, 190,010,647 people: 53.7% white, 38.5% mulatto (mixed white and black), 6.2% black, 0.9% other (includes Japanese, Arab, Amerindian)

Columbia, 44,379,598 people: 58% mestizo (mixes Amerindian and white), 20% white, 14% mulatto, 4% black, 3% mixed black-Amerindian, 1% Amerindian

Peru, 28,674,757 people: 45% Amerindian, 37% mestizo (mixes Amerindian and white), 15% white, 3% other (includes black, Japanese, Chinese)

now with the cell phones its a given the cost would be cheaper for one the coverage area is smaller and there more people to charge in this one area. its simple economics.

the unemployment rate is well into the double digits

unemployment is 2.9%

the unemployment rate is well into the double digits

unemployment is 2.9%

Quite a few Brits I've met seem to work 2-3 jobs. If you are a teenager good luck finding a job, even the local pizza delivery boy is in his early fifties.

Ok, I don't know what backwater piss-hole you're living in, but I'm 24 and not a single one of my friends had trouble finding a job as a teenager, whether it was after-school/weekends or as an apprenticeship. I can't think of a single person in my year at school who didn't have at least one job before university, and there was 150 people in my year, and I was on talking terms with all of them.

I've never met a single person working 2-3 jobs, other than my friend who used to moonlight as a club bouncer. Oh and the lady who worked in my library at primary school. You get taxed higher if you do, it just doesn't make sense for most people.

I've never seen a local pizza delivery boy over 25, but I'll grant you, as an anomaly, this is possible. Talk about selective facts though.

Actually, let's be totally fair here. Yes, having everyone in the world use the same measurement system would make a lot of things easier.

Having everyone in the world speak the same language would make things even easier -- indeed the benefits of a common language are far greater than the benefits of a common measuring system.

Elbonia is a whole country, not local tribal information, but I guess you were making a point.

Here's all you need to know to get up to speed on Estonia https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos /en.html

Now where can I bone up on the info you mentioned?

• fix for IE: filter all sites that contain the text "09*F9*11*02*9D*74*E3*5B*D8*41*56*C5*63*56*88*C0"
• fix for IE: redirect http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=09F911029D74E 35BD84156C5635688C0&btnG=Search to http://www.cia.gov/confess
• fix for OE: filter all emails that contain the text "09*F9*11*02*9D*74*E3*5B*D8*41*56*C5*63*56*88*C0" after forwarding them to snitch@cia.gov
• fix for Vista: Change the NSAKEY from "09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0" to "HEIL_BALLMER_HEIL_BUSH"
• fix for MSN Messenger: filter all messages that contain the text "09*F9*11*02*9D*74*E3*5B*D8*41*56*C5*63*56*88*C0" and report the sender to the child-abuse-reporting-service
• fix for Office: Remove the text "09*F9*11*02*9D*74*E3*5B*D8*41*56*C5*63*56*88*C0" from all loaded documents and have clippy ask "it looks like you are trying to violate the DMCA - would you like to [] go to guantanamo [] pay 3750$ [] switch to linux?"
• fix for Vista: Delete all files that contain the bytes "09*F9*11*02*9D*74*E3*5B*D8*41*56*C5*63*56*88*C0" (unfortunately this affects ntoskrnl.exe)
• fix for Visual Studio: delete all programs that contain the text "09*F9*11*02*9D*74*E3*5B*D8*41*56*C5*63*56*88*C0" (unfortunately this affects a certain hd-disc player)
• fix for Visual Studio: delete all programs that can somehow ever write the text "09*F9*11*02*9D*74*E3*5B*D8*41*56*C5*63*56*88*C0" (they should have asked Henry Gordon Rice first)
• fix for Paint: Do OCR on images and delete all files that contain the text "09*F9*11*02*9D*74*E3*5B*D8*41*56*C5*63*56*88*C0"
• fix for TWAIN: Do OCR on images and discard all images that contain the text "09*F9*11*02*9D*74*E3*5B*D8*41*56*C5*63*56*88*C0"
• fix for Direct3D: Do OCR on Textures and don't render textures that contain the text "09*F9*11*02*9D*74*E3*5B*D8*41*56*C5*63*56*88*C0"
• fix for OCR: if "09*F9*11*02*9D*74*E3*5B*D8*41*56*C5*63*56*88*C0" is recognized - don't return it (making the previous 3 fixes useless)
• fix for Cryptography Service: Delete all Files that might (in ANY way) be an encrypted "09*F9*11*02*9D*74*E3*5B*D8*41*56*C5*63*56*88*C0" (FLOSS fans REALLY love this one)
• fix for MediaPlayer: do speech recognition and delete all audiofiles that contain the spoken text "09*F9*11*02*9D*74*E3*5B*D8*41*56*C5*63*56*88*C0" (fortunately this key doesn't contain an N)
• fix for MineSweeper: don't allow "09*F9*11*02*9D*74*E3*5B*D8*41*56*C5*63*56*88*C0" to be a hiscore name
• fix for Notepad: delete all files that contain the text "09*F9*11*02*9D*74*E3*5B*D8*41*56*C5*63*56*88*C0"
• fix for windows explorer: delete all files that have a filename of "*09*F9*11*02*9D*74*E3*5B*D8*41*56*C5*63*56*88*C0* "
• fix for powershell: "echo *09*F9*11*02*9D*74*E3*5B*D8*41*56*C5*63*56*88*C0*" now crashes the system

In a country nearing 1.4 billion people you would have to spend quite a lot to look important and be noticed.

Have you compared the relative wealth and stability of Thailand and Brazil lately?

Brazil -- GDP ~$1.616 trillion, PPP basis
                    per-capita ~$8,600
                    national gov't budget ~$244B revenues
                    relatively stable center-left government
                    HIV/AIDS prevalence ~0.7% among adults

Thailand --
                    GDP ~$585.9B (PPP)
                    per-capita ~$9,100 PPP
                    national gov't budget ~$40.31B revenues
                    military coup d'etat, violent Islamist unrest in south
                    HIV/AIDS prevalence ~1.5% among adults

So the Thais make slightly more money per-person, but have about double the HIV/AIDS infection rate among adults, so on a $/HIV patient they're far worse off than Brazil. And they're in the middle of a military junta AND needing to deal with some violent separatism... and some Buddhist agitation as well. And Brazil's national government has a significantly larger portion of its GDP than Thailand's, as well. So how are these really comparable to the point that the allegedly poor Brazilians have a 'right' to the same price?

https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos /th.htm
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos /br.htm

Have you compared the relative wealth and stability of Thailand and Brazil lately?

Brazil -- GDP ~$1.616 trillion, PPP basis
                    per-capita ~$8,600
                    national gov't budget ~$244B revenues
                    relatively stable center-left government
                    HIV/AIDS prevalence ~0.7% among adults

Thailand --
                    GDP ~$585.9B (PPP)
                    per-capita ~$9,100 PPP
                    national gov't budget ~$40.31B revenues
                    military coup d'etat, violent Islamist unrest in south
                    HIV/AIDS prevalence ~1.5% among adults

So the Thais make slightly more money per-person, but have about double the HIV/AIDS infection rate among adults, so on a $/HIV patient they're far worse off than Brazil. And they're in the middle of a military junta AND needing to deal with some violent separatism... and some Buddhist agitation as well. And Brazil's national government has a significantly larger portion of its GDP than Thailand's, as well. So how are these really comparable to the point that the allegedly poor Brazilians have a 'right' to the same price?

https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos /th.htm
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos /br.htm

And is the GDP of China increasing faster than the US?

Yes.

Say what you will about the CIA, but their World Factbook rocks. Here is a table with countries according to GDP growth.

China is 12th place (after 11 very small economies) with a 10.5% GDP growth rate.

The US is in 148th place, with a 3.4% growth rate.

But even without taking the relative growth rates into account, China is already too close to the US i size to make economic warfare a realistic option. Washington can huff and puff and maybe make some symbolic gestures, but that's about it when it comes to China.

Or Europe, for that matter, should it ever come to that. See this table. And if you live in the US, please persuade your political leaders never to threaten anybody with economic santions if they haven't read it too. :)

And is the GDP of China increasing faster than the US?

Yes.

Say what you will about the CIA, but their World Factbook rocks. Here is a table with countries according to GDP growth.

China is 12th place (after 11 very small economies) with a 10.5% GDP growth rate.

The US is in 148th place, with a 3.4% growth rate.

But even without taking the relative growth rates into account, China is already too close to the US i size to make economic warfare a realistic option. Washington can huff and puff and maybe make some symbolic gestures, but that's about it when it comes to China.

Or Europe, for that matter, should it ever come to that. See this table. And if you live in the US, please persuade your political leaders never to threaten anybody with economic santions if they haven't read it too. :)

We [the US] don't have to play their game either. Trade is a 2-way negotiation. We don't have to accept all their imports if we don't like their IP treatment.

True in principle, of course. As a sovereign nation, the US is perfectly free to start trade wars with whomever it wants.

But a good rule of thumb for statesmen, is to show restraint in starting wars that you cannot possibly win.

In trade wars, size is all that matters. If a big county and a small one start imposing trade sanctions on each other, both countries are hurt, but the smaller one is hurt more. If there is a big enough difference in size between the two sides, the strategy can actually work. US trade sanctions on Cuba hurt Cuba a lot, but have no significant impact on the US economy. Therefore, the US has been able to keep up the sanctions for about half a century. (But it should of course be noted that this strategy has failed to achieve the primary goal of unseating Castro, even after all that time.)

But in the case of the US vs. Cuba, the US economy is about 300 times as large as the Cuban one in terms of GDP.

With China, it's an entirely different ball game. The relevant figures from the CIA Factbook are:

• US: population 300 million, purchasing power parity GDP 13,000 billion
• China: population 1,320 million, ppp GDP 10,000 billion

That's a considerable advantage for China in terms of population, and almost parity when it comes to economic strength. Add to this the fact that China's percentage of the world's total GDP is rising, whereas the US percentage is declining, and we can skip directly to the bottom line:

There is no way the US can win a sustained trade war against China.

And it's not just China, of course. There is a long list of countries that the US is trying convince to change its copyright laws to better suit US corporate interests. In fact, as the BBC article US copyright lobby out-of-touch points out, the majority of the world's population lives in countries that are being implicitly threatened with trade sanctions by the US over intellectual property issues.

To those of us living outside the US, these threats are just silly. The US economy accounts for 20% of the world's GDP (ppp adjusted), the rest of the world has 80%. Who do you think will win the trade war "the US vs. the rest", if push comes to shove?

When a British newspaper ran the famous headline "Fog over the channel, continent isolated", the empire was already on the decline, even if nobody had noticed it yet. The US threatening the rest of the world with trade sanctions to uphold its views on intellectual property, smacks of just the same attitude helped hasten the demise of what once was the greatest empire on earth.

USA: 6.37 per 1000 live births
European Union: 4.80 per 1000 live births

all according to these guys:
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rank order/2091rank.html

..they forgot to put the US on the watch list. Considering the computer userbase here, the "amount" of piracy might be higher than in any of those countries, or even all of them taken together. Here's some numbers for you: Ukraine Internet Users: 5.278 Million (2005) Russia Internet Users: 23.7 Million (2005) China Internet Users: 123 Million (2006) India Internet Users: 60 Million (2005) United States Internet Users: 205.327 Million (2005) (According to https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/inde x.html) That does not really reflect the whole picture (people there buy bootleg dvd's instead of downloading), but might give you some ideas to think of.

agricultural products (soybeans, fruit, corn) 9.2%, industrial supplies (organic chemicals) 26.8%, capital goods (transistors, aircraft, motor vehicle parts, computers, telecommunications equipment) 49.0%, consumer goods (automobiles, medicines) 15.0% (2003)

agricultural products (soybeans, fruit, corn) 9.2%, industrial supplies (organic chemicals) 26.8%, capital goods (transistors, aircraft, motor vehicle parts, computers, telecommunications equipment) 49.0%, consumer goods (automobiles, medicines) 15.0% (2003)

I'm interested in seeing what factual basis you are making this on? IP does protect large anti-competative companies, and some IP vendors, but I fail to see how there's any actual tie to the US Economy. I'd argue that lessening IP laws will eventually bolster US's economy in the long run and allow for much more diversity domestically... While I'm no economist, just taking some figures from the CIA World Factbook... https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos /us.html#Econ US exports are at: $1.024 trillion f.o.b. (2006 est.) Commodity wise: agricultural products (soybeans, fruit, corn) 9.2%, industrial supplies (organic chemicals) 26.8%, capital goods (transistors, aircraft, motor vehicle parts, computers, telecommunications equipment) 49.0%, consumer goods (automobiles, medicines) 15.0% (2003) US imports: $1.869 trillion f.o.b. (2006 est.) Commodity wise: agricultural products 4.9%, industrial supplies 32.9% (crude oil 8.2%), capital goods 30.4% (computers, telecommunications equipment, motor vehicle parts, office machines, electric power machinery), consumer goods 31.8% (automobiles, clothing, medicines, furniture, toys) (2003)

"Poor and 3rd world nations" aren't usually associated with being near the top in GDP and certainly not at #2. In several years, given current trends, China will become the largest economy in the world.

https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rank order/2001rank.html

I seriously doubt that. That would then mean that most people you know in that age group are already serving, veterans, or are in law enforcement/protection. I don't know about you, but out of all the people I know I would say that less than 10%, more likely less than 5%, fall into those categories.

Now for some numbers!
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos /us.html
Manpower available for military service: males age 18-49: 67,742,879 (Fit: males age 18-49: 54,609,050)

http://www.armyg1.army.mil/hr/demographics/FY05%20 Army%20Profile.pdf
Total Army Strength: About 1 million

So even if you increase that 10 fold, that's nowhere near 'most' of that age group. I can very well say that 'most' of that age group can be concerned about a draft.

The US did not depend on 678 - they considered 1441 the loophole they needed. Resolution 1441 did not authorize the use of force. In fact, both the U.S. ambassador to the UN, John Negroponte, and the UK ambassador Jeremy Greenstock, gave assurances that the resolution provided no "automaticity", no "hidden triggers". The US and UK ambassadors agreed that 1441 included no step to invasion without consultation of the Security Council. The US was keenly aware of this and tried desperately to get UN approval via a new resolution, but they could not. And keep in mind that both Hans Blix and Mohamed ElBaradei had just given the UN reports that further undercut the US push for war - they had found nothing worthy of concern and wanted more time to continue the inspections. The American attack forced the weapons inspectors back out of the country. Don't get me wrong - Saddam was jerking around the international community and playing games with the system. Some of those on the Security Council refusing to authorize war were profitting from illegal deals with Iraq. However, none of that gives the US the right to launch a war of aggression against another sovereign nation.

I disagree for two reasons. First, the US and their allies certainly did rely on UNSEC #678 and UNSEC #687. Here is an op-ed by a State Department ambassador laying out the exact same case. You can find the same rational from Australia, The UK, and even the National Security Council, among others.

Second, UNSEC #1441 specifically recalled and reaffirmed UNSEC #678 and UNSEC #687 which gave authorization to use force, and deplored the fact that Iraq was in "material breach" of the requirements in UNSEC #687.

You mean the Al-Samoud 2 missiles that were declared to the UN in December of 2002 and were considered a violation because they could potentially exceed the 150 km range limit by 30 km? The same Al-Samoud 2 missiles that Iraq was in the process of destroying when the US invasion occurred?

Bingo. They declared these weapons to the UN in December of 2002, but had been banned from possessing them or developing them 12 years prior to that. The fact that it took a carrier group parked on their doorstep in the Gulf to make this declaration is hardly comforting.

I have to admit that I'm at a loss to explain your "North Korean No Dong 2000km ballistic missiles" comment. I'm not aware of any reports about No Dong missiles in Iraq and I can't find anything on Google. No Dong missiles do not even have a 2000 km range.

This information is directly pulled from the 2004 Duelfer report:
Iraq entered into negotiations with North Korean and Russian entities for more capable missile systems. Iraq and North Korea in 2000 discussed a 1,300-km-range missile, probably the No Dong, and in 2002 Iraq approached Russian entities about acquiring the Iskander-E short-range ballistic missile (SRBM).

My apologies about the mis-information on the range, however 1300km is still well above the 150km limit.

Again, I'm at a loss. The Duelfer report was considered a scathing rebuke of American rhetoric and propaganda. It indicated that Saddam wanted to restart his weapons programs as soon as the sanctions were lifted, but I don't think that was disallowed. The report demonstrated that his nuclear program was in shambles, and his chemical and biological programs nonexistent. And why do you guys love to reference David Kay's interim repor

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghai#Economy_and_ demographics

https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rank order/2004rank.html

Look at that CIA link again. The US comes in tenth in the world, Hong Kong by itself comes in 15th. Hong Kong is the 800lb gorrilla of the business world (sorry bill). Talk all you want about the efficiency of a totalitarian government, but do not discount the benefits of unbridled capitalism in China's overall success.

https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos /rs.html

It'd be nice to annotate my other statements with sources but to do it nicely would require more time and effort than I can justify for an internet forum post I wrote in passing.

Someone else did disagree with my brain drain comment; for that I'll just say that when I worked for a major chemical company in R&D a couple years ago there were more Russians than any other foreign nationality, and speaking with them is my basis for the statement, NOT an independent study.

This would suggest that a good number of US citizens are literate in a language other than English, which is not accounted for in the wikipedia article you linked.

The NEWSWEEK Poll, conducted March 28-March 29, has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points for questions based on all registered voters and plus or minus 6 percentage points for results based on registered Republicans and Republican leaners. In conducting the poll, Princeton Survey Research Associates International interviewed 1,004 adults aged 18 and older.