Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

US, UK 'worst places for children'
Al Jolson, uh...Jazerra ^ | WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 2007 | Al jazerra

Posted on 02/14/2007 3:56:18 AM PST by Tulsa Ramjet

Britain and the United States are the worst places in the industrialised world for children to live, according to a report by the United Nations Children's Fund (Unicef).

They ranked among the bottom third in the study which looked at overall well-being, health and safety, education, relationships, risk and their own sense of well-being.

The study said that child poverty - defined as the percentage of children living in homes with incomes below 50 per cent of the national median - remains above the 15 per cent mark in Britain, the US and Ireland, as well as Spain, Portugal and Italy.

"The evidence from many countries persistently shows that children who grow up in poverty are more vulnerable," the report said, especially in terms of academic underachievement, chances of unemployment and low self-esteem.

Child well-being was rated highest in northern Europe, with the Netherlands, Sweden and Denmark leading the list.

"All countries have weaknesses that need to be addressed and no country features in the top third of the rankings for all six dimensions," David Bull, the UK executive director of Unicef, said.

Risk behaviours

Britain lived up to its reputation for "binge-drinking," hazardous sexual activity and drug use, with the report putting the country at the bottom of the rankings for risk behaviours "by a considerable distance".

(Excerpt) Read more at english.aljazeera.net ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: aljazeera; aljazerra; notsogreat; qatar; unitedkingdom; waronterror
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-91 next last
Tell the UNICEF to go raise their kids in the Congo, or Iran, and see how well their children turn out. Especially the females. What a crock. I guess genital mutilation, child soldiers, and rapes of honor don't count for much anymore.
1 posted on 02/14/2007 3:56:20 AM PST by Tulsa Ramjet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet

When do we see some rock star begging for money for poor kids in Alabama.What a bunch of commie bs.


2 posted on 02/14/2007 4:03:18 AM PST by JOHANNES801 (I have no tag line, cause I say nasty things.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet

So, this reporter and the UNICEF folks have never been to a third world country other than for a vacation. Thinks that make you say hmmmmm!


3 posted on 02/14/2007 4:04:12 AM PST by crghill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JOHANNES801

yeah bono, howsabout a bone in ol' allybammy?


4 posted on 02/14/2007 4:04:54 AM PST by Tulsa Ramjet ("If not now, when?" "Because it's judgment that defeats us.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: crghill

"So, this reporter and the UNICEF folks have never been to a third world country other than for a vacation."

What? and step off that plane to get struck by the unbearable heat and stench of dead bodies, burning tires, and murderous flies? Maybe for a night or two for the ol resume', but otherwise all other nations beside the US and UK are doing well. I guess that's why so many mexicans are trying to sneak in with their kids. It is soooo horrible here.


5 posted on 02/14/2007 4:07:21 AM PST by Tulsa Ramjet ("If not now, when?" "Because it's judgment that defeats us.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet
"The study said that child poverty - defined as the percentage of children living in homes with incomes below 50 per cent of the national median - remains above the 15 per cent mark in Britain, the US and Ireland, as well as Spain, Portugal and Italy."

This is such a stupid use of numbers. How about absolute material welfare? According to this measure, if the whole country is just above the subsistence level, with 30% of the people starving, they could still be "better off" than the U.S. if the percentage of children living in homes with incomes less than 50% of the national median was less than 15% (maybe because those children had all died of starvation.

The whole thing looks to be constructed to make more capitalistic societies look bad. The whole idea that a wide spectrum of wealth in a society is bad is idiotic, a stupid idea dreamed up by failing socialists.
6 posted on 02/14/2007 4:07:43 AM PST by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet

Mexico had better immediately take steps to seal its borders.


7 posted on 02/14/2007 4:08:06 AM PST by Mr Ramsbotham (Laws against sodomy are honored in the breech.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet

US, UK are worse than Sudan?

Oh. Oh, it's Al Jizm. "To be a slave in Islam is noble."


8 posted on 02/14/2007 4:08:13 AM PST by Alouette (Learned Mother of Zion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet
The study said that child poverty - defined as the percentage of children living in homes with incomes below 50 per cent of the national median - remains above the 15 per cent mark in Britain, the US and Ireland, as well as Spain, Portugal and Italy.

The bottom 2% in the US still live better than 90% of the global population.

This study is just a waste.

9 posted on 02/14/2007 4:09:15 AM PST by tcostell (MOLON LABE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet

The study said that child poverty - defined as the percentage of children living in homes with incomes below 50 per cent of the national median


That is about the dumbest measure of poverty I have ever encountered. On this basis the kids in Mexico and any poor country are much better off than the kids in the US.


10 posted on 02/14/2007 4:09:45 AM PST by Recon Dad (Marine Spec Ops Dad)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Time to audit UNICEF's books.
Probably a rice-voucher-cash-for-positive-child-reviews scandal brewing.

some UNICEF staffer had been drinking hard when they wrote this.


11 posted on 02/14/2007 4:11:29 AM PST by Tulsa Ramjet ("If not now, when?" "Because it's judgment that defeats us.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet
The study said that child poverty - defined as the percentage of children living in homes with incomes below 50 per cent of the national median - remains above the 15 per cent mark in Britain, the US and Ireland, as well as Spain, Portugal and Italy.

Poor people in the United States have cars, cable TV, cell phones, iPods, and are often fat. Show me another country where they have fat poor people with new iPods. (Hint: Ryhmes with "the UK")

I've been all over the world. Most Americans can't grasp what real poverty is. Many happy, middle class people in other countries live with less material comfort than our own poor. UNICEF should be embarassed to release such a crock. Who gives a rat's ass what the 'median' is? By definition, half of the people will be living under the fifty percent mark, anyway. If America was half billionaires and half millionaires, then by this idiotic study, millioniaires would be living below the poverty line. That doesn't take into account what you can buy with that million dollars.

12 posted on 02/14/2007 4:15:46 AM PST by Steel Wolf (As Ibn Warraq said, "There are moderate Muslims but there is no moderate Islam.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet

Remember those long-ago Halloweens collecting UNICEF money for the poor kids of the world? It turns out that those little bastards should have been collecting money for us instead!!


13 posted on 02/14/2007 4:18:10 AM PST by Chi-townChief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet

Uh huh.....

Best to be raised in a loving place like Palastine where Mom kisses your illiterate noggen while buttoning up your adolescent bomb vest /sarc


14 posted on 02/14/2007 4:18:17 AM PST by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet

That damned Scrappleface is at it again :-)


15 posted on 02/14/2007 4:18:48 AM PST by American in Singapore (Bill Clinton: The Human Stain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steel Wolf

"Who gives a rat's ass what the 'median' is?"

Yeah. Besides, at least in America if you don't have it, you can 'jack someone down the street and take it. What do you get bustin a AK cap in a mullah in Tehran?.....a diseased goat and a stinky head wrap?


16 posted on 02/14/2007 4:23:05 AM PST by Tulsa Ramjet ("If not now, when?" "Because it's judgment that defeats us.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet
Absurd on its face.

US out of the UN
UN out of the US

17 posted on 02/14/2007 4:23:24 AM PST by NonValueAdded (Prevent Glo-Ball Warming ... turn out the sun when not in use)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet

They still haven't carried the Anna Nicole story. They got nothing on Greta.

the world will not end with a bang, or whimper, or cleavage, but a JDAM focused on a group sharing a hooka pipe.


18 posted on 02/14/2007 4:26:14 AM PST by Tulsa Ramjet ("If not now, when?" "Because it's judgment that defeats us.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet

That's pretty funny! Many of those "poor" kids have cell phones, TVs, ipods, computers, toilets in the house, houses, schools, LeBron James shoes, etc. Poor people in other parts of the world have a piece of cloth. The better off ones might have a drinking cup.

As far as binge drinking goes, it's much harder to do in Muzzle'em countries. Their solution to a lot of vices is death.


19 posted on 02/14/2007 4:31:16 AM PST by Right Wing Assault ("..this administration is planning a 'Right Wing Assault' on values and ideals.." - John Kerry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet

Then their are the rapes by UN personnel.


20 posted on 02/14/2007 4:32:12 AM PST by Right Wing Assault ("..this administration is planning a 'Right Wing Assault' on values and ideals.." - John Kerry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet
One Liberal MP was on television this morning, saying that part of the measure was how much fresh air that kids got. They have plenty of fresh air in the Congo - that doesn't make it any less infected with malaria.

Regards, Ivan

21 posted on 02/14/2007 4:33:14 AM PST by MadIvan (I aim to misbehave.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet; Mr Ramsbotham; Alouette

Everyone…I agree this report is flawed, but dump the Iran, Congo, Mexico etc comparisons. The report only includes ‘industrialised’ actions.

Judging by the list here ‘industrialised’ apparently means Europe and the US:

(http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6359363.stm)

Don't ask me why they couldn't manage to get enough data from those economic backwaters (!) Japan and Australia.


22 posted on 02/14/2007 4:35:59 AM PST by FostersExport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet

When the little kids come around and try to collect for UNICEF, I tell them the UN is filled with filled with communists and Nazis who barbecue small African children on spits. They looked shocked and don't know what to say.

The goofy lefty parents, however, go into cardiac arrest, throw little Johnny in the car and speed off at 60 MPH.


23 posted on 02/14/2007 4:41:08 AM PST by sergeantdave (Consider that nearly half the people you pass on the street meet Lenin's definition of useful idiot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet
The study said that child poverty - defined as the percentage of children living in homes with incomes below 50 per cent of the national median - remains above the 15 per cent mark in Britain, the US and Ireland, as well as Spain, Portugal and Italy.

50% of 0 is 0.

24 posted on 02/14/2007 4:42:29 AM PST by nativist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FostersExport
I find their use of statistics meaningless and probably political. The study said that child poverty - defined as the percentage of children living in homes with incomes below 50 per cent of the national median

Really!! Due to the way in which peoples earnings change over time the only reason this number would not be ~50% is that most elderly with grown children do not have large incomes.

Don't ask me why they couldn't manage to get enough data from those economic backwaters (!) Japan and Australia.

Politically incorrect results maybe?

25 posted on 02/14/2007 4:47:55 AM PST by Fraxinus (My opinion worth what you paid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Fraxinus

Regarding Japan I haven't a clue but I have no reason to suspect Austrlia would be finish than either the US or UK. I'm just puzzled by its ommission.

PS - how did I manage to spell 'nation' as 'action'? Must be my hopeless upbringing!


26 posted on 02/14/2007 4:55:25 AM PST by FostersExport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: tcostell

" The bottom 2% in the US still live better than 90% of the global population "


That's probably wrong.


27 posted on 02/14/2007 4:55:32 AM PST by Rummenigge (there's people willing to blow out the light because it casts a shadow)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet
The study said that child poverty - defined as the percentage of children living in homes with incomes below 50 per cent of the national median - remains above the 15 per cent mark in Britain, the US and Ireland, as well as Spain, Portugal and Italy.

Bangs head on desk.

What do they want? That everyone lives in a home with income above the national average?

If only 15% of the children live in homes that are below the national average, I'd say that's pretty good.

Let's reword it: 85% of the children live in homes with incomes above 50% of the national median. Harder to criticise, isn't it?

28 posted on 02/14/2007 5:02:45 AM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet

I am not going to defend the report. But many on here need to read. Where are you getting third world countries.

"in the industrialised world "

They did not include third world countries. So attack the report where it deserves to be attacked. The use of irrelevant statistics and non measurable feel good ones.


29 posted on 02/14/2007 5:05:32 AM PST by pas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet
Britain and the United States are the worst places in the industrialised world for children to live, according to a report by the United Nations Children's Fund (Unicef).

I would say that anything associated with the United Nations reports the polar opposite of the correct findings. Looks like a continuation of the leftist conspiracy to discredit/destroy the USA and Great Britain! Why do we give those folks a penny? The UN should exist on donations, not government money! We are fools to support such vermin!

30 posted on 02/14/2007 5:07:29 AM PST by olezip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet

That must be why so many refugees are seen fleeing this country!! (end sarcasm)


31 posted on 02/14/2007 5:09:04 AM PST by AaronInCarolina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FostersExport
I have no reason to suspect Australia would be finish than either the US or UK.

Truthfully I have no clue either, however given the political criteria they were using, it seemed plausible.

I have amateur's interest in history and one of the things that is striking for most of history is the lack of fecundity of the truly wealthy throughout most of history.

32 posted on 02/14/2007 5:12:25 AM PST by Fraxinus (My opinion worth what you paid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: olezip

Ok, it looks like about 3 of the posters here read the linked article.

One of the factors in the determination was "relationships." That discussion focused on the effect of single parent families. It noted that the US and the UK had the highest rate of single parents, which had a negative effect on the kids. In addition, the focus group is made up of a bunch of European nanny states -- life there isn't bad now . . . its the future that is dicey.

Sorry folks, whether the conclusion of the report is correct or not (its an entirely subjective matter), things like single parenthood and its having a negative impact on our kids makeup are true problems in this country. And the mass of the country just accepts it now as hunky-dory.


33 posted on 02/14/2007 5:17:10 AM PST by hoyaloya
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet
child poverty - defined as the percentage of children living in homes with incomes below 50 per cent of the national median

What a silly definition. Totally meaningless WRT their brainiac conclusions.

34 posted on 02/14/2007 5:17:27 AM PST by savedbygrace (SECURE THE BORDERS FIRST (I'M YELLING ON PURPOSE))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet

Whenever I read this drivel, it gets my blood boiling. It's not just the Congo or Iran. I've traveled to many nice places and I don't think they're anything so great either. Just ask the Jewish kids in France, for example. But more importantly, the only reason these "numbers" are what they are is because there is a certain element in our society here in America that are such horrible parents, the 5 or 6 kids they seem to have apiece (because other than getting their nails done, weaves, grilles, or whatever, all they know how to do is reproduce and of course they have time to do this because they don't work either) are skewing the stats.


35 posted on 02/14/2007 5:21:13 AM PST by Paved Paradise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

This is how mere numbers can mess up the true facts. You made excellent points, especially the remark about child mortality in other countries. If you read this story and decide to move based on their info, then you'd be heading for Venezuela before you'd come here (yeah, right).


36 posted on 02/14/2007 5:22:34 AM PST by Paved Paradise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: pas

I found this part of the report interesting.

Britain and the US were also found to have the worst rankings in terms of children's relationships with their families and peers.

Unicef noted the sensitivity of this field, but said "at the statistical level, there is evidence to associate growing up in single-parent families and stepfamilies with greater risk to well-being," including dropping out of school, leaving home early, poorer health and low pay.

The US, Britain and Sweden had the highest proportion of children living in single-parent families, while Italy, Greece and Spain had the lowest.


37 posted on 02/14/2007 5:26:39 AM PST by kjhm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Fraxinus
Yeesh, yes given the nature of the report I meant to say “I have no reason to suspect Australia would be lower…”

I’m clearly having brain-to-keyboard issues today :o/

38 posted on 02/14/2007 5:28:57 AM PST by FostersExport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet

I almost can't bear it,driving to work each day in my C-Class Mercedes. Coming home to my 4 bedroom house. This place is horrible! Oh the humanity!


39 posted on 02/14/2007 5:30:47 AM PST by crghill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: pas

Oops, my bad. I'm still trying to master the English language.


40 posted on 02/14/2007 5:33:16 AM PST by crghill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet
LOL Now if the bad old US/Britain can convince all illegals to move to Saudi Arabia, Iran, Sudan, Congo, Zimbabwe, Libya, etc. we may have something here.
41 posted on 02/14/2007 5:43:52 AM PST by Chgogal (The USA, where the poor people are fat, have cable, computers, cars.................................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet

LOL


42 posted on 02/14/2007 5:47:17 AM PST by cinives (On some planets what I do is considered normal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: hoyaloya

Let's see - a home with no father versus a home with a murderous jihadist father ... hmmmm

Which might be more detrimental to a kid's welfare ?


43 posted on 02/14/2007 5:49:38 AM PST by cinives (On some planets what I do is considered normal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet

No kidding - this is another B.S. report from the U.N. I wonder how many tax dollars went to create this?


44 posted on 02/14/2007 5:53:34 AM PST by AD from SpringBay (We have the government we allow and deserve.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

That skewed ratio occurred to me as well. What about countries where a greater number of people are wealthy, like Kuwait? Would someone be considered living in poverty if they couldn't afford two luxury yachts?


45 posted on 02/14/2007 5:53:48 AM PST by Burkean
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet

Sooooooooooooo does this mean the UN will start giving us money instead of taking it??

It's for the chiiiiiiiiiiiiiiildren


46 posted on 02/14/2007 5:56:35 AM PST by Mo1 ( http://www.gohunter08.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet
The study said that child poverty - defined as the percentage of children living in homes with incomes below 50 per cent of the national median -

Uh, my math is a bit fuzzy, but isn't this definition sort of like what Garrison Keillor says about the children who live at Lake Woebegon - they are all above average!

47 posted on 02/14/2007 6:05:38 AM PST by maica (America will be a hyperpower that's all hype and no power -- if we do not prevail in Iraq)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tulsa Ramjet

The name of UNICEF official in charge of this report is David BULL. Enough said.


48 posted on 02/14/2007 6:23:48 AM PST by driftless2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rummenigge

I'm sure that if you've ever been to India or China (or Indonesia, or most of Africa) you'd probably be less quick to dismiss the idea.


49 posted on 02/14/2007 7:09:35 AM PST by tcostell (MOLON LABE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: tcostell

That wasn't my point.

The whole study in this article is about industrial nations. The comparison didn't touch India or Angola.

It's neither about wealth alone - it's about education (own desk - time to learn etc. etc.) health and so on.

I've always had the idea that scandinavian nations are just a better place to bring up kids. There's more help organized in the neighborhoud either. The UK people tend to live apparrt from their neighbours. So do we germans.

Certainly that's not for every individual but that's the tendency.

How about your neighborhoud - are your kids been looked after by the neighbours time by time ?


50 posted on 02/14/2007 7:26:38 AM PST by Rummenigge (there's people willing to blow out the light because it casts a shadow)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-91 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson