Well, since he is using 45 million, I'm assuming the number came from the 2005 census.
Quote:
|
Nearly half of the 45 million fall in the category of my 26-year-old nephew. He smokes cigarettes, dates, eats out, goes to movies and, like all young people, lives through his cell phone. With a slight change in priorities, he could afford health insurance, the cost of which at his age and health starts at about $100 a month.
|
The U.S. Census states that 40% of those uninsured are 18-34. Not nearly half, it is 40%. And being between 18-34 (yes, that's 16 years) does not mean you won't get sick or have an accident. THEY STILL COUNT.
Quote:
|
Millions more can access health care — through SCHIP (State Children's Health Insurance Program), Medicaid or other government programs. But for whatever reason, 11 million people simply refuse to take advantage of them.
|
Can't argue this, I have no idea where we got this number from. However, why would these people not count?
Quote:
|
Several million other Americans who want insurance do, indeed, go without it — for a time. Many are, however, between jobs, and most — at some point — will find employment that either offers health insurance or pays enough so that they can buy it. Millions more work at companies that offer health insurance, and for a few dollars out of every paycheck, they could add family members. They choose not to.
|
As Kmikl noted, these people are not exempt from cancer, diseases of all sorts, accidents, etc. Statistically, it doesn't actually matter if that 45 million are all temporary or if they are all long-term, the total expected number of uninsured people in need of health care will be the same.
Quote:
|
What about criminals without insurance? More than 2 million Americans
|
Is he talking about prisoners? They are guaranteed health care from the government, are covered under state programs and would not be considered "uninsured" by the U.S. Census. He does not give a source, so I am unsure what he is referring to.
Quote:
|
As for infant mortality, a 2007 study by economists June and David O'Neill found that low birth weight drastically increases an infant's chance of dying. They compared U.S. infant mortality (6.8 per 1,000 births) with Canada's (5.3). Teen mothers are far more likely to have low-weight babies, and America's teen motherhood rate is three times higher than Canada's. They determined that if Canada had America's low-weight birth distribution, Canada's infant mortality rate would rise from 5.3 to 7.06. If America had Canada's low-weight birth distribution, our infant mortality rate would fall from 6.8 to 5.4.
|
He jumps from America's teen births, to birth weight distribution. Your lower birth weight distribution does not necessarily only come from the higher number of teen births. Nonetheless, iit also helps that any pregnant mother in Canada can go visit a doctor to help ensure their babies are healthy, get tips on advice, etc. The biggest contributor to baby weight, regardless of the mother's age, is prenatal care and nutrition.
Linear Mode
