Norway, best to have a child. the US? Not so much

[velkyn]

http://shine.yahoo.com/team-mom/best-country-raising-kids-report-says-not-united-050400422.html

the US is 25th out of 165.  As expected the worst are places where there is wide spread ignorance and not suprisingly religion, either in misogynistic religions, or religious war. 

[Timtheskeptic]

true. If i were to have a kid, i would prefer another country to raise them because let's face it; US is not very good in the education system.

[kaziglu bey]

Once again, those atheist, socialist devil-worshippers in Scandinavia utterly destroy the predominantly ignorant, religious US in terms of quality of life type indicators. Huge surprise there. As a freshman in college (12 years ago) I became very interested in Norway for these very reasons. It has been performing consistently in the top 5 for virtually any type of ranking for at least as long as the dozen years that I have paid attention to it. I've often thought I would like to move there, but with split custody, it's not happening any time soon. Unless I can convince my ex wife to move there too, it would honestly be a lot better for her as a woman and a mother anyways.

[Nick]

But as a Christian nation we are exceptional.  How can we be that low? I don't believe in the science that put these facts together.

[Graybeard]

Let us consider how the US would do on a Biblical and Godly scale rather than this despicable atheist model with its emphasis on babes suckling at the breast.

Let us disregard hospitals, as they are filled with medics who try to foil God's Plan for your early death!

Give yourself 1 point for each time any of this has happened to you and 2 points if you have carried it out.

There are 10 bonus points for attempting human sacrifice of a child (Abraham and Isaac) and 20 points if you actually carried it out (Jephthah's daughter). If you are an escaped victim, deduct 30 points for spitting in God's face.

Prov 13:24: “He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes.”
Prov 19:18: “Chasten thy son while there is hope, and let not thy soul spare for his crying.”
Prov 22:15: “Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him.”
Prov 23:13: “Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die.”
Prov 23:14: “Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell.”
Prov 29:15: “The rod and reproof give wisdom: but a child left to himself bringeth his mother to shame.”

[nogodsforme]

All this info does to the conservatives is make them double down.

"We need to cut rich folks' taxes more, beat our kids more and drive more gas-guzzlers! We need more guns and more laws that let us shoot people! Build more jails for brown people! Fewer rights for gays! Make it harder to get birth control! Add high fructose corn syrup to all foods! Teach everyone less science! Put more religion into the schools! Censor everything we don't like!"

That'll do it.

[Nick]

All this info does to the conservatives is make them double down.

"We need to cut rich folks' taxes more, beat our kids more and drive more gas-guzzlers! We need more guns and more laws that let us shoot people! Build more jails for brown people! Fewer rights for gays! Make it harder to get birth control! Add high fructose corn syrup to all foods! Teach everyone less science! Put more religion into the schools! Censor everything we don't like!"

That'll do it.

All correct except for one thing.  We want rich people to pay less taxes.  They are our "job creators" and they earned that money.  We don't want no cherity except out welfare checks and food stamps.  Them there are our rights.

[nogodsforme]

And keep the goddamn gummint outta my life.

Except for my medicare. 
And my unemployment insurance,
social security,
roads,
schools,
air and water quality,
zoning board,
utilities,
post offices,
libraries,
parks,
food inspection,
police,
fire,
coroner,
emergency rescue,
small claims court,
criminal justice system,
animal control,
community colleges,
state universities,
forest preservation,
drug safety,
driver's licenses,
business licenses,
pet licenses,
banking regulation,
army,
navy,
air force,
marines,
coast guard,
border patrol,
immigration,
small business loans,
student loans,
scholarships,
farm subsidies,
veteran's benefits,
business contracts,
and everything else the government does for me, my family, friends and neighbors. Leave all that stuff. Just cut out all the fat and waste.

[mrbiscoop]

The best place to have a child would be the third moon of Mars. (hint: Mars has only 2 moons)

[Wrec]

Now, if only we could come up with a system that makes people actually having children. Birth rates are below what's required to maintain a stable population, and it looks like it's not going to change anytime soon. Probably because young women still can't be sure their careers won't be negatively affected by having children, and companies routinely see young women as liabilities who are just going to start having children when they get a position. So no, not everything is allright in the nordics.

[Nick]

true. If i were to have a kid, i would prefer another country to raise them because let's face it; US is not very good in the education system.

We just don't got no smarts anymore.

[Truth OT]

These types of studies do not dig beyond the surface and give blanket answers as if one size truly fits all. To keep it real, as a black man, ain't no way in hell I would consider raising my family in Norway, Finland, or Sweden. My family would sorely lack the cultural benefits of being raised and exposed to individuals of similar background, family history, etc.

Comparing a nation like Norway which has a population roughly the size of the Houston, TX surrounding area to the USA, a nation with a population in the 100's of millions, is an apples to oranges comparison. The USA is exponentially more diverse than Norway not only in ethnic makeup, but also in how different the ethnicities are within the nation. Norway had a strong assimilation policy from the 19th century up to the 1970s that served to help weed out diversity. What has come of that is a nation of a more likeminded population with less of a massive subcultural divide or influence. Naturally because of this there will likely be less of a divergence within the population as if relates to education, income, and cultural norms. I would imagine such a prevailing culture would lead to a large middle class and a level of national continuity that a much larger and vastly more diverse nation like the USA would be hard pressed to acheive in light of those factors.

[EV]

Okay, I just spent 2 hours doing some research into this and correlated the data in the report from Save the Children[1](that Velkyn's article linked to) and some statistics on Global atheism and came up with these results.

TL;DR at the bottom 

The data for the percentage of atheism can be presumed to be higher than the given value, as the data is from 2005[2]

Ranking is how high on the quality of parenting, or the 'Mother's Index Rank' the percentage of atheists is people who do not believe in a God or Higher Power.

RANKING --- PERCENTAGE ATHEISTS

• Norway     17%
• Iceland     11%
• Sweden     23%
• New Zealand  35%
• Denmark    19%
• Finland       16%
• Australia    22%
• Belgium    27%
• Ireland        4%
• UK            20%
• Holland       27%
• Germany    25%
• Slovenia    16%
• France       33%
• Portugal      3%

As we can see, in the More Developed Countries (MEDC'S for those geographers among you) where these statistics are from (the countries were on page 55 of the report linked in the footnote), [/b]the top 15 for parenting are almost solely in Europe.[/b] The exceptions being Australia and New Zealand, which were incidentally British colonies.

We can see from the data above that apart from Ireland and Portugal, the incidence of atheism is fairly high in regards to the percentage of Atheism. There were 32 countries in the sample, and the majority (bar 3 out of 15) of the top 15 countries at parenting are in the top 50% of atheist countries in Europe.

The exceptions are, Iceland (2. 11%), Ireland (9. 4%) and Portugal (15. 3%). I know that Ireland and Portugal are renowned for being heavily Christian, not too sure about Iceland.

The average level of atheism in Europe is 14% for comparison.

I would postulate that this data shows that a higher degree of atheism in a country can lead to it being a better country for children to grow up in, but the factors considered in the parenting may also be brought to a better standard by community based religion (as in Ireland). Of course then you can argue that it is wrong to brainwash a child religiously but I'm not proving that with this study

Factors:

• Lifetime risk of maternal death
• Percent of women using modern contraception
• Female life expectancy at birth (years)
• Expected number of years of formal female schooling
• Maternity leave benefits 2011
• Ratio of estimated female to male earned income
• Participation of women in national government (% seats held by women)
• Under-5 mortality rate
• Gross pre-primary enrollment ratio (% of total)
• Gross secondary enrollment ratio

/study

TL;DR- a higher degree of atheism in a country can appear to lead to it to be a better country for children to grow up in. It's probably right.

1.	http://www.savethechildren.org/atf/cf/%7B9def2ebe-10ae-432c-9bd0-df91d2eba74a%7D/STATE-OF-THE-WORLDS-MOTHERS-REPORT-2012-FINAL.PDF
2.	http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_atheism#Studies_and_statistics

[Truth OT]

I would postulate that this data shows that a higher degree of atheism in a country can lead to it being a better country for children to grow up in, but the factors considered in the parenting may also be brought to a better standard by community based religion (as in Ireland). Of course then you can argue that it is wrong to brainwash a child religiously but I'm not proving that with this study

Factors:

• Lifetime risk of maternal death
• Percent of women using modern contraception
• Female life expectancy at birth (years)
• Expected number of years of formal female schooling
• Maternity leave benefits 2011
• Ratio of estimated female to male earned income
• Participation of women in national government (% seats held by women)
• Under-5 mortality rate
• Gross pre-primary enrollment ratio (% of total)
• Gross secondary enrollment ratio

/study

TL;DR- a higher degree of atheism in a country can appear to lead to it to be a better country for children to grow up women to live in independently. It's probably right.

Thanks for putting in the time on this. These correlations are interesting to say the least. The one question however, that keeps coming to mind for me is the question of how 'better' is defined as we look at this from the perspective of children. Looking at what the data reveals on its surface, I would almost prefer having my daughter grow up in one of the countries mentioned on this list, but not so much for my son believe it or not. I also wonder how attainable and commonplace a rags to riches accent would be in these nations.

In my opinion, the statistics about the above countries that aren't broadcasted enough are demographical in nature. The demographic influence on a society is quite powerful and should not be overlooked when comprising such lists. How homogenous are the populations? How many divergent subcultural influences have a voice within the national landscape? Has there been a national somewhat coersive cultural assimilation put in place by governing bodies that dates back generations? 

[nogodsforme]

You have a good point, TOT.   Many of the countries that post good numbers on human development are very homogenous: Norway, Sweden, Iceland, Japan. When populations are more diverse, there can be resistance to spending tax money on the well-being of people "not like us". Australia and Canada are more diverse, and still have pretty good numbers.

The places in the world I feel more accepted racially (like Africa and Latin America) aren't the nicest places to be in human development terms.  Any way you look at it, the US could do a lot more on human development, considering how much money we spend on health, dealing with social problems, etc.

[EV]

You have a good point, TOT.   Many of the countries that post good numbers on human development are very homogenous: Norway, Sweden, Iceland, Japan. When populations are more diverse, there can be resistance to spending tax money on the well-being of people "not like us". Australia and Canada are more diverse, and still have pretty good numbers.

Fair point, also fair point TOT. I was only going on what I had... 

The dates of the statistics are 6 years apart anyway. It's not a particularly respectable study,I just did it because I found it interesting!

[Wrec]

Thanks for putting in the time on this. These correlations are interesting to say the least. The one question however, that keeps coming to mind for me is the question of how 'better' is defined as we look at this from the perspective of children. Looking at what the data reveals on its surface, I would almost prefer having my daughter grow up in one of the countries mentioned on this list, but not so much for my son believe it or not. I also wonder how attainable and commonplace a rags to riches accent would be in these nations.

In my opinion, the statistics about the above countries that aren't broadcasted enough are demographical in nature. The demographic influence on a society is quite powerful and should not be overlooked when comprising such lists. How homogenous are the populations? How many divergent subcultural influences have a voice within the national landscape? Has there been a national somewhat coersive cultural assimilation put in place by governing bodies that dates back generations?

I'd venture to say the term "better" here simply means better in the ways you can realiably measure, for example infant mortality, education recieved on average, equality with other children concerning possibilities in their lives and so on.

The "rags to riches"-point is an interesting one. In the nordic countries heavy emphasis is put on that everyone recieve equal opportunities. Anyone, regardless of financial or cultural background, can become a doctor or lawyer, just to pick a few stereotypical ways to get well-off. In countries like the US, for every successful rags-to-riches person, how many actually tried it and failed?
Some statistics on this would be interesting, but I think the amount of people living in absolute poverty in the US say a lot about how it actually is. For every successful businessman, athlete, actor/actress, performer, there's scores and scores of people who just didn't make it.

I'd also like to see some statistical analysis on the way cultural diversity affects possibilities for children, or just people. I do however feel the need to ask you to clarify one point;
What do you mean by "homogenous populations"? I assume you mean culturally, but can't help wondering if you're meaning racially. Usually culturally is just a diplomatically correct way of saying racially, since most people readily think of caucasians when talking about sausage, and africans when talking about okra (Yes, I picked food culture because I'm hungry! )

If the above is correct, and I'm not saying it is, then in what way does it matter what the people you grow up with look like? Isn't it the personalities of people that we're interested in and should be focused on, not the exterior.

So I suppose the real question, then, is; what are the effects of cultural diversity on the development of children? I'm sure there's mostly positive effects, but I'd like to hear from someone who knows about this stuff.

Oh, and I'm sorry my intention is not to hijack the thread, please forgive my transgression.

Regards,
Wrec