|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
wishfullthinkng
Joined: 05 Mar 2010
|
 Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 9:53 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Savant wrote: |
| wishfullthinkng wrote: |
| Adventurer wrote: |
| Today, I was walking in Itaewon not too far from the foreign store, and I saw this mother in a motorcycle, and she was driving with her little child in front of her. That's child endangerment. The mother seemed so happy and was smiling while driving with her child on the motorbike. If they got into an accident, the child would possibly be severely injured, and it would be her fault. Korea should prevent irresponsible parents from doing such things, IMHO. |
Bold comments are mine.
oh noes. not a child on a motorbike!!!
did you ever think that might be her only mode of transportation for her particular situation? of course you didn't.
Unless she was taking her child to a Hospital ER [which I doubt] then fair game. Other than that, I don't see a good reason for it.
what makes the baby more important than the woman? sounds like you don't actually care for either of them, just that you care about controlling how they act. the world is overpopulated. That woman and child could have made it less overpopulated. coddling people based on your own agenda or the pure love you have for all the wonderful people isn't going to help anyone.
protip: if you dislike children on motorbikes never travel around se asia.
your mind = blown.
New Tourism Slogan: Come to Korea - We remind you of the worst bits of SE Asia
|
|
facts:
1. you do not know her story, nor will you ever.
2. you are no one to judge her or tell her what she can or cannot do in this particular situation. in fact you are probably simply no one.
3. my post had nothing to do with korea, it was about the close mindedness of the op.
4. this post also has nothing to do with korea. it is about your close mindedness and obvious and moronic desire to hate on the country where you reside.
5. bears beat battlestar galactica. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 11:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Anyone who thinks that traveling in/on a motorized vehicle traveling at speeds that allow for only seconds to stop or avoid a collision, on roads crowded with others, who may or may not be distracted/inebriated, is delusional. Yes things can make it safer, but the very nature of the beast makes it a somewhat risky proposition.
At some point you have to realize that there will be a risk and chance of death and get from point A to point B sometime that day.
And I agree, that for a lot of people a motorbike might be the only means of transportation and guess what? You and your child have to get from point A to point B on that motorbike.
Now you may say you would take the subway or a bus, but until you're a parent and having to get around town on a schedule, then hold off. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
joeteacher
Joined: 11 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 12:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
I don't understand how anyone could possibly defend driving a child around on a motorbike. Are you insane?
I've seen families of four on them, only the dad wearing a helmet. They are complete idiots. I don't care if that's your only mode of transport..walk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wishfullthinkng
Joined: 05 Mar 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 1:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| joeteacher wrote: |
I don't understand how anyone could possibly defend driving a child around on a motorbike. Are you insane?
I've seen families of four on them, only the dad wearing a helmet. They are complete idiots. I don't care if that's your only mode of transport..walk! |
there is a difference between defending someone blindly, and understanding that the realities of life aren't what you sometimes think they are. overly entitled people such as yourself have a hard time understanding that if they ever do at all.
let's see what you would do if you were born into a poor family or got bad cards dealt to you in life and were in a situation with a family of four with nothing but your motorbike. i don't like to make generalizations or assumptions, but i GUARANTEE you'd be singing a different tune. to say they are idiots not only shows your own idiocy and lack of cognition, but shows you how little of scope you have about the world at large. the only thing i can tell people like you is travel more and see more of the world and not just hang out with tourists.
i'm not doubting the lack of safety of a family of four on a motorbike. that's dangerous to a degree, no if ands or buts. but some people simply have no choice, and as i've said in a previous post, there are too many people on this planet and someone picked up that i was alluding to the idea that it would actually be beneficial for the planet if the mortality rate went up.
what i really don't understand about all this though is why someone who had no business with a family of four on a motorbike would get so riled up about it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
crescent
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Location: yes.
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 1:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
^
So add the ubiquitous scooter examples we all see regularly to the countless times we've all seen kids jumping around the back seats of cars, or the front seats for that matter.
Then, add to that all the times Ive seen toddlers chasing each other around bus stops, literally half a meter away from charging buses and charging ajumas, while mom sends her text messages, completely unaware.
Then, add to that all the times I'v seen groups of mothers walk in front of their toddlers on narrow sidewalks, chatting while their kids are out of view amid the delivery scooters, again half a meter away from the street.
What about the exacto-knives parents give their kids to sharpen pencils. In my hogwan years, we had to do a finger repair each month.
How about all the times parents walk with their families down streets side by side, with, instead of against traffic. Or just right down the middle for that matter.
And what about the boys bathroom at the hogwan I worked at. They stored bleach and various other cleaning chemicals in plain view on the floor.
Add to that the bus drivers who put schedule ahead of safety and stop in the inside lane of traffic to pick up kids going to school.... or drive so terribly they almost throw senior citizens to the floor.
Oh, and then there's all the times I've almost fell and broke my neck in the winter after sliding on a half frozen glaze of mop water left over from a cleaner. Sign? What's that?
And what about the crowds of kids chasing the insect repellant scooter around, basking in the fumes.
Does that all have something to do with not seeing the world at large, or does that have everything to do with the fact that there is a complete lack of safety awareness here. You can go on about SE Asia, where life is cheap, but this is a thread about Korea, a nation claiming to be highly developed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
northway
Joined: 05 Jul 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 3:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| joeteacher wrote: |
I don't understand how anyone could possibly defend driving a child around on a motorbike. Are you insane?
I've seen families of four on them, only the dad wearing a helmet. They are complete idiots. I don't care if that's your only mode of transport..walk! |
#firstworldblindness |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 4:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| crescent wrote: |
What about the exacto-knives parents give their kids to sharpen pencils. In my hogwan years, we had to do a finger repair each month.
Back in the day before our country got sissified and people still joined the Boy Scouts, things like kids with knives wasn't seen as some sort of danger.
And what about the boys bathroom at the hogwan I worked at. They stored bleach and various other cleaning chemicals in plain view on the floor.
What are they just going to start drinking the bleach. You really think kids are that dumb? And if they do, well then that kid was probably going to do something moronic at some point in their life and die anyway.
Oh, and then there's all the times I've almost fell and broke my neck in the winter after sliding on a half frozen glaze of mop water left over from a cleaner. Sign? What's that?
Watching where you step? What's that?
|
Some of your points were valid, but some were just ridiculous.
You know what it says? It says you obviously grew up in a sheltered, sterilized lifestyle.
Some of us grew up around things like farms, machinery, aircraft, tools, chemicals, large horned barnyard animals, guns, large crowds, moving vehicles, cramped areas and so on and so forth and learned that you had to watch out. And yes, accidents happen. At some point you have to live life and accept that there is always a chance you or your loved ones could die because someone else is an idiot or that you yourselves do something stupid.
My dad had me using knives by the time I was what? Six? I learned to watch where I stepped by taking out feed for the animals. I learned not to drink bleach because of the skull and crossbones on the bottle and the fact that I'm not a total idiot. I don't think my parents even had to teach me that one.
What, you think putting bleach in an out of reach place won't stop a kid from reaching it? Kids will look and explore through anything. You can't keep an eye on them 24-7. If there is a way to make something dangerous, kids will find out how.
Like the old man said "Stay away from knives and fire. I'm going to bed." The underlying point of which is that you can only do so much to stop a kid from being an idiot and you can't spend all of your waking hours making sure they don't get out a knife or matches and do something stupid.
If you don't want your kids to risk injury you can always put them on a leash or duct tape them to some sort of red wagon. Otherwise, I hate to break it to you future perfect parent, but at some point your eyes won't be watching your kids and they're going to run around and do something stupid and make you look bad. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
crescent
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Location: yes.
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 6:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
Some of your points were valid, but some were just ridiculous.
You know what it says? It says you obviously grew up in a sheltered, sterilized lifestyle.
Some of us grew up around things like farms, machinery, aircraft, tools, chemicals, large horned barnyard animals, guns, large crowds, moving vehicles, cramped areas and so on and so forth and learned that you had to watch out. And yes, accidents happen. At some point you have to live life and accept that there is always a chance you or your loved ones could die because someone else is an idiot or that you yourselves do something stupid.
My dad had me using knives by the time I was what? Six? I learned to watch where I stepped by taking out feed for the animals. I learned not to drink bleach because of the skull and crossbones on the bottle and the fact that I'm not a total idiot. I don't think my parents even had to teach me that one.
What, you think putting bleach in an out of reach place won't stop a kid from reaching it? Kids will look and explore through anything. You can't keep an eye on them 24-7. If there is a way to make something dangerous, kids will find out how.
Like the old man said "Stay away from knives and fire. I'm going to bed." The underlying point of which is that you can only do so much to stop a kid from being an idiot and you can't spend all of your waking hours making sure they don't get out a knife or matches and do something stupid.
If you don't want your kids to risk injury you can always put them on a leash or duct tape them to some sort of red wagon. Otherwise, I hate to break it to you future perfect parent, but at some point your eyes won't be watching your kids and they're going to run around and do something stupid and make you look bad. |
You are full of assumptions, aren't you? Stop pretending like you know me or any of the instances I explained.
Watch where I step? Oh, you mean like I could actually SEE that moist film? LOL! Do you think I'd blissfully walk on it if I could SEE it? What else...? Oh, I suppose it's still my fault because I should've gotten my eyes checked. Hey, here's an idea. Just put a sign up so some senior doesn't wipe out and crack a hip. Is the concept really that outlandish to you?
And while those boys never drank those chemicals , they sure did play around with them. There were no skull and crossbones on the random plastic containers. Even you, in all your gloriousness at 6 years old wouldn't know what's inside. Congratulations that you don't see anything wrong with leaving a bunch of chemicals around for little kids to experiment with. I'm sure the mark of being an intelligent, responsible adult means, given the choice of minimizing obvious risks or not, you'd choose not to.
Is it being a 'perfect parent' or just a responsible adult to at least put some effort in keeping such things out of access? Is it that difficult?
But hah, I got a real kick out of the sterilized upbringing thing. Proof again that you have a desperate need to make assumptions. Here's a shock... I was also raised on a farm until I was a teenager. Grimsby, Ontario. I picked fruit on 15 foot ladders when I was 7, drove tractors and operated machinery starting around 12. I was filleting fish at around 13, and at 14 I rode my bike 5km at 5am to my part time job cleaning racquetball courts for court credit. I was too young to get paid, yet old enough to carry keys, and open up a sports complex/ice rink.
The difference between the experience I had, and what I see in Korea, was that my parents taught me how to do things safely. There was guidance, and the minimization of obvious high risks until I was old enough to know better. That goes for all the adults around me. If you parents didn't do so, they were irresponsible. Plain and simple.
Seriously, what's with the hyperbole? Talk about being ridiculous. It's almost as if you're arguing with your own imagination. When did I advocate that people monitor their kids 24/7? Ever think that being a responsible adult is enough? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NilesQ
Joined: 27 Nov 2006
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
I have been told flat out that Korean mothers love their kids more than "western" mothers do. It was the funniest thing I ever heard. I have never seen kids used as status symbols as much as they are here. This facination with education is not so much for the betterment of the child, but the pride and prestige of the mother and family. Validation of the mother in the eyes of the in-laws.
I do think that Korean and western definitions of "love" are quite different, too. Western thinking has that tough love to it. Forcing a child to become independent is seen as a loving thing to do in western countries, where Koreans might think it's abondoning or not supporting a young adult. Different approaches. I've known Koreans who were actually shocked that I still talked to my parents. They just figured that Canadian families break up once the kids get thrown out of the house at 18  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 1:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crescent wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
Some of your points were valid, but some were just ridiculous.
You know what it says? It says you obviously grew up in a sheltered, sterilized lifestyle.
Some of us grew up around things like farms, machinery, aircraft, tools, chemicals, large horned barnyard animals, guns, large crowds, moving vehicles, cramped areas and so on and so forth and learned that you had to watch out. And yes, accidents happen. At some point you have to live life and accept that there is always a chance you or your loved ones could die because someone else is an idiot or that you yourselves do something stupid.
My dad had me using knives by the time I was what? Six? I learned to watch where I stepped by taking out feed for the animals. I learned not to drink bleach because of the skull and crossbones on the bottle and the fact that I'm not a total idiot. I don't think my parents even had to teach me that one.
What, you think putting bleach in an out of reach place won't stop a kid from reaching it? Kids will look and explore through anything. You can't keep an eye on them 24-7. If there is a way to make something dangerous, kids will find out how.
Like the old man said "Stay away from knives and fire. I'm going to bed." The underlying point of which is that you can only do so much to stop a kid from being an idiot and you can't spend all of your waking hours making sure they don't get out a knife or matches and do something stupid.
If you don't want your kids to risk injury you can always put them on a leash or duct tape them to some sort of red wagon. Otherwise, I hate to break it to you future perfect parent, but at some point your eyes won't be watching your kids and they're going to run around and do something stupid and make you look bad. |
You are full of assumptions, aren't you? Stop pretending like you know me or any of the instances I explained.
Watch where I step? Oh, you mean like I could actually SEE that moist film? LOL! Do you think I'd blissfully walk on it if I could SEE it? What else...? Oh, I suppose it's still my fault because I should've gotten my eyes checked. Hey, here's an idea. Just put a sign up so some senior doesn't wipe out and crack a hip. Is the concept really that outlandish to you?
And while those boys never drank those chemicals , they sure did play around with them. There were no skull and crossbones on the random plastic containers. Even you, in all your gloriousness at 6 years old wouldn't know what's inside. Congratulations that you don't see anything wrong with leaving a bunch of chemicals around for little kids to experiment with. I'm sure the mark of being an intelligent, responsible adult means, given the choice of minimizing obvious risks or not, you'd choose not to.
Is it being a 'perfect parent' or just a responsible adult to at least put some effort in keeping such things out of access? Is it that difficult?
But hah, I got a real kick out of the sterilized upbringing thing. Proof again that you have a desperate need to make assumptions. Here's a shock... I was also raised on a farm until I was a teenager. Grimsby, Ontario. I picked fruit on 15 foot ladders when I was 7, drove tractors and operated machinery starting around 12. I was filleting fish at around 13, and at 14 I rode my bike 5km at 5am to my part time job cleaning racquetball courts for court credit. I was too young to get paid, yet old enough to carry keys, and open up a sports complex/ice rink.
The difference between the experience I had, and what I see in Korea, was that my parents taught me how to do things safely. There was guidance, and the minimization of obvious high risks until I was old enough to know better. That goes for all the adults around me. If you parents didn't do so, they were irresponsible. Plain and simple.
Seriously, what's with the hyperbole? Talk about being ridiculous. It's almost as if you're arguing with your own imagination. When did I advocate that people monitor their kids 24/7? Ever think that being a responsible adult is enough? |
Well then how are you so freaked out by all of this? What there wasn't some kid in your area who did something stupid? You never did anything stupid and life endangering when your parents were or were not around? You never climbed a tree? Rode a bike without a helmet? If you say no, then you are one of two things- A liar or a bore. If you're lying, fine. At least you have a chance. But if you actually never rode a bike without a helmet then you're a total bore.
I'm sorry, but yes a 6 year old can tell the difference between something under the sink covered in filth and smelling as bad as sin and grape juice. And whose to say those kids weren't told "Don't drink the bleach?" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
crescent
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Location: yes.
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 4:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Well then how are you so freaked out by all of this? |
I'm not, that's your assumption. I'm making a case for an argument, so get over yourself.
| Steelrails wrote: |
| What there wasn't some kid in your area who did something stupid? You never did anything stupid and life endangering when your parents were or were not around? You never climbed a tree? Rode a bike without a helmet? If you say no, then you are one of two things- A liar or a bore. If you're lying, fine. At least you have a chance. But if you actually never rode a bike without a helmet then you're a total bore. |
Why is it that every single time you reply, you make up your own argument, or you morph the argument into something it isn't. This isn't about kids being kids. It's about parents not minding their infants in seriously dangerous situations, or teaching them simple safety skills when they're older. It's about other adults not being responsible in minimizing dangerous risks for children. Now, I know this still won't sink in, so ask me again in your next post.
| Steelrails wrote: |
| I'm sorry, but yes a 6 year old can tell the difference between something under the sink covered in filth and smelling as bad as sin and grape juice. And whose to say those kids weren't told "Don't drink the bleach?" |
'Whose'? Love the interrogative form of that command. So, the crux of your position comes down to a 6 year old drinking bleach? Something that has indeed happened before, but yet you say wouldn't happen. You haven't noticed how great cleaning chemicals smell these days? Does one have to drink them to get seriously hurt? Here's the thing: Lethal chemicals shouldn't have been on the floor for a 6 year old to play with. Period. If you feel otherwise, you're in the minority and your actions irresponsible. If someone else's child was burned by chemicals lying around in easy access while in your care, you would be legally liable.
Of course I didn't always wear the helmet my parents pleaded with me to wear. But they gave me one, and they told me how important it was even though the traffic around me was exponentially less dangerous than it is here. I also wore steel-toe boots and gloves while working around machinery, If they caught me without these things, I was punished. See? Responsible.
Now, is there anything else I can clear up for you, or any other words you'd like to put in my mouth? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 9:06 pm Post subject: Re: Korea's utter lack of a child safety culture |
|
|
| crescent wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
Speaking of traffic accident rates...
http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/health_glance-2011-en/01/05/index.html?contentType=/ns/StatisticalPublication,/ns/Chapter&itemId=/content/chapter/health_glance-2011-8-en&containerItemId=/content/serial/19991312&accessItemIds=&mimeType=text/html
| Quote: |
| In OECD countries alone transport accidents were responsible for more than 120 000 deaths in 2009, occurring most often in the United States (45 000), Mexico (17 000), Korea and Japan (7 000 each). |
Even if we take the population difference in account (approx six to one) the U.S still has a slightly higher rate.
And things are getting better.
| Quote: |
| As a result, death rates due to transport accidents have been halved in OECD countries since 1995 (Figure 1.5.2). Estonia, Iceland, Korea, Portugal and Japan have seen the largest declines, with a reduction of 60% or more since 1995, although the number of vehicle kilometres travelled has increased in the same period (OECD/ITF, 2010). Death rates have also declined in the United States, but at a slower pace, and therefore remain above the OECD average |
I'm dealing with mortality as it seems to me to be somewhat more serious than injury.
As for deaths by disease that is not really a major cause in developed countries such as Korea and the U.S.
And that link you posted is not a injury rate but a DEATH by injury rate.
I've already posted two more recent links which show Canada and the U.S ahead.
As for posting world wide non fatal injury rates...can't find them. Most links only show mortality rates by accidents. |
I realize the link I provided was death by injury. What I meant was, that injury rates would be more telling of safety issues. The fact remains that death by injury stats are a better measurement of safety issues than mortality rates. Mortality rates are subject to a wide range of parameters other than safety issues. Disease, and terminal illness is indeed a large factor in mortality even in industrialized nations. If you feel that's not true, then show proof that disease and illnesses are a negligible part of the overall result.
Your stats regarding traffic deaths are not only skewed by population, but by vehicles on the road. They also do not account for injuries, many of which go unreported in favour of blood money in S.K., versus the Litigious States of America.
Again, dishonesty? |
Dishonesty? I copied and pasted a link. The link did not break down the stats by population and vehicles on the road. If it had you might have had a point.
As for not accounting for injuries it didn't mention that either. But while we are on the subject do you have a link for this claim that many traffic injuries are settled in fovor of blood money and unreported?
Otherwise it's sheer speculation that such incidents make up a substantial amount of the total.
But while we are talking about "blood money"...you are aware that most cases in America are settled out of court?
97% of civil cases are either dismissed or settled before trial
http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2004/05/31/newscolumn5.html?page=all
70% of all cases are settled out of court. Only about 6% go to trial.
http://www.nytimes.com/1987/12/04/us/the-law-settling-out-of-court-gamble-or-skill.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm
It shows overwhelmingly that people prefer to settle their own disputes and prefer to take whatever compensation they can get without the hassle and time of a trial. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| It's about parents not minding their infants in seriously dangerous situations, or teaching them simple safety skills when they're older. It's about other adults not being responsible in minimizing dangerous risks for children. Now, I know this still won't sink in, so ask me again in your next post. |
If all this was a big a deal as you say, there would be a dramatic difference in life expectancy between the US and Korea. There isn't. Clearly, it doesn't matter all that much.
| Quote: |
| So, the crux of your position comes down to a 6 year old drinking bleach? Something that has indeed happened before, but yet you say wouldn't happen. You haven't noticed how great cleaning chemicals smell these days? Does one have to drink them to get seriously hurt? Here's the thing: Lethal chemicals shouldn't have been on the floor for a 6 year old to play with. Period. If you feel otherwise, you're in the minority and your actions irresponsible. If someone else's child was burned by chemicals lying around in easy access while in your care, you would be legally liable. |
Well thank goodness we don't have that dingbat system here.
Rocks are dangerous. Children play on my property next to rocks. One kills another with a rock or slips and cracks their head. Should I be held liable? Is it dangerous for kids to play next to a rock? Are chemicals more or less dangerous than rocks, one of mankind's oldest weapons?
Here's a clue- whatever it is that makes kids generally not whip rocks at each other or stab each other with scissors or try and fly off of a 2nd story roof is the same thing that causes them not to have a bleach pool party and make Oxy-clean cocktails.
Look at some point you have to accept danger and teach kids to be around such things. And sorry, but any human being at any age can be an idiot when it comes to caustic chemicals and hurt themselves.
| Quote: |
| I also wore steel-toe boots and gloves while working around machinery, If they caught me without these things, I was punished. See? Responsible. |
I'm sure there are some spastic types out there who would call any minor operating machinery "child endangerment" and decide that your parents were unfit and would call child protective services.
They also wouldn't care whether or not your parents told you to wear your helmet and you ignored them. You were not being supervised by them and that's your parents responsibility- child endangerment.
Now you can have that slippery slope world of yours.
Me, for the third time "Stay away from knives and fire. I've done my part. I'm going to bed." Really, what more can a parent do? Lock up their kitchen knife set everyday with a 3 different locks? Same with their chemicals? Kids are kids, you do that stuff and they'll do anything to look inside. Maybe, just maybe if you leave the chemicals sitting in a storage like manner and say "You drink, you die". They won't care so much. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
crescent
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Location: yes.
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| If all this was a big a deal as you say, there would be a dramatic difference in life expectancy between the US and Korea. There isn't. Clearly, it doesn't matter all that much. |
And this is where I stopped reading. What's clear, is that you don't know how to apply statistics. Enjoy the imaginary argument you created with yourself. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atwood
Joined: 26 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:43 pm Post subject: Re: Korea's utter lack of a child safety culture |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| crescent wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
Speaking of traffic accident rates...
http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/health_glance-2011-en/01/05/index.html?contentType=/ns/StatisticalPublication,/ns/Chapter&itemId=/content/chapter/health_glance-2011-8-en&containerItemId=/content/serial/19991312&accessItemIds=&mimeType=text/html
| Quote: |
| In OECD countries alone transport accidents were responsible for more than 120 000 deaths in 2009, occurring most often in the United States (45 000), Mexico (17 000), Korea and Japan (7 000 each). |
Even if we take the population difference in account (approx six to one) the U.S still has a slightly higher rate.
And things are getting better.
| Quote: |
| As a result, death rates due to transport accidents have been halved in OECD countries since 1995 (Figure 1.5.2). Estonia, Iceland, Korea, Portugal and Japan have seen the largest declines, with a reduction of 60% or more since 1995, although the number of vehicle kilometres travelled has increased in the same period (OECD/ITF, 2010). Death rates have also declined in the United States, but at a slower pace, and therefore remain above the OECD average |
I'm dealing with mortality as it seems to me to be somewhat more serious than injury.
As for deaths by disease that is not really a major cause in developed countries such as Korea and the U.S.
And that link you posted is not a injury rate but a DEATH by injury rate.
I've already posted two more recent links which show Canada and the U.S ahead.
As for posting world wide non fatal injury rates...can't find them. Most links only show mortality rates by accidents. |
I realize the link I provided was death by injury. What I meant was, that injury rates would be more telling of safety issues. The fact remains that death by injury stats are a better measurement of safety issues than mortality rates. Mortality rates are subject to a wide range of parameters other than safety issues. Disease, and terminal illness is indeed a large factor in mortality even in industrialized nations. If you feel that's not true, then show proof that disease and illnesses are a negligible part of the overall result.
Your stats regarding traffic deaths are not only skewed by population, but by vehicles on the road. They also do not account for injuries, many of which go unreported in favour of blood money in S.K., versus the Litigious States of America.
Again, dishonesty? |
Dishonesty? I copied and pasted a link. The link did not break down the stats by population and vehicles on the road. If it had you might have had a point.
As for not accounting for injuries it didn't mention that either. But while we are on the subject do you have a link for this claim that many traffic injuries are settled in fovor of blood money and unreported?
Otherwise it's sheer speculation that such incidents make up a substantial amount of the total.
But while we are talking about "blood money"...you are aware that most cases in America are settled out of court?
97% of civil cases are either dismissed or settled before trial
http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2004/05/31/newscolumn5.html?page=all
70% of all cases are settled out of court. Only about 6% go to trial.
http://www.nytimes.com/1987/12/04/us/the-law-settling-out-of-court-gamble-or-skill.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm
It shows overwhelmingly that people prefer to settle their own disputes and prefer to take whatever compensation they can get without the hassle and time of a trial. |
Those articles do not show that people prefer to settle their own disputes since it's lawyers that they have hired to settle the dispute that are doing the settling.
As for "blood money," I think it's fair to point out that many accidents of all sorts go unreported in Korea. I was rear-ended and I was immediately offered cash and asked not to report it to my insurance company. I've had friends tell of similar experiences and of course when driving see many accidents where no police are on the scene.
Some traffic accident statistics that you earlier posted showed that the margin of error for the Korean statistics was very high, so they too must have mistrusted the number of accidents reported. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
