Is the USA a Developed Country?

[Infected Mushroom]

have you ever heard of the phrase:

"Money isn't everything"

Sure, but I'm not saying money is a virtue in of itself. I'm saying countries with more guns tend to be developed countries because the citizens of developed countries tend to have the money to buy guns.

You're got your correlation the wrong way 'round, not to mention causation. Development is associated with more guns - not less.

I'm saying "Money buys guns" doesn't show that "guns are good" and "guns = money = development"; its not everything

[Galloism]

Sure, but I'm not saying money is a virtue in of itself. I'm saying countries with more guns tend to be developed countries because the citizens of developed countries tend to have the money to buy guns.

You're got your correlation the wrong way 'round, not to mention causation. Development is associated with more guns - not less.

I'm saying "Money buys guns" doesn't show that "guns are good" and "guns = money = development"; its not everything

I'm not making a value judgement - i'm pointing out what IS.

Development is associated with more guns. It's not an absolute trend in every country, but it is a general one. Therefore, saying "the US has too many guns to be considered developed" is like saying "that ship has too much cargo space to be considered a shipping vessel". It doesn't make sense.

[Infected Mushroom]

I'm saying "Money buys guns" doesn't show that "guns are good" and "guns = money = development"; its not everything

I'm not making a value judgement - i'm pointing out what IS.

Development is associated with more guns. It's not an absolute trend in every country, but it is a general one. Therefore, saying "the US has too many guns to be considered developed" is like saying "that ship has too much cargo space to be considered a shipping vessel". It doesn't make sense.

What you mean is that economic power is correlated with more guns

But I'd say its hugely skewed because the USA's economy is so large

[Galloism]

I'm not making a value judgement - i'm pointing out what IS.

Development is associated with more guns. It's not an absolute trend in every country, but it is a general one. Therefore, saying "the US has too many guns to be considered developed" is like saying "that ship has too much cargo space to be considered a shipping vessel". It doesn't make sense.

What you mean is that economic power is correlated with more guns

But I'd say its hugely skewed because the USA's economy is so large

Even taking the US out of the list results in more economic power being associated with more guns. You basically have to exclude the United States, Canada, and good chunks of Europe to make the trend line between guns and development disappear.

And, at that point, you're just cherrypicking data.

Face it Mushrooms. More development is associated with more guns. Probably because we have money. Your assertion that too many guns makes a country undeveloped makes no rational sense in light of the fact that development is associated with more guns, not less.

[Bakery Hill]

Barely. But not because of guns.

[The Forsworn Knights]

We have lots of issues with our development but to say that its due to guns in my opinion shows a lack of understanding of how national development works.

[Xelsis]

And their trust has truly been rewarded, as no European country has ever turned tyrannical against its own people in any way.

Right? That's what history proves, isn't it?

Indeed. Europe has much lower crime rates and no school shootings, gun crimes, and Las Vegas style incidents by comparison.

I think we've moved beyond ignorance as an excuse, into straight-up refusing to accept facts.

Let's look at some of those facts, shall we?

2015 Paris, France Charlie Hebdo shotings: 15 dead. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Hebdo_shooting

2015 Paris, France attacks and shootings: 130 Dead. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/November_ ... is_attacks

2002 Erfurt, Germany School shooting: 17 dead. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erfurt_school_massacre

2009 Winnenden, Germany School shooting: 17 dead. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winnenden_school_shooting

2010 Cumbria, UK shooting: 13 dead. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumbria_shootings

1996 Near Stirling, UK School shooting: 18 dead. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunblane_massacre

2008 Kauhajoki, Finland School shooting: 11 dead. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kauhajoki_school_shooting

2007 Jokela, Finland School shooting: 9 dead. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jokela_school_shooting

2001 Zug, Switzerland Shootings: 15 dead. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zug_massacre

2011 Utøya, Norway shooting: 69 dead. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Norway_attacks

You're wrong. Concede it.

Europe has much lower crime rates and no school shootings, gun crimes, and Las Vegas style incidents by comparison.

I just gave you dropped two mass shootings in each of the Big Three Western European countries, and then an extra pair of shootings in Finland and one in Norway and Switzerland for good measure.

Remember that this is just shootings. If we were talking about attacks, I'd have the 86 killed in a truck attack in Nice, the 12 killed in a truck attack in Berlin, and the London and Manchester bombings for another 52 and 23 dead just from the start, with far more to add onto that sad list.

This isn't a complete list. This is only a sampling of the mass shootings in Europe. They happen. They're real. Some have been even deadlier than anything in the United States-and you're giving a middle finger to all those who died in these killings when you try to pretend that they never even existed.

[San Lumen]

In light of the Las Vegas shooting and other school shootings, gun crimes, and just the general widespread ownership of guns in the hands of civilians...

I have to ask the theoretical question:

Is the USA a Developed Country?

I have a feeling that despite the official classification of the USA as such (based on things like the economy) it may actually not be the case.

The USA has really high crime rates and the gun control is so out of control that its quite unlike other Developed countries. Does it still make sense to call the US a Developed country when so many people legally (and illegally) own firearms? Isn't this something we would instead expect to be happening in a less developed country?

Can the USA still be a developed country when things like Las Vegas where hundreds of people are killed/injured because of guns happen quite frequently?

At what point does the USA stop being a Developed country?

Please discuss. What is your definition of the Developed country and in light of the gun problems in the USA, is the USA still a Developed country?

In my view, the USA is not a Developed country, it has been misclassified.

I would define a Developed country primarily on its safety and crime rate though the economy plays a role. In light of this, I feel the USA no longer fits the label unless it can get rid of the gun problem.

A Developed country does not have such widespread gun ownership in the hands of the population. A Developed country does not have gun problems and gun crimes on the scale of the USA. A Developed country does not have such widespread illegal ownership of firearms, such high frequencies of school shootings, gun crimes, and incidents like Las Vegas where hundreds are killed/injured. It is inconsistent for a Developed country to have massive numbers of people walking on the streets who are not police, carrying firearms who can turn on each other.

A Developed country looks like Japan, Norway, Germany etc where most of the people don't own guns and you don't have gun incidents where dozens to hundreds are killed/injured. The USA is in need of massive reforms.

The US stopped being a developed country when it elected Donald Trump through a unfair and undemocratic election system.

[Sovaal]

In light of the Las Vegas shooting and other school shootings, gun crimes, and just the general widespread ownership of guns in the hands of civilians...

I have to ask the theoretical question:

Is the USA a Developed Country?

I have a feeling that despite the official classification of the USA as such (based on things like the economy) it may actually not be the case.

The USA has really high crime rates and the gun control is so out of control that its quite unlike other Developed countries. Does it still make sense to call the US a Developed country when so many people legally (and illegally) own firearms? Isn't this something we would instead expect to be happening in a less developed country?

Can the USA still be a developed country when things like Las Vegas where hundreds of people are killed/injured because of guns happen quite frequently?

At what point does the USA stop being a Developed country?

Please discuss. What is your definition of the Developed country and in light of the gun problems in the USA, is the USA still a Developed country?

In my view, the USA is not a Developed country, it has been misclassified.

I would define a Developed country primarily on its safety and crime rate though the economy plays a role. In light of this, I feel the USA no longer fits the label unless it can get rid of the gun problem.

A Developed country does not have such widespread gun ownership in the hands of the population. A Developed country does not have gun problems and gun crimes on the scale of the USA. A Developed country does not have such widespread illegal ownership of firearms, such high frequencies of school shootings, gun crimes, and incidents like Las Vegas where hundreds are killed/injured. It is inconsistent for a Developed country to have massive numbers of people walking on the streets who are not police, carrying firearms who can turn on each other.

A Developed country looks like Japan, Norway, Germany etc where most of the people don't own guns and you don't have gun incidents where dozens to hundreds are killed/injured. The USA is in need of massive reforms.

The US stopped being a developed country when it elected Donald Trump through a unfair and undemocratic election system.

I don't think politics have anything to do with it either. Plenty of democratic third world countries.

[Salus Maior]

The US stopped being a developed country when it elected Donald Trump through a unfair and undemocratic election system.

Oh please.

[Xelsis]

well without guns we wouldn't have Las Vegas or the school shootings

You do realize the Vegas shooter had bomb materials, don't you? That such a bombing attack could easily have been more deadly than the shooting?

if there are no guns, how can there be gun violence?

Is there some kind of moral superiority to being killed by a truck or acid than a bullet? Are you any less dead that way? Is stabbing someone to death somehow not as violent as shooting them?

have you ever heard of the phrase:

"Money isn't everything"

Have you ever stopped to think that maybe the cause of death of less than one-third of one percent of people in the United States isn't exactly disqualifying from developed country status?

(That's the actual statistic. 2013 firearm murders: 8,464. 2013 deaths, total: 2,596,993.)

Meanwhile, more than twenty-five percent of male deaths in Belgium are due to smoking, compared to around nineteen percent in the United States. Is Belgium not a developed country? Let's look at that.

U.S. gun homicide death percentage: (Note that we're being nice and saying "gun homicide" here. Six out of seven murders in Belgium are by non-firearm means, compared to nearly the opposite in the United States) .326%

Belgium gun homicide death percentage: .0229%

So, U.S. vs. Belgium, the U.S. has .303 percentage points more of its population die to guns than Belgium.

Now, tobacco. (Note that this is male-only data.)

U.S. tobacco death percentage: 19.2%

Belgium tobacco death percentage: 25.34%

So the percentage-point difference here is 6.14, or more than twenty times higher than the gross percentage point difference of people killed by firearms.

How big is that? Belgium, population c. 11.5 million, had nearly as many deaths in the difference between them and the United States (nearly 7,000) from tobacco as the total number of gun murders in the United States. It's total number of tobacco-related deaths were more than three times the number of firearm murders in the United States, despite having only a little over one-thirtieth of the population.

So, Infected Mushroom, we come to the question. Based on your ridiculous standards, with a preventable death rate difference twenty times higher than the United States, is Belgium a developed country?

Or is the answer yes, and you just really hate guns outside of any actual reason or logic?

[Great Minarchistan]

The US stopped being a developed country when it elected Donald Trump through a unfair and undemocratic election system.

So a country suddently gets out of the developed category when a president elected by 46% (it's almost enough to win, so he had an actual massive support) of the voters joins office in the same system that has been existing since 1788. Exciting.

[Great Minarchistan]

well without guns we wouldn't have Las Vegas or the school shootings

Yeah, and without cars we wouldn't have car accidents. Metaphors aside, mass shootings in the US claim the lives of 362 people every year, in average. When diluted into a 320 million population, it means a zero dot zero zero zero one percent yearly death risk. But that's way too much, right?

[Pasovo-nacoBo]

Fun Fact:
Devloped places with higher Crime Rate than US (Human Development Index Rank #10):
Sweden (Human Development Index Rank 14)
Developed Places with near Crime Rate as US (HDI Rank #10)
Norway (HDI Rank #1)
Russia (if you can argue it is developed)
France (HDI Rank #21)
Ireland (HDI Rank #8)
Italy (HDI Rank #26)
United Kingdom (HDI Rank #16)

Sources:
http://hdr.undp.org/en/countries/profiles/USA
https://www.numbeo.com/crime/rankings_by_country.jsp

As you can see, even if 10,000 more terrorists attacks happen (which it will not because we'd free the shit out of the Middle East, and their bankers) America will still stay developed. I mean, look at France, in Marshal Law right now, terrorist attacks all the time, and not one person suggests it's not devloped. I think people tend to overexhaggerate in America because we are the freest and you see it the most. But believe me, we are no Syria, India, or even Brazil. This (Human Devlopment Index) usually talks about infrastructure, quality of life, life expectancy (which is really high, but not the highest), and just, well devlopment (like education.) If you can't tell the difference between an undeveloped and developed nation, walk down the street of any of either cities, and figure out yourself.

(Edit: before any of y'all say "this has nothing to do with the middle east, Stephen Paddok converted to Islam and went to the middle east. Also, ISIL claimed responsibility for these attacks.
http://www.news.com.au/world/north-america/stephen-paddock-had-recently-been-on-a-cruise-to-the-middle-east-as-experts-say-dont-discount-islamic-states-potential-involvement/news-story/4846b116c77f95140968c4cf967f0319)

[The Two Jerseys]

The US stopped being a developed country when it elected Donald Trump through a unfair and undemocratic election system.

So a country suddently gets out of the developed category when a president elected by 46% (it's almost enough to win, so he had an actual massive support) of the voters joins office in the same system that has been existing since 1788. Exciting.

And if that makes America "undeveloped", how can Germany be considered a developed country when Angela Merkel only won 33% of the popular vote?

[Great Minarchistan]

So a country suddently gets out of the developed category when a president elected by 46% (it's almost enough to win, so he had an actual massive support) of the voters joins office in the same system that has been existing since 1788. Exciting.

And if that makes America "undeveloped", how can Germany be considered a developed country when Angela Merkel only won 33% of the popular vote?

Because Drumpf is a xenophobic racist chauvinist intolerant man that goes against my beliefs, ofc.

[Plzen]

If you can't tell the difference between an undeveloped and developed nation, walk down the street of any of either cities, and figure out yourself.

I might mention that this is harder than one might initially think.

Downtown Bangkok or downtown Kuala Lumpur looks every bit as advanced as downtown Paris. It's not until you look into the hidden alleyways that one notices differences.

[Valgora]

In light of the Las Vegas shooting and other school shootings, gun crimes, and just the general widespread ownership of guns in the hands of civilians...

I have to ask the theoretical question:

Is the USA a Developed Country?

I have a feeling that despite the official classification of the USA as such (based on things like the economy) it may actually not be the case.

The USA has really high crime rates and the gun control is so out of control that its quite unlike other Developed countries. Does it still make sense to call the US a Developed country when so many people legally (and illegally) own firearms? Isn't this something we would instead expect to be happening in a less developed country?

Can the USA still be a developed country when things like Las Vegas where hundreds of people are killed/injured because of guns happen quite frequently?

At what point does the USA stop being a Developed country?

Please discuss. What is your definition of the Developed country and in light of the gun problems in the USA, is the USA still a Developed country?

In my view, the USA is not a Developed country, it has been misclassified.

I would define a Developed country primarily on its safety and crime rate though the economy plays a role. In light of this, I feel the USA no longer fits the label unless it can get rid of the gun problem.

A Developed country does not have such widespread gun ownership in the hands of the population. A Developed country does not have gun problems and gun crimes on the scale of the USA. A Developed country does not have such widespread illegal ownership of firearms, such high frequencies of school shootings, gun crimes, and incidents like Las Vegas where hundreds are killed/injured. It is inconsistent for a Developed country to have massive numbers of people walking on the streets who are not police, carrying firearms who can turn on each other.

A Developed country looks like Japan, Norway, Germany etc where most of the people don't own guns and you don't have gun incidents where dozens to hundreds are killed/injured. The USA is in need of massive reforms.

The US stopped being a developed country when it elected Donald Trump through a unfair and undemocratic election system.

A nation doesn't stopped being developed just because the leader is an idiotic asshole (or an evil genius, because sometimes I can't figure out which one Trump is).

[Great Minarchistan]

A nation doesn't stopped being developed just because the leader is an idiotic asshole (or an evil genius, because sometimes I can't figure out which one Trump is).

Both. Trump is just another politician that achieves brilliant things and then does something extremely retarded to undo the progress, and vice-versa.

[Pilarcraft]

The US stopped being a developed country when it elected Donald Trump through a unfair and undemocratic election system.

A nation doesn't stopped being developed just because the leader is an idiotic asshole (or an evil genius, because sometimes I can't figure out which one Trump is).

I'm not sure if democratic-ness even matters where Development is concerned.
See, This is the problem when people don't study stuff. they keep repeating the same wrong thing.
This Forum's last, what, 10 pages, has been this dialogue put on repeat.
"Is America Developed?"
"Yeah. Development is Economic."
"Yeah. Ok. I guess it is developed, economically speaking, but is it really developed?"
"Yes. Developement is an economic concept, so it's developed"
"But Is a country that [enter civil issues that are actually important, but irrelevant to Economic Growth and Development.] really developed?"
"Yes. Development is an economic concept"
"Yes. but is it REALLY-"

[Plzen]

This Forum's last, what, 10 pages, has been this dialogue put on repeat.
"Is America Developed?"
"Yeah. Development is Economic."
"Yeah. Ok. I guess it is developed, economically speaking, but is it really developed?"
"Yes. Developement is an economic concept, so it's developed"
"But Is a country that [enter civil issues that are actually important, but irrelevant to Economic Growth and Development.] really developed?"
"Yes. Development is an economic concept"
"Yes. but is it REALLY-"

Economic development is a very broad concept. Economic development means a higher quality of life, and you could very well argue that socio-political liberty and safety is an essential part of having a high quality of life, just like economic prosperity is.

That being said, though, the United States is still developed. Anybody with the most rudimentary grasp on development statistics would be able to tell you so. It's not like this stuff is hard to find, either.

[Trumptonium]

The poorest shithole in the United States, Mississippi, still has higher disposable income than Spain and higher GDP per capita than Netherlands.

If the United States isn't a developed country, then the only ones that are are city-states and Luxembourg.

[Trumptonium]

In light of the Las Vegas shooting and other school shootings, gun crimes, and just the general widespread ownership of guns in the hands of civilians...

I have to ask the theoretical question:

Is the USA a Developed Country?

I have a feeling that despite the official classification of the USA as such (based on things like the economy) it may actually not be the case.

The USA has really high crime rates and the gun control is so out of control that its quite unlike other Developed countries. Does it still make sense to call the US a Developed country when so many people legally (and illegally) own firearms? Isn't this something we would instead expect to be happening in a less developed country?

Can the USA still be a developed country when things like Las Vegas where hundreds of people are killed/injured because of guns happen quite frequently?

At what point does the USA stop being a Developed country?

Please discuss. What is your definition of the Developed country and in light of the gun problems in the USA, is the USA still a Developed country?

In my view, the USA is not a Developed country, it has been misclassified.

I would define a Developed country primarily on its safety and crime rate though the economy plays a role. In light of this, I feel the USA no longer fits the label unless it can get rid of the gun problem.

A Developed country does not have such widespread gun ownership in the hands of the population. A Developed country does not have gun problems and gun crimes on the scale of the USA. A Developed country does not have such widespread illegal ownership of firearms, such high frequencies of school shootings, gun crimes, and incidents like Las Vegas where hundreds are killed/injured. It is inconsistent for a Developed country to have massive numbers of people walking on the streets who are not police, carrying firearms who can turn on each other.

A Developed country looks like Japan, Norway, Germany etc where most of the people don't own guns and you don't have gun incidents where dozens to hundreds are killed/injured. The USA is in need of massive reforms.

The US stopped being a developed country when it elected Donald Trump through a unfair and undemocratic election system.

So why didn't the US stop being a developed country when George Bush won the election through an unfair and undemocratic election system? Or Benjamin Harrison 120 years ago?

Moreover, what about other countries with unfair and undemocratic systems, like Canada, Australia, United Kingdom, France...? Are they all undeveloped? Germany is also part-undemocratic.

Angela Merkel is a Chancellor by winning 33% of the popular vote. Mark Rutte is the Dutch Prime Minister by winning a measly 21% of the popular vote. They run in coalitions.
Up until 2017, Theresa May was a Prime Minister with unlimited power (by virtue of having a majority in government) by winning 37% of the populat vote.

Macron won 24% of the popular vote in the presidential election and his party won 32% of the popular vote in the legislative elections. He is running a majority government. Wtf?

Trump won 46% of American voters. He has a better mandate than any of the above leaders, not to mention that you could add all CDU, VVD and Conservatives voters together and it still wouldn't be half of Republican voters in 2016.

Explain.

[Lord of The Rings]

Meh, I'd say it's halfway there.

[Benjabobaria]

You take a lot of stuff for granted don't you OP. I'll refrain from being too harsh, but you're really ungrateful for the many luxuries you enjoy if you are an American.
If you are not an America, I'm guessing you've never been to America.
We got some good stuff here in America, including but not limited to electricity, running clean water, FOOD, education, good technology, good healthcare, cars, roads, and lots of other stuff.

While the US may not be as good as Europe in many metrics...

Be real. We've got far better quality of life than most of the world.

While our murder rate's higher than most of Europe, look at it compared to the countries you think we belong with.