First of all when I posted as Bobert it was an accident. I did it to some other folks too so I joined so it won't happen again.

In another thread Bobert stated "The US leads all *developed nations" in per capita poverty, infant mortality, incarceration rates and capital punishment"

I found that hard to believe so I started looking for the proof on the internet. I believe a person should have some knowledge and belief of the correctness of what they are stating before they state it.

I found there were statistics to base his claim on. on that site it said "National estimates of the percentage of the population lying below the poverty line are based on surveys of sub-groups, with the results weighted by the number of people in each group. Definitions of poverty vary considerably among nations. For example, rich nations generally employ more generous standards of poverty than poor nations." Therefore one would have to know how it is figured in the various countries or the percentages are meaningless.

I asked Bobert how it was figured and he did not respond in that thread which I considered the proper thread. I asked him again on other threads and finally I had to accuse him of slinking off into the bushes before he responded.

I lost track of the original thread where he stated those figures so I tried to find it using the Mudcat Forum search. That search only works up through 95 so I used Google and I found where he has made other similar statements plus some other statements in which are prima facie contradictions.

Statements such as percentages as I posted above and his statement that "Like they say, stats are for loosers....
You ain't gonna hear a bunch of stats outta me 'cause I don't need 'um...."

It is by assertion that Bobert while being intelligent, educated, experienced and a good entertainer, repeats things that he does not know to be true and accurate and he does not care if they are true and accurate. He just passes it on in hoping that someone else will believe them and thereby prove his point.

On the site I found data that supported what Bobert claimed. It had poverty in the US as 12% and the UK as 17% I know that can't be right. It sticks in my mind that somewhere Bobert said "western developed nations" so I assumed he was trying to exclude the UK because I believe it is in the eastern hemisphere.

All I want to from Bobert is how do the criteria for poverty and the other stats he posted, compare in the various countries?

While looking at the infant mortality rates I found discrepancies in the criteria for that statistic. For instance "in Switzerland, by contrast, an infant must be at least 30 centimeters long at birth to be counted as living. This restriction effectively excludes most infants weighing less than a kilogram and excludes many of the most vulnerable infants from Switzerland's relativity low infant mortality measure"

I bear no animosity for the UK. I regard the UK as the motherland of America. The birthplace of democracy and freedom. Therefore I doubt that there can be more poor people living there than in the US.

I do not believe that these numbers are accurate. I do not believe that 12% of Americans are poor and I do not believe that 17% in the UK are poor.

I would like to have an explanation from Bobert and I would like to hear what the Ukers here have to say about it.