[Egregious Philbin]

The fuzzy math belongs to Hume (or whoever wrote the copy).

"Two hundred seventy seven U.S. soldiers have now died in Iraq, which means that, statistically speaking, U.S. soldiers have less of a chance of dying from all causes in Iraq than citizens have of being murdered in California which is roughly the same geographical size. The most recent statistics indicate California has more than 2,300 homicides each year, which means about 6.6 murders each day. Meanwhile, U.S. troops have been in Iraq for 160 days, which means they're incurring about 1.7 deaths, including illness and accidents, each day."

As Franken says, there are 34 million people in California. There are more than 2,300 homicides each year in California, 6.6 a day. It comes out to about 1 homicide for every 15,000 citizens. There are 140,000 troops in Iraq. 277 have died. They've been there for 160 days. That comes out to about 1 death for every 250 troops.

[UNGN]

277 is total deaths. That's Car accidents, falls, construction acidents, etc.

The Rate of Service men killed in Iraq thru hostile action is actually VERY CLOSE to the Murder rate of 15-27 year old Black men in California.

Do the math.

[Timesink]

As Franken says, there are 34 million people in California. There are more than 2,300 homicides each year in California, 6.6 a day. It comes out to about 1 homicide for every 15,000 citizens. There are 140,000 troops in Iraq. 277 have died. They've been there for 160 days. That comes out to about 1 death for every 250 troops.

You either count the deaths of the soliders via the ratio of troops to the number of people in Iraq - the SAME WAY the California homicide stats are counted - or else you are playing games with the numbers. (Unless every troop death in Iraq has been due to friendly fire, which it has not.)

Franken was playing games with the numbers.

[Huck]

Uh, I know. That's what I said.

[syriacus]

As Franken says, there are 34 million people in California. There are more than 2,300 homicides each year in California, 6.6 a day

First of all, I am not a statistician, so I might be wrong in how I see this...but here goes

Franken calls Hume a liar, but doesn't do any better at answering the question that people really want answered.

Concerned people really want to know if the risk of death to the Americans in Iraq is really much worse than their risk of death if they stayed in the US.

Is Franken, say, comparing death rates per 100,000 among young people (especially men) in California, to death rates per 100,000 among young people serving in Iraq?

The ages of the Americans we choose to compare in Iraq and California should be similar.

So, for example, I think we should compare the chances of death (per 100,000)for, say, 18-21 year old men in the US and in Iraq. Then we should compare the chances of death per 100,000 for 18-21 year old women in the US and Iraq. Then the 21-25 year olds. The 26-30 year olds. And so on.