4 ms·

The evidence is that almost all other countries don't have the boxes while infant mortality dropped nearly everywhere. Your attack is an odd one.

knightofmars 7y ago
Just because infant mortality dropped nearly everywhere doesn't mean that this "baby box" didn't help reduce infant mortality _specifically in Finland_. The infant mortality rate dropped from 7% in 1935 (already extremely low compared with the global rate in 1935) to .02% (much lower than the global rate now).
devnonymous 7y ago
If not for 'programs /like/ this', how else has 'infant mortality dropped nearly everywhere' ?? Just because Finland introduced boxes and other countries didn't does not mean that the Finland's contribution to the overall decrease to infant mortality was not due to boxes. Also, for gp comment -- nanny is a odd way to spell welfare.
- weberc2 7y ago
  > Just because Finland introduced boxes and other countries didn't does not mean that the Finland's contribution to the overall decrease to infant mortality was not due to boxes. You're arguing against a straw man. The article implies that the boxes are driving the decrease in infant mortality. The OP points out that this is ignoring the global decrease in infant mortality. The OP did not assert that the boxes made no contribution to the decrease in infant mortality. > Also, for gp comment -- nanny is a odd way to spell welfare. I genuinely don't understand your point. "Nanny state" and "welfare state" are synonymous, at least in the U.S.
  - arethuza 7y ago
    From a UK perspective "nanny state" is somewhere pejorative description of a "welfare state" (we don't use 'welfare' to describe payments from the state to individuals or families).
    - esotericn 7y ago
      Brit here. I'd use 'nanny state' more to refer to indirect effects. Stuff like the sugar tax, smoking packaging, cameras etc - the sort of 'nanny knows best' thing. Benefit payments and taxes usually don't come under the banner.
  - InvisibleCities 7y ago
    >I genuinely don't understand your point. "Nanny state" and "welfare state" are synonymous, at least in the U.S. The term "nanny state" typically refers to legislation that aims to protect people from their own worst impulses - laws that ban the sale of large-sized soft drinks, sin taxes on cigarettes and alcohol, and giving tickets to drivers who don't wear a seat belt would all be examples of the "nanny state". In contrast, the "welfare state" refers to redistributive social programs that aim to mitigate the effects of capitalism on vulnerable populations (i.e. Social Security, Medicare, Unemployment Insurance, etc. ).
    - weberc2 7y ago
      Oh, I wasn't aware of the nuance. Thanks for educating me.
teh_klev 7y ago
> Your attack is an odd one. I wouldn't call wmeredith's comment an "attack", it's a civilly written challenge. That aside. It may be true that baby boxes in and of themselves aren't directly responsible for the reduction of child mortality rates (say from sudden cot death); there doesn't seem to have been any research into the long term benefits of the "box" itself. But it's the holistic approach to ensuring kids get a good start in life and the box, the contents etc is one small part of that.

knightofmars 7y ago

Just because infant mortality dropped nearly everywhere doesn't mean that this "baby box" didn't help reduce infant mortality _specifically in Finland_. The infant mortality rate dropped from 7% in 1935 (already extremely low compared with the global rate in 1935) to .02% (much lower than the global rate now).

devnonymous 7y ago

If not for 'programs /like/ this', how else has 'infant mortality dropped nearly everywhere' ?? Just because Finland introduced boxes and other countries didn't does not mean that the Finland's contribution to the overall decrease to infant mortality was not due to boxes. Also, for gp comment -- nanny is a odd way to spell welfare.

weberc2 7y ago
> Just because Finland introduced boxes and other countries didn't does not mean that the Finland's contribution to the overall decrease to infant mortality was not due to boxes. You're arguing against a straw man. The article implies that the boxes are driving the decrease in infant mortality. The OP points out that this is ignoring the global decrease in infant mortality. The OP did not assert that the boxes made no contribution to the decrease in infant mortality. > Also, for gp comment -- nanny is a odd way to spell welfare. I genuinely don't understand your point. "Nanny state" and "welfare state" are synonymous, at least in the U.S.
- arethuza 7y ago
  From a UK perspective "nanny state" is somewhere pejorative description of a "welfare state" (we don't use 'welfare' to describe payments from the state to individuals or families).
  - esotericn 7y ago
    Brit here. I'd use 'nanny state' more to refer to indirect effects. Stuff like the sugar tax, smoking packaging, cameras etc - the sort of 'nanny knows best' thing. Benefit payments and taxes usually don't come under the banner.
- InvisibleCities 7y ago
  >I genuinely don't understand your point. "Nanny state" and "welfare state" are synonymous, at least in the U.S. The term "nanny state" typically refers to legislation that aims to protect people from their own worst impulses - laws that ban the sale of large-sized soft drinks, sin taxes on cigarettes and alcohol, and giving tickets to drivers who don't wear a seat belt would all be examples of the "nanny state". In contrast, the "welfare state" refers to redistributive social programs that aim to mitigate the effects of capitalism on vulnerable populations (i.e. Social Security, Medicare, Unemployment Insurance, etc. ).
  - weberc2 7y ago
    Oh, I wasn't aware of the nuance. Thanks for educating me.

teh_klev 7y ago

> Your attack is an odd one. I wouldn't call wmeredith's comment an "attack", it's a civilly written challenge. That aside. It may be true that baby boxes in and of themselves aren't directly responsible for the reduction of child mortality rates (say from sudden cot death); there doesn't seem to have been any research into the long term benefits of the "box" itself. But it's the holistic approach to ensuring kids get a good start in life and the box, the contents etc is one small part of that.