Submission + - USPTO issues patent #8,000,000. (uspto.gov)
On Tuesday, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued its eighth-million patent. This most recent 1 million patents took only about 5 years.
You know what is a far more dangerous job than being a police officer? Being a pizza delivery guy.
I'm not being tricky and counting accidental deaths either. That is for homicide. For some reason you never hear about people in the food services industry beating the shit out of innocent civilians.
I think you're making claims that aren't supported by the data you linked to. Your data indicates:
There were 144 law enforcement worker occupational fatalities in 2008. This represents 3% of all fatalities as measured by occupation.
There were 65 food prep and serving occupational fatalities in 2008. This represents 1% of all fatalities as measured by occupation.
But these numbers alone don't really tell the story. We have no idea how many were employed in each category. When measuring whether one job is more dangerous than another, we only really care about deaths per capita, which isn't presented in this data.
The only data that appears to support your claim is that in the 4th column labeled "homicides." But the real label is "homicides (percent of total for occupation)." It indicates:
33% of law enforcement fatalities are homicides. This is approximately 48 law enforcement homicides in a single year.
54% of food prep and serving fatalities are homicides. This is approximately 35 food prep and serving homicides in a single year.
It's true that the percentage is higher for those in food service, but that only means that for those that actually DO die, chances are about 1 in 2 it will be a homicide if you're making pizza, or 1 in 3 if you're driving a squad car. Again, that data doesn't give any indication how many total people there are employed in each occupation. There's just no way to use this data to back up the claim that it's more dangerous to be a pizza delivery driver than it is a cop.
If you really want an opinion about airlines, don't ask a bunch of tech enthusiasts who fly to Orlando once a year on vacation. Talk to the road warriors who spend their lives on the road and in airplanes. Flyertalk is the
Just for the record here, here is what I could find on the US Tax incomes:
Year US Tax Income ($M) GDP ($B) Tax/GDP
2009 $1,398,542 (a) Not Available ---
2008 $1,602,823 (a) Not Available ---
2007 $1,571,322 (a) Not Available ---
2006 $1,478,945 (a) $11541.614 (b) 0.128140224
2005 $1,339,363 (c) $11163.759 (b) 0.119974200
2004 $ 998,328 (c) $10822.914 (b) 0.092242970
2003 $ 925,477 (c) $10466.951 (b) 0.088418967
2002 $1,006,389 (c) $10095.771 (b) 0.099684214
2001 $1,145,414 (c) $ 9910.034 (b) 0.115581238
2000 $1,211,749 (d) $ 9887.749 (b) 0.122550542
1999 $1,064,160 (d) $ 9671.089 (b) 0.110035178
1998 $1,017,274 (d) $ 9237.081 (b) 0.11012938
(a) source: http://www.fms.treas.gov/bulletin/b2009_4fd.doc
(b) source: http://forecasts.org/data/data/GDPC96.htm
(c) source: http://fms.treas.gov/bulletin/b45.pdf
(d) source: http://fms.treas.gov/bulletin/b42.pdf
This, combined with historical information about Congress:
Year House Maj.(e) Senate Maj.(f)
2009 Democrat even
2008 Democrat even
2007 Republican Republican
2006 Republican Republican
2005 Republican Republican
2004 Republican Republican
2003 Republican Republican
2002 Republican even/Democrat
2001 Republican Democrat
2000 Republican Republican
1999 Republican Republican
1998 Republican Republican
(e) source: http://clerk.house.gov/art_history/house_history/index.html
(f) source: http://senate.gov/pagelayout/history/one_item_and_teasers/partydiv.htm
We also note that this is *not* spending, but simply tax income. Keep in mind we should expect that tax income should lag tax law by about a year for the tax law to take effect. The GDP steadily rises, so the main difference is the tax income (total dollars). As a nation, the US tends to hang out around 11%-12% Tax/GDP ratio. There were some low years (2002-2004) which seems to align (with said lag) with the Democratic control of the Senate, although it could also be blamed on the "Bush Tax Cuts" (2001, if I recall correctly).
Short answer, looking at a president, a congress, a party, etc. is potentially a myopic view.
Too much of everything is just enough. -- Bob Wier