Maliya Edwards

1/16/17

Ms.I

Benchmark

You ever wonder what could affect the amount of money you make in a year? You ever wonder why you make the amount of money you do and what's stopping you from making more? There are many answers and variables that affect your annual money a year. Today we are focusing on the amount of children and the amount of people in a family effect has on the amount of money made each year. All which support the idea of the less amount of family members and children can lead you to make more money.

In the early 1800s, Ghana were having nearly 7 kids per woman. The family size was an average of 9. In the 1800s Ghana average 696 a year. Now back in the 1800s there weren't a lot of jobs and there wasn't a lot of good paying jobs. Seen below As we get further into the future, in the 1900s Ghana average family size was 8 and the average amount of children were 6. At this time the average amount of money made a year was 725. During the 1800s Ghana were going through diseases. It lowered the amount of the population. It may not show in the average size family but a lot of people died due to diseases. As we get into the 2000s, Ghana average family size went down to 6 per family and roughly about 4 to 5 children a family. At this time people in Ghana were making up to 2,270 a year. Seen belowAs better jobs and vaccines came out for these diseases. As we go into the year 2015, the average family size went down to 5 and the average children per woman went down to 3 roughly 4 kids and average an amount of 4,100 a year. From the 1800s Ghana family size was 9 and average children in the family were 7, now in 2015 the average family size is 5 and children within the family is 3. Seen below

The next country we are looking at is Keyna. In the 1800s Kenya family size was 9 and average children to a family was 7. Again around this time there wasn't a lot of jobs anywhere let alone jobs that paid a good amount of money. People in kenya in the 1800s made roughly 854 a year. Seen below Compared to ghana the family and children size were about the same, although Kenya made more money a year than Ghana. As we get closer to the 1900s Kenya was another country to deal with diseases and deaths throughout the years. In 1900s Kenya family size was still roughly around 9 and children per family was still hovering around 7. The money per year did go up to 1,170 a year. At this time people in Kenya were all at work. Kids started work a very early age to support their families. As deaths started to go up, more education and better jobs were being built. In the 2000s Kenya family size was down to 7 and babies per woman down to 5. The average salary a year has also gone up to 2,140 as seen below Kenya economy started to get better and were offering better paying jobs to the people. Seen below In 2015 Kenya family size went down to 6 per family and 4 children per woman. They were also making 2,900 a year as seen below As the year went on Kenya people had less children and were making more money.

As we move along we take a look at the United States. In the 1800s there was 7 children to a family and average family size was 9. United States was making 2,130 a year. Seen below As we get to the 1900s, we know United States was going through slavery and wars. This made the country lose a lot of people to death and there wasn't many jobs. Most jobs were war or being a slave. In the 1900s the United States the family size plumbed down to the size of 5 to a family and roughly 4 kids to a woman. United states also made 6,820 a year. That was a big jump from 1800 to 1900. As we get closer to the 2000s, United States have gotten their freedom, have rebuild and structure the country and got better jobs. The family size went down again to 4 a family and 2 children to a woman in 2000s. They also made roughly 46,000 a year. Seen below In 2015 the family size and children to a woman and still the same but with the country advancing in technology it made nearly 53,400 a year. Seen below United States has and still known for the richest country in the world.

The last country we are going to look at is China. To start off China made 985 a year with a family size of 7 and children size a 5 in 1800s. Seen below In the 1900s diseases also spread through China wiped out most of its country. China family and children size were still the same trying to refill its population again. They made 894 a year, less than what they made in the 1800s. In 2000s China made roughly 3,680 a year. The children to a woa went down to 2 and family size to 4. The family size dropped very big because China passed a law saying women couldn't have more than 2 babies. Seen below As we get to 2015 the average family size was 3 and the average kid to a woman was a 1 and they also made up to 13,400 a year seen below.

While doing this paper I realize the more kids people had the less time they spent working which mean the less money they made a year. With children you have to spend so much time taking care of them while they are young which meant you couldn't always go to work. In a lot of cases, people in these countries lost their jobs when they had a big family because they miss work too much. All in all, i do believe the less children you have the more money you will make.

The Sources I used was from the YouTube video from class https://youtu.be/N-x7eHuUhNM and  https://www.google.com/amp/nypost.com/2016/01/03/how-chinas-pregnancy-police-brutally-enforced-the-one-child-policy/amp/

Lucia Idriss

01/10/17

Mrs. I

Statistics

There is no correlation between HIV and life expectancy in females within the countries of Sierra Leone and Italy.HUMAN IMMUNODEFICIENCY VIRUS ( HIV) "Unlike some other viruses, the human body can’t get rid of HIV completely. So once you have HIV, you have it for life. HIV attacks the body’s immune system, specifically the CD4 cells (T cells), which help the immune system fight off infections. If left untreated, HIV reduces the number of CD4 cells (T cells) in the body, making the person more likely to get infections or infection-related cancers. Over time, HIV can destroy so many of these cells that the body can’t fight off infections and disease. HIV is an easily contracted disease that can be transmitted through breast milk, sexual activities, and also blood.Countries such as Sierra Leone are underdeveloped and do not have access to all the resources needed to sustain incurable diseases such as HIV, whereas Italy has that kind of access because they are a more developed country.  I wanted to learn more about those whom have been infected and why they’ve been infected. To truly determine what the data points on the graph represent, from the least to the greatest. So now I will test whether your location and income affect the life expectancy in women with HIV.

When I first began I asked myself questions such as : How many of these women were sexually active before marriage and where these women sexually abused to contract HIV? So I took those questions to the web to find out that, yes sexual abuse was used as a form for some of these woman to contract HIV, especially in Sierra Leone during the war time. As I searched around even further I came an article ( lifeinitaly.com ) says “ In the past sex was viewed as a taboo subject. In Italy, like so many other European countries, this was perhaps mostly due to the powerful influence of the Catholic Church on Italian society. Sex was not a topic discussed by people in public, nor did it have a presence in the media.” and “ The average age for the first sexual experience is currently 17 in Italy. This is a difference of up to four years compared to the past, in particular the 30's-40's, when women generally had sex for the first time when they were, on average, 21-22 years old. Not only has the age for first experience changed but so has the context.” So could this also be a reason as to why HIV has such a high testing rate in Italy? Yes. And that evidence can be found on the gapminder graph that I have created.

The graph on gapminder tells a story of the women in Italy and Sierra Leone living with the HIV disease. In the graph you can clearly see that there is no positive nor negative correlation between the two countries. But you can also see that Italy has a larger bubble and also a longer life expectancy than women in Sierra Leone. The bubble represents the amount of women infected by the HIV disease, but how is it that they are living longer than the women who actually have  a lower HIV infection? Poverty, many women in Sierra Leone live in poverty, they are not expected to live as long because treatment in sometimes non affordable so they wind up passing because they can no longer take care of themselves. But as for the women in Italy they are more financially equipped so they can then actually take care of themselves to live much longer. The graph’s story has been told as to what the bubbles and correlations represent.

Now I also asked myself “ does living circumstances affect treatment availability? “ and my answer to that is yes. Some people who have been diagnosed with HIV cannot afford treatment because they are too poor, but based off of the graph that seems to have not affected the life expectancy for those women whom have been diagnosed. But in recent affairs I have noticed that the graph in 1990 Italy’s life expectancy increased, and there must have been a more affordable access to the treatment. This same increase also happened in Sierra leone in 2000 and remained at that same rate in 2006 going forward. So I believe the same affect that happened in Italy also Happened in Sierra Leone.  

In conclusion, from my research I can say that HIV does affect life expectancy in Females, and I can conclude that your financial statement also plays a part in whether or not you will receive treatment for the HIV disease. But I can still remain to say that there is no correlation on the graph determining life expectancy and HIV in Sierra Leone and Italy.  

Taalib Coffield

Ms.Isakowitz

1.10.17

Statistics

Suicide is the third leading cause of death for people ages 15-24 all over the world according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. I researched how a country’s average income affects the country’s suicide rates. Within my research I found out some important information that is useful and informative. Through graphical analysis, I have found that there is no major correlation between suicides being high amongst high income countries and vice versa. There is also no major correlation between high suicide rates amongst low income countries. I found out that middle income countries have an exceeding high suicide rate. Through my research, I will try to explain how other resources were wrong when they came to the conclusion suicide rates are the highest amongst high income countries. Instead I’ve found rates to be the highest in middle income Countries based off of my evidence I found that to not be true, also I will explain why the suicide rates are what they are in each income country. The hope is to gain knowledge of how does income affect the low, middle, and high income countries.

       Low income countries are fairly accused of having high suicide rates because they’re low in the economic level according to Huffington Post. Also, In many resources from Huffington Post. I found it is more common that high suicide rates come from high income countries. As I did my own research I started to realize that that wasn’t the occasion anymore.Based off of graphical analysis, suicides do happen in Low income Countries however, the most suicides do not come from low income countries as many believed before.  There is some level of suicide rates in the low  income countries, and my question is why? During my research I seen that Afghanistan was a low income country that had a low suicide rate, but still had a suicide rate. The income of Afghanistan in the year 2002 was $647dollars with a suicide rate of 5.4 per 100,000 people. According to my Gapminder Graph.

( Figure 1 )

This proves that many people think that there were massive amount of suicides within the low income countries. However, based off of Afghanistan and later research, I can say that this rate is kind of low. Still I wonder to myself why are there 5.4 per 100,000 suicides still? Many of the suicides that happen in Afghanistan mainly come from women who have been forced into marriages, that is rape victims, and that is victims of domestic violence. Based off of “Report: Suicide Deaths in Afghanistan Higher Than Murders, War Deaths Combined by Edwin Mora” Looking at the graph you see a tiny increase in the amount of suicides of 10 people from 2003 to 2004. Suicides are bad no matter how much the number of people are, however looking at my graphs and correlating it to other resources has enlightened me. There are not as many suicides in low income countries than there is in middle or high income countries.

          High income countries are what you can call the wealthiest. The country that has the most money, but does that mean the more money higher the suicide rates? Like many articles I have read for instance “ Why Are Suicides More Common In Richer Neighborhoods” by Josh Sanburn have said that most suicide rates come from people with more money. Now this may be talking about neighborhoods or people,  however neighborhoods coexist within a country, and people coexist within the neighborhood which will ultimately means the same thing. Now based off of graphical studies ( Figure 1)  I have seen that in many of the wealthiest countries I researched there is not an over exceeding amount of suicides.  Reading the article ( Why Suicides Are More Common in Richer Neighborhoods )you would think that Suicides basically only come from those people who have a higher income and nowhere else really. However, I found that to not be true. I have found that  suicides are high in high income countries, but they do not have the HIGHEST suicide rates like many acclaim. United States was the richest country of the countries I researched. I found that the United States have an income of 15,300, while it has 11.2 suicides per 100,000 people in the most recent year: 2004. ( Record: Figure 1 ) It has been made clear that STILL high income countries don’t have the highest amount of suicides, but they still have a pretty large amount. Suicide rates have jumped tremendously in the last 30 years according to “U.S. Suicide Rate Surges to a 30-Year High” by Sabrina Tavernise. Women in their middles ages tend to be the biggest group that suffer from suicides. I will say it affects women in their middle age the most normally during this time Women start to become mothers, go though manipulate and it creates a mid life crisis. This is what leads many Women to suicide. Through research I have gathered, especially in the United States who has the highest income suicide rates come from mid life crisis. Not because so many Rich people get tired of their life as Josh Sanburn implied in his article. Suicide rates are high in The United States, but they are not high as one other country.

      China is a middle income country that has an income per person of $5,680. The suicide rate however is 16.9 per 100,000 people. As I was hinting in my other graph analysis’s, suicide rates are the highest in the MIDDLE income countries. Now this is surprising because many other articles have swore up and down that High income countries, and low income countries have had the highest suicide rates. ( According to sites below. ) While in my research I have seen that that is not the case, it is the total opposite in fact. China is one of the highest suicidal countries in the world. ( Figure 1 ) It mainly comes from Women as it does in many other countries. Although, the reasons behind it is different. Women in China tend to commit suicide because many women are stressing, and people have diseases such as bronchitis and cancer. That causes women to end their life because of the pain and infliction they go through. This is shocking to me because so many articles I’ve read has said middle income countries aren’t really the ones affected by income. I personally think that this happens in middle income countries because the middle tries to live a higher income life acting as if they are rich, while kind of in reality many people still have an income that relates more to the low income pool of things. This makes a lot of sense, because they seem to stress between the two lives of high income and low income. It makes people become stressful, which may lead to being overwhelmed that may cause suicide. Along this graph I was able to see that the income level with the most suicides come from a middle income level instead of low or high.

           In conclusion, I have proved that Suicide rates are most excessive in the middle income countries instead of the high and low income countries. There has been multiple articles ( at the bottom of page )  that seems to think that middle income countries are the least of worries. My research has told me otherwise. Depending on the different countries you decide to study in depth, my conclusion may change but in these circumstances my theory remains.

Work Cited:

http://www.suicide.org/suicide-statistics.html#death-rates

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/22/health/us-suicide-rate-surges-to-a-30-year-high.html?_r=0

http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/22/health/suicide-rates-rise/

http://business.time.com/2012/11/08/why-suicides-are-more-common-in-richer-neighbor

hoods/

http://www.sras.org/how_does_income_affect_suicide_rates

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/09/suicide-rate-rich-neighborhoods_n_2102777.html