Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

quakerboy

(14,845 posts)

21. I would disagree

Reply to jeff47 (Reply #7)

Wed Oct 22, 2014, 08:04 PM

Oct 2014

I suppose it would depend on exactly how many decades.

The mortality rate is something like .8%/year. So over the past couple decades, it would add up to about 16%, or 51 million folks who have died.

Adding that to the current adult population of 242 million you end up with 293 million folks.

Starting with our current 240 million adults and their number of 1/3, that would be 80 million.

Taking 80 million and dividing it by the larger number, adding all the deceased, it only drops the percent to 27%.

Which is still pretty gnarly, over 1/4 of all adults.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

34 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

One in three adults listed in FBI’s ‘master criminal database’ [View all] Jesus Malverde Oct 2014 OP

that is mind boggling statistic grasswire Oct 2014 #1

The problem is the lousy way they got to it. jeff47 Oct 2014 #7

On it's face that just looked like a bogus number. trof Oct 2014 #10

I would disagree quakerboy Oct 2014 #21

Again, the article doesn't say. But IIRC they've been jeff47 Oct 2014 #22

Fair enough quakerboy Oct 2014 #32

Well, THAT certainly has a nice hifiguy Oct 2014 #2

Hm, that sounds similar Ampersand Unicode Oct 2014 #15

Being on DU probably gives to one an admission ticket to be tracked as a RKP5637 Oct 2014 #29

Land of the free(ish) progressoid Oct 2014 #3

I wish I were considered a Master Criminal but probably on their good list uppityperson Oct 2014 #4

Not me. I've always strived to keep my amateur status. FSogol Oct 2014 #6

I prefer Smooth Criminal. Ampersand Unicode Oct 2014 #14

Look at it as a recruting database seveneyes Oct 2014 #5

This is a national disgrace. Comrade Grumpy Oct 2014 #8

How did they know I was a master criminal? Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #9

Most Americans have smoked pot, and as such belong in prison. Warren DeMontague Oct 2014 #11

For a non-addictive substance... Recursion Oct 2014 #23

Either that, or people understand that it's not the government's fucking business Warren DeMontague Oct 2014 #24

Right, but the user judges the bowl is worth that risk Recursion Oct 2014 #25

Sort of like how gay people pre-lawrence risked arrest for consensual gay sex in Texas? Warren DeMontague Oct 2014 #26

I'd say love is close to addictive (not everything addictive is bad) Recursion Oct 2014 #27

Well I'm more focused on ending the bad laws, than judging those who break them. Warren DeMontague Oct 2014 #28

God I hope so Recursion Oct 2014 #30

is there really roomtomove Oct 2014 #12

"Master" as in "primary database of record." nt Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2014 #16

I'm going to guess Wall Street thieves aren't on that list. Ampersand Unicode Oct 2014 #13

Baazinga! And welcome to DU FailureToCommunicate Oct 2014 #17

They definitely should be, as they've stolen most of the world's wealth! Initech Oct 2014 #19

Cool. Does this mean I've been promoted from "thought criminal" to "Master Criminal?" TygrBright Oct 2014 #18

Home of the brave, LAND OF THE FREE! Lol! sabrina 1 Oct 2014 #20

Go USA! Go USA! Go USA! RKP5637 Oct 2014 #31

It was the wish of the late J. Edgar Hoover. Rex Oct 2014 #33

Umm, bloggers who are bad at math for $200, Alex. X_Digger Oct 2014 #34