For those of us in the Heath, Wellness and Democracy bunker…

I think its very challenging in the article “Is democracy good for the poor?” to solely challenge this theory by only looking at child and infant mortality…where are the other factors involved? As such, Democracy has little or no effect on child and infant mortality rates- and the direction, data and concepts Ross uses to get there is choppy. His conceptual challenge is nullified- where if he looked at % in which single parents (mother probably more likely  receivers of welfare, how much theses classified poor citizens have to spend on daycare- subsidized or not subsidized…we could then see how democracy is functionally working towards being good for the poor or not good for the poor based on something that can be directly causal of being good or bad for the poor- rather than child and infant mortality that can occur in the data for families just as frequently in the poor as for middle class, and richer people.

I think we should be careful in our analysis- for two of the articles depend on the world survey, and measuring of feeling thermometers  which this one measure the democracy functionally working for or against the poor based on a concept that doesnt really pan out in the end, in my opinion. AS such I think its helpful to find fundamental links with some of the articles that either conceptualize in the same way or take on similar datasets. As such, in my circumstance I spend alot of time arguing in my paper against the measure the article discusses.