Skip to main content

VP Picks and Chances of a President Dying in Office

After McCain picked a relatively unqualified and inexperienced Sarah Palin, many people gasped at the possibility of Palin having to take over the presidency in case something happens to McCain. I think McCain dying in office is overstated considering he appears healthy and fit despite the recurrence of a malignant melanoma. Plus, he has been getting great healthcare due to his status and will continue to do so whether or not he wins the presidency.

That said, it would be nice to get numbers on chances of McCain's survival as a function of his age. Thankfully, that information was provided by Alex Burns at Politico.
The odds of a 72-year-old man living four more years, or one full White House term, are better. But for a man who has lived 72 years and 67 days (McCain’s age on Election Day this year), there is between a 14.2 and 15.1 percent chance of dying before Inauguration Day 2013, according to the Social Security Administration’s 2004 actuarial tables and the authoritative 2001 mortality statistics assembled by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners.

Going by the Social Security Administration’s tables, that’s nearly ten times the likelihood that a man aged 47 years and 92 days (Barack Obama’s age on Election Day this year) will die before Jan. 20, 2013.
Given McCain's 15% chance of not making it through his first term, it is indeed reckless for him to choose a VP who has no experience on the national stage at all.

I worry that Obama's chances of not making it through his first term are probably much higher than the 1.5% statistics suggest. This is because Obama is a target for many radical groups who would want to assassinate him. Many charismatic leaders who capture the world's attention have too often fallen victim to the bullet of a troubled radical with extremist agenda. Fortunately, he picked Joe Biden, a very capable VP who can take over the presidency in case of a major trajedy.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Correlation Between Taxes and Social/Economic Programs

I have always wondered if the taxes people pay correlate with the availability of social and economic programs and safety nets, not to mention the military programs that protect them. This idea comes in light of the notion that Europeans are highly taxed compared to their American counterparts, but they seem to have access to free (or almost free) education and health care while the US provides neither. The Europeans live and work at a more leisurely pace than Americans and they have the comfort of knowing that their government has put safety nets in case a disaster. The Europeans do a lot to ensure that all their citizens have comparable opportunities, and thus you are less likely to see a huge gap between the poor and the rich. Perhaps the lack of incentive to excel has stifled entrepreneurship and innovation in Europe to some extent. In fact, Europe has historically high unemployment rates than the US and the size of government there is significantly larger than that of the US....

Plea to Barack on Foreign Aid

Barack Obama has been my candidate of choice from the beginning. I have outlined a few of the reasons I support him . One I didn't mention is the issue of foreign aid. As I discussed earlier, US government's foreign aid as a % of its GDP is one of the lowest for any developed nation. Economic Aid to Developing Countries - The Stats To make it worse, much of the aid is given to two sources: Military and economic aid to Israel and Egypt to keep some peace in the Middle East Colombia, Peru and Bolivia to fight drug The tiny bit that is left goes to countries where the US has foreign policy interests. The aid is used for political leverage. Here is where Barack Obama comes into the picture. He has said that diplomacy and restoration of American image in the world would be the pillars of his foreign policy. One way to improve America's image in the world is to provide more foreign aid, particularly one that is not directly used for political leveraging. Obama promised ...

2001 Recession Deferred for 2008?

Most people remember the Dot-Com bubble of the 1990s that peaked in 2000 before bursting in 2001-2003. Considering how the NASDAQ composite lost more than 60% of its value by 2001 alone, the country was about to go into a recession. The 9/11 attacks made things worse too. As the impact of 9/11 and Dot-Com bust were about to pull the country into a recession, another bubble came to the rescue. It was the housing bubble that deferred a sure recession and kept the US in an era of faux prosperity. It gave Bush a reason to soldier on with flawed economic policies as the housing bubble gave the impression that the good economic progress of the Clinton years were being sustained through Bush's years. This time though, there does not appear to be another bubble ready to bail the US out of the recession it is in. After suffering through the I.T. and housing bubbles in just a decade, I don't think investors and people in general will be adventurous enough to create another bubbl...