SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
London, United Kingdom - A decade of "austerity" - a political programme of slashing public spending on services in a bid to reduce government budget deficits - has seen significant effects on the health and wellbeing of Britons, new research has reported.
Life expectancy has stalled and mortality rates have increased, especially for the poorest in the United Kingdom, according to a report commissioned by the Institute of Health Equity.
The report, Health Equity in England: The Marmot Review Ten Years On, was launched on Tuesday and sees Sir Michael Marmot, a former president of the World Medical Association, updating his influential 2010 report, having been asked by the then-Labour government to study the question: "Is inequality making us sick?"
Marmot's latest research analysed a wealth of data from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) and Public Health England to explore what has happened since his last landmark report. And the answer can only be summarised as: Not only is inequality making us sick but it is killing us quicker.
In the past decade - for the first time in 120 years of increasing life expectancy in England - life expectancy has stalled for those people living in the UK's 10 percent most deprived areas, particularly in the northeast.
Among women from the most deprived areas - especially British women of Bangladeshi and Pakistani origin - life expectancy fell between 2010-2012 and again between 2016-2018.
Mortality rates have meanwhile increased for people aged between 45 and 49 - the generation that grew up under former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's administrations. The report details how life expectancy follows the social gradient - the more deprived the area, the shorter the life expectancy.
Marmot's data analysis finds that, as the social gradient has become steeper, so inequalities in life expectancy have also increased.
Austerity has adversely affected the social determinants that impact on health in the short, medium and long term. Austerity will cast a long shadow over the lives of the children born and growing up under its effects
:- Professor Sir Michael Marmot
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday February 28 2020, @03:39AM (2 children)
Imaginary? Every single election cycle the "I'm for the little man! We demand $freeshatoftheday!" party attempts to increase spending. And about every other time on average, they succeed. But, yeah, it's totally my imagination that new or more highly funded programs cause a spending increase.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 28 2020, @04:29AM (1 child)
I don't really agree with this assessment, mostly because there aren't a lot of political parties that support austerity. Your typical left and right parties tend to support a lot of government spending but disagree on where it should be spent. In the US, the Democrats and Republicans worked together to end sequestration and increase spending levels across the board. If spending is going to be reduced, it's probably going to come from a classically liberal party like the US Libertarian party. Unfortunately, we're stuck with typical left and right parties wanting to increase spending in different areas. Whoever has a majority decides what type of spending to increase. Left-leaning parties tend to support more spending on social programs while right-leaning parties tend to support more defense spending and reducing revenue through tax cuts. I don't like taxes any more than you do, but it seems irresponsible to cut taxes while already running large deficits. But if you want to actually cut spending and reduce deficits, you probably need a classically liberal party in power.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday March 02 2020, @04:17AM
Read the thread not just the comment. In context you're agreeing with me.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.