According to a report by the Congressional Research Service (PDF hosted on Cloudflare; archived copy here),
Although life expectancy has generally been increasing over time in the United States, researchers have long documented that it is lower for individuals with lower socioeconomic status (SES) compared with individuals with higher SES. Recent studies provide evidence that this gap has widened in recent decades. For example, a 2015 study by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) found that for men born in 1930, individuals in the highest income quintile (top 20%) could expect to live 5.1 years longer at age 50 than men in the lowest income quintile. This gap has increased significantly over time. Among men born in 1960, those in the top income quintile could expect to live 12.7 years longer than men in the bottom income quintile. This NAS study finds similar patterns for women: the life expectancy gap between the bottom and top income quintiles of women expanded from 3.9 years for the 1930 birth cohort to 13.6 years for the 1960 birth cohort.
Apparently, all the advances in medical science and healthy living that occurred during this rolling 30-year interval were visited upon the rich a lot more than on the poor.
According to a different study (open; DOI 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.0918; archived copy here) in JAMA Internal Medicine,
[...] inequalities in life expectancy among counties are large and growing, and much of the variation in life expectancy can be explained by differences in socioeconomic and race/ethnicity factors, behavioral and metabolic risk factors, and health care factors.
In 2014, there was a spread of 20.1 years between the counties with the longest and shortest typical life spans based on life expectancy at birth.
—NPR
additional coverage:
- Boston Globe (about CRS report)
- WPVI-TV (about JAMA study)
- Time (about JAMA study; Javascript required)
- WESA-FM (about JAMA study)
- The Park Record (about JAMA study)
(Score: 5, Informative) by idiot_king on Sunday May 28 2017, @05:02PM (49 children)
These issues have been raised by the common person for years and years, and for some reason it seems to be a surprise when a study is done about it.
I'm sick of the government dragging their feet on these things, and after Trump is ousted and the Far Right follows him out the door (possibly by force), we can finally tackle some of this e very obvious issues presented here (which we have known for literal decades at this point!)
Income inequality keeps increasing, black life expectancy is lower than white life expectancy, social security benefits pay out more to men than women. Just 3 things I saw skimming over the data. But the average person has known this since, well, at least as far as I can remember! Capitalism doesn't work, as pointed out in the summary, as the rich get better medical treatment than even the middle class.
My guess is this: either these problems are taken head on VERY soon, or we completely collapse into White Oligarchy if, God forbid, Der Trumpenfurher isn't ousted for his seemingly millions of transgressions at this point.
I guess countries really do have personalities. America's is that of an orange, racist, sexist, oaf in charge.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 28 2017, @05:13PM (3 children)
Trump is voted in to block the presidency from a warmongering pay-for-play puppet. Other reasons is to block the whole intersectional genderstudiespostcolonialiewfprekfr and definitely to put an end to the Muslim influence. That corporations shafted American workers doesn't help credibility either. This election lesson will be taught until it's learned.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 28 2017, @10:34PM (2 children)
Who might that be? is there any evidence to support that anyone other than Trump's sycophants were negotiating with foreign powers during the campaign?
Or are you just repeating rumors and lies that other people told you?
Evidence, friend. That's the key. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I haven't seen even ordinary evidence to support your claim.
So what about it?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 29 2017, @12:26AM (1 child)
Jeebus, dude! I was fully aware that Hillary is a warhawk when I voted for her. It's not necessary to keep Correcting the Record! At least not for another three years.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 29 2017, @06:52AM
There. FTFY.
(Score: 0, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 28 2017, @05:13PM (15 children)
>(possibly by force)
Good luck with that, beta cuck. We own all the guns, farms, and factories. You have Hollywood and a bunch of trannies.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Whoever on Sunday May 28 2017, @05:54PM (13 children)
You don't own shit. Your paymasters own it, and when they are done with you, they will dump you. You will die young because you were not able to afford proper medical care.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 28 2017, @06:33PM (4 children)
For some reason you seem to think I'm as poor and resourceless as you. I'll be doing just fine.
(Score: 2) by Whoever on Sunday May 28 2017, @08:03PM (3 children)
No, I don't. I think that you poor and I know that I am not.
Let's face it, you indicated you live in a flyover state, all of which are poorer than the coastal states.
Oh, and those farms: did you look at how much of US agriculture is based in California?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 28 2017, @08:11PM
Yes, plenty. Pay attention to what's grown there. You'll definitely not have a shortage of nuts and fruits over in California, that's for sure.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 28 2017, @08:14PM (1 child)
Oh, and only a Tolerant Liberal (TM) could be ignorant and hypocritical enough to prejudge people based on what state they live in. You're in great company.
(Score: 1) by kurenai.tsubasa on Monday May 29 2017, @12:42AM
That's true, it is pretty ignorant to prejudge fly-over country based on regularly published statistics. I've lived here my whole life. Let me say with confidence that GP is correct!
On the other hand, I like open air target practice. I've never actually been to an indoor gun range. Never needed to.
(Having advanced infiltrator tranny capabilities helps with this, but to be honest, there's a good number of people in flyover country who aren't jackasses like you. We're just all a bunch of proud ammosexuals!)
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Sunday May 28 2017, @08:34PM (7 children)
Young is relative. With Kurzweil's predicted advances, it's about to get blown fat far out of proportion.
Used to be, average life expectancy was +/-10% based on wealth, today that might be moving closer to +/-20%, but with "immortality around the corner," that marginal difference could trend to infinity very quickly (the singularity, as it were.)
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday May 29 2017, @02:00AM (6 children)
WHY would you want to live forever? Stop and think about "forever" here. It would be endless, eternal hell after a few million or billion years. We are not made to be Godlike.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday May 29 2017, @02:55AM (4 children)
Good joke, and possibly true, though given the choice some sentience might never choose to terminate.
"Immortality" will start with lifespans of 120, 140, 200 years, and death by accident or foul play will always be there, at least until you can "backup" into a newly manufactured body ala Doctrow's Magic Kingdom story.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday May 29 2017, @05:29PM (3 children)
I am as serious as an ebola plague. Eternity is not "a long freaking time," it's *forever.*
Think about it this way: suppose that as a human you can appreciate and have, say, 100,000,000,000,000,000,000 (that's 100 quintillion) years of more or less unique experiences. That's it. After that, things start looping, because there's only so many possible configurations you can comprehend by virtue of BEING human. In other words, you've literally seen and done it all, and this includes all sorts of horrible torture you chose to engage in for the sole reason that it's something you hadn't experienced yet.
*You are no closer to the end of eternity than when you began.* And now you have no choice but to loop it.
Forever.
Boredom is the eternal Hell of the immortal. At some point, even if it's a number of years too big to represent in a 64-bit pointer, you will wish more than anything to die. And you won't be able to. You will be in Hell.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday May 29 2017, @08:14PM
Douglas Adams tangled with this a bit - the Restaurant at the end of the Universe, time travelling immortals watching every movie ever made, etc. and always being so very bored by it all.
If you take time travel out of the equation, then there's a lot to try to accomplish before the heat death of the Universe, including sustaining your consciousness into another Big Bang, if you can.
I would imagine older immortals would tend to take things more slowly... but, who knows, haven't met one yet as far as I know.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 31 2017, @02:33AM (1 child)
It's trivial to create new experiences. Just delete the old ones.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday May 31 2017, @02:53AM
This is not eternal life proper, then...this is akin to reincarnation.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday May 29 2017, @03:15AM
Why would you want to live through the rest of 2017? Or the year after that? Why not just end it now?
That option is still on the table even if aging is cured. Of course, WW3 might choose for you.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1) by kurenai.tsubasa on Monday May 29 2017, @12:28AM
Strictly speaking, you don't have all the guns. I have a few right here.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Sunday May 28 2017, @05:22PM
What's a couple of decades between classes, hm?
I'll harp on the Trumpster's age again here - at what point are our leaders going to be older than the constituents they represent will ever hope to be? Is there a better definition with "out of touch with your constituency" than to be 10 years older than their median life expectancy?
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2, Disagree) by slap on Sunday May 28 2017, @05:49PM (2 children)
"black life expectancy is lower than white life expectancy"
From the report:
"Life expectancy at age 65 in 2014 was 18.2 years for blacks (so an expected age of death at 83.2 [65+18.2=83.2]) and 19.3 years
for whites (so an expected age of death at 84.3 years [65+19.3=84.3])"
Also,
"CBO compares today’s life expectancy and lifetime earnings to life expectancy and earnings in the year 2039, and determines that,
in 2014, a 65-year-old man in the upper lifetime earnings quintile is expected to live more than three years longer than someone with the
same observable characteristics in the lowest lifetime earnings quintile. A similar trend exists for women: in 2014, a 65-year-old woman
in the upper lifetime earnings quintile would be expected to live more than one year longer than this same woman in the lowest lifetime
earnings quintile."
The first quote indicates a 1.1 year difference in the age of death between blacks and whites who have reached the age of 65; the second one indicates
that lifetime earnings has a somewhat larger impact on the age of death for people who have reached the age of 65.
I had always assumed that what the poster Idiot_king said was right - just for the heck of it I looked it up and found out that we were both wrong.
(Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Sunday May 28 2017, @07:27PM
Well, more accurately, you likely were right. But things are changing. As a recent Washington Post article [washingtonpost.com] noted, the racial gap in life expectancy has been closing for a while. Though it is important to note that your first stat has to do with people aged 65 and over: yes, the mortality gap has nearly disappeared there, but it still exists for younger age groups. For blacks who make to 65, there isn't much difference in outcomes, but there's still a lot of younger deaths due to heart disease, diabetes, etc. (Obviously a significant part of that is also related to poverty rates; poor whites frequently suffer from similar issues.) Even there, though, the differences are fading a bit as more younger white people overdose, commit suicide, etc., coupled with improved healthcare etc. for African Americans.
(Score: 2) by butthurt on Sunday May 28 2017, @11:11PM
The quote from idiot_king and the quote from the CBO report agree.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday May 28 2017, @06:11PM (23 children)
No shit? Who would have thought!? You reckon it might have something to do with them being able to shovel endless amounts of money at doctor after doctor after doctor until they find the one who knows his ass from a hole in the ground? You think this will change with socialized medicine? You're right, they'll fly overseas for better treatment instead of staying here.
Didn't your mother ever tell you worry about yourself not other people? I mean the only excuses for you thinking this wrongly are shitty parenting or you were too stupid to learn the lesson.
Yes, black people are on average poorer than the rest of the nation. Would you like to state a few more redundant and irrelevant facts? Maybe tell us the sky is blue?
This couldn't have anything to do with men working more than women, could it? Nah, let's have ourselves a big ole class war over it instead of using logic.
Yeah. Name me a non-capitalist nation that's done better than the US ever in all human history. Go ahead. I'll wait.
What a fucking indoctrinated moron. Go drink some more Kool-Aid.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 28 2017, @06:58PM (2 children)
Belgium
http://www.therichest.com/rich-list/rich-countries/the-10-best-countries-in-the-world-officially/ [therichest.com]
(Score: 2) by number11 on Sunday May 28 2017, @07:54PM
Belgium isn't capitalist?
(Score: 1, Troll) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday May 28 2017, @09:57PM
I think you need to learn what Capitalist means.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Sunday May 28 2017, @08:37PM (10 children)
Did the US do better because of capitalism, or simply by being in the right place at the right time (away from the destruction of WWII, but close enough to profit from the rebuilding)?
"Progress" is what you define it to be. Slaving away 45+ hours a week for 35+ years to have a chance of "not outliving my money," doesn't feel like progress to me.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday May 28 2017, @10:02PM (9 children)
You're blinded by your ideology then. No nation in the history of the world has ever does as much for its people or humanity as a whole in the span of two hundred years and change.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 28 2017, @10:41PM (1 child)
Except Belgium.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday May 29 2017, @02:34AM
Does this look like a serious screenplay to you?
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday May 29 2017, @03:05AM (4 children)
You're blinded by your ideology then. The "neosocialists" are living better lives, healthier and happier. They do grouse about high taxes, but they don't starve, freeze, or neglect their children.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday May 29 2017, @04:50AM (3 children)
And they contribute far less to the world than proper capitalist nations as well. They are parasites living off the creations of capitalism. Compare what the norse nations have given to the world since adopting socialist policies as opposed to what capitalist nations have. What advances have Cuba or Russia given the world since they started sucking Marx's cock? I'm not the blind one here.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday May 29 2017, @01:43PM (2 children)
If, by contributing far less, you mean they, per capita: output less CO2, rape fewer fisheries into oblivion, and create fewer toxic waste dumps, then, yes, they are contributing "less" - I wouldn't say "far less," but I would say that they are creating and contributing, one example that immediately comes to mind is Linus' "stone soup" computer operating system that I'm using right now.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday May 29 2017, @02:32PM (1 child)
That's some confirmation bias on an epic scale there. Nearly every modern amenity you take for granted today is a product of U.S. innovation. Including the personal computer that you run good ole Linus's operating system on and the worldwide network you're using to shit talk the people who created it. That medical care that you bitch about being too expensive and that other nations take advantage of? Mostly us. Advances in cleaner petroleum-powered vehicles and fully electrical vehicles? Us again.
Your focusing entirely on negatives while dismissing the unprecedented in human history pile of positives doesn't make you insightful, it just makes you a dishonest shithead.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday May 29 2017, @08:23PM
Ever travel outside the US, get some perspective on the world from the other side of the borders?
We are not 100% responsible for 100% of innovation and invention. Hell, we got our rockets from Germans, our nukes from the Jews (o.k. stretching here)... Yes, the US nurtured these guys and let them do their thing a little faster than they could have elsewhere, back then. Back in the day of Bell labs, 20% of income reinvested to R&D, etc.
Things have changed in the US, it's no longer as friendly to innovation as it used to be. There's still lots of money here, funding innovators like Rocket Labs in New Zealand for one example, but there's also lots of money accumulating in China, and no small amount of innovation happening there these days. There's plenty of copycat work, but there's also independent engineering and manufacturing that's surpassing US capabilities in many areas.
Are we good? Sure, we're good - but not as good as we used to be, and the rest of the world is catching up fast. If Europe hadn't ground itself into hamburger, twice, we wouldn't be in nearly the competitive position that we are - they had the knowledge, they just screwed up the politics in a big way. The US is actually very lucky that we fought our Civil War before weapons got better.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 29 2017, @02:49PM (1 child)
Wow WTF.
You sound like American religion threw up all over you and all you can now do is reiterate it over and over again.
I just looked up some random major things,
Space exploration => UUSR
Insulin (diabetes) => Canada
Linux OS=> Europe
Trains => Europe
Computer => Europe
Internet => US
Hey, look at that, inventions are spread over the globe instead of located all in the US.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday May 29 2017, @03:36PM
Nice list.
Computer? You had to go back to Babbage, I assume, because computing on silicon is U.S. top to bottom. Most relevant being the microprocessor and the personal computer upon which Linux runs.
Linux itself? Love it but it started as a UNIX ripoff, so that's not particularly inventive. What's been done with it? That's not a product of geographic borders but worldwide collaboration (most of which comes from the U.S.).
Insulin? That's all you've got for medical advancements? Would you like me to start listing off the many thousands of drugs and vaccines that would not have existed without U.S. capitalism? The underlying research done here? The devices invented here?
Trains? That'd be the UK which was extremely capitalist at the time.
Space exploration? Please. We have consistently kicked the shit out of the USSR/Russia in everything space related since 1963. Also the only properly socialist/communist nation to make your list.
Seriously, your attempts to maintain this cognitive dissonance are pathetic. Just admit to yourself that capitalism creates things and socialism does not.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by Lagg on Sunday May 28 2017, @09:36PM (4 children)
I don't care about the overall topic in this (hypocrisy shows on both sides quickly) but you're giving America way too much credit putting it on the world history stage like that. It's like challenging someone to have softer skin than a toddler. America is the toddler among the feet of giants.
We could very well be a failed state and just not know it yet.
The US barely has any business being in a sentence next to "in all human history" as if its significance was that important.
Shiiiiiiet.
http://lagg.me [lagg.me] 🗿
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday May 28 2017, @10:07PM (3 children)
Probably. Likely due to being able to afford self-destructive libtards for long enough that it became something other than a fringe movement.
Try again, my shit-colored goggles wearing friend. Check where the medical, scientific, cultural, and humanitarian advancements have been taking place since 1776. Now check the scope of them compared to the rest of human history. Yeah, that's right, Merica wins.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 28 2017, @10:47PM (1 child)
Bah what have the Romans ever done for us?! And why are all those fancy science terms named after people with weird names? From now on everything is gonna be in Freedom Units.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday May 29 2017, @02:32AM
Most of those fancy Latin names came about since 1776. Learn your shit.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 29 2017, @02:05AM
You need to toss yourself out on to the burn pile. Dry out that swampy skin of yours a bit.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 29 2017, @05:28AM (3 children)
Just when I think you can't possibly get worse you grab a shovel and start looking for China.
Socialized healthcare is better, the "long waits" that people complain so much about are actually non-emergency procedures bumped back so that the people who have urgent problems are taken care of first. Of course, that doesn't work in your worldview where you believe it is OK for people to be selfish pricks and use money to pretend they are royalty.
Immediately you promote selfishness as if the person is too stupid or had bad parenting? My my buzzy, I like this new world where we don't have to suspect anything, the vampires are now comfortable outing themselves!
Systemic racism and its effects are boring to you? I'm shocked, SHOCKED I say!
It would be a gender war, not a class war you dipshit. So the lesson here is that women should never be stay at home moms because it could totally screw them over. Social Security isn't an easy problem to solve, but you don't seem to be interested in even addressing societal problems.
You really want to attribute all of the USA's success to capitalism? What else should I expect, you're an idiot. Go to college, its not too late for you to stop being an idiot.
(Score: 1, Troll) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday May 29 2017, @10:45AM (2 children)
Do please point me to a socialized healthcare system that's given the world any significant number of medical advances. Can't? That's because such is a fucking unicorn. It does not exist. Now our cut-throat bastardly capitalist system here in the U.S., yeah, we've increased the quality of healthcare so much it's fucking unbelievable in our relatively brief existence. Capitalism: 1, your bitch ass: 0.
I promote selfishness every day but your reading comprehension is lacking if that's what you were trying to gig me on there. I was promoting not pinning your self-worth relative to what others have. That is called being a well-adjusted adult instead of a "mommy, he got two more M&Ms than me" petulant child. What others have is irrelevant to your personal happiness unless you simply have a heart full of avarice.
No, I find them hilarious. Systemic racism/sexism/etc... = "I can't find any actual evidence of race/sex/blah-ism, so I'm going to claim it's built into the system." Go fuck yourself with that nonsense. This is America, bitch. You want wrongdoing dealt with, you fucking well prove it or shut your pie hole.
Gender is, by its very nature, a calssification. Learn to fucking English.
Tell you what, sweetcheeks, I'll start listing off significant capitalist nation contributions to the world and you start listing off significant socialist nation contributions to the world and we'll see who runs the site out of db space first. Pro-tip: it sure as fuck ain't gonna be you.
Get this straight in your mind, dumbfuck: Socialist nations produce nothing of worth because everyone who wants to produce things of worth fucking leaves for somewhere their contributions will earn them a better life.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 29 2017, @12:32PM (1 child)
You seem to miss what social healthcare means. Tip: it works just like social roads, social armies, I was going to say social schooling, but that's not working that well in the US from what I hear, other places that's working fine to though.
The U.S. wouldn't be treading in the social healthcare like its some hypothetical thing, most of Europe has social healthcare, also Canada, etc. have social healthcare, working very well. I mention the last one too because they get many Americans visiting only for medical procedures to expensive for them in the US. (But they can afford them in Canada)
And for medical advances, did you ever use the European invention of antibiotics?
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday May 29 2017, @02:35PM
It works well in other nations because the US did the lion's share of the work creating modern medicine. Without our capitalist asses you'd still be getting leeches put on you, albeit at a reasonable price.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by pgc on Monday May 29 2017, @03:49AM
Idiot.
None of your presidents has ever done something about these things. Now it is suddenly Trump that is to blame and ousting him will provide you with a president that will solve all these issues?
How old are you? Still believe in fairytales?
(Score: 2, Insightful) by kanweg on Sunday May 28 2017, @05:03PM
More evidence for the god(s) liking rich people more than poor people. Similar to the god(s) liking people who wear their safety belt better. Also enjoying favor are those who have a sturdy car with a crumple zone of ample length and with air bags. Spending money in that area must be considered a more effective way of garnering good fortune than tithing.
Bert
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 28 2017, @05:12PM (6 children)
Poor people are often obese, and obesity kills. Rich people are not responsible for the eating habits of others.
(Score: 3, Informative) by sjames on Sunday May 28 2017, @05:22PM (4 children)
Nice bit of stone age knowledge you pulled from your backside there. Care to read more modern research on the subject of causes of obesity?
Also consider, eating habits are also dictated by how much money you can afford to spend on food and how much time you have left over after earning enough to pay the rent.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 29 2017, @02:10AM (3 children)
Keep peddling your revisionist junk. My information is current [diabetesjournals.org]. There is such a thing as sloth, and it causes both poverty and obesity.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Monday May 29 2017, @01:50PM (2 children)
Actually, the article you linked suggests that poverty causes sloth.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 29 2017, @04:20PM (1 child)
My post said poor people are often obese, and the article shows a clear link. You denied this link, and now you're trying to shift the argument. I also wrote that people are responsible for what they put in their own mouthes. But no, we should pretend lazy bums don't exist, and the poor and obese are all victims of circumstance. And then you wonder why Trump won the election.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Monday May 29 2017, @11:24PM
No, I'm not. You claimed that sloth causes obesity and poverty, then for some reason I can't fathom you posted a "supporting" link that suggests that poverty causes sloth. That would be closer to my argument that that the constraints of poverty tend to lead to bad diet. Sure, everyone would love to eat those healthy diets that you can have if the grocery budget is high enough and free time to prepare food is sufficient.
Of course, even that won't end obesity. We have good evidence that you'll need a fecal transplant for that.
Trump won the election because the democrats were successful in eliminating their best candidate and the other republican candidates were unelectable.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 29 2017, @06:10AM
Actually yes, some rich assholes decided that loading cheap food with sugar, salt, and fat would make themselves more money. Add in a lot of stress eating and you have a great recipe for obesity. In case you don't get the last sentence, poor people are often stressed out and a biological result is eating to trick your body into thinking life is not so stressful.
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Sunday May 28 2017, @05:17PM (2 children)
It's really simple. People with enough money can move from good ideas into practice and make use of the knowledge acquired. Poor people usually have a hard time to change their circumstances. And often no money for education to become aware either.
(Score: 0, Troll) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday May 28 2017, @06:18PM (1 child)
Pell Grant. Countless scholarships. The G.I. Bill. Student loans. A combination of the above. Or if all else fails, put the money that would have gone into bigass rims for your car, booze, and weed into educating yourself. Anyone can do that. Being poor is no excuse.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 28 2017, @07:01PM
Dr. Carson is that you?
(Score: 2) by bradley13 on Sunday May 28 2017, @08:44PM (3 children)
...but - amongst the people we know, there is something really odd.
We know a lot of people in the lower quintile. And they seem have huge numbers of health problems that are just not easily explained. Adult-onset diabetes, in a guy who is fit and not overweight. Serious eye problems that just cannot be fixed. Congenital heart problems discovered in relatively young people. Etc.
These are not the kinds of problems explained by a low income level. In most cases, these are content people, working "blue collar" jobs, but basically living a nice life. Why, exactly, do they have such a high incidence of really nasty health problems? It's actually really weird.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 28 2017, @10:51PM (1 child)
Is it because they show up at hospital when their health issue is end-stage? Because they have no health coverage.
(Score: 2) by bradley13 on Monday May 29 2017, @09:22AM
Is it because they show up at hospital when their health issue is end-stage? Because they have no health coverage.
No, that's exactly not the case. Diabetes - the kind where you have to inject insulin, not controllable by diet - doesn't normally just pop out of nowhere in a fit, non-overweight adult. Heart problems in 20-something young people are also not normal. Really, lots of serious and apparently inexplicable health problems. Ones that I don't see in wealthier folks.
Frankly, if I were looking at dog breeds, I'd think: "inbreeding". These aren't people marrying their cousins or anything, but, I wonder: the blue collar world is less mobile. People tend to stay in the same general area over generations, and they then tend to marry local. Whereas the white collar world moves around a lot more, and people are more likely to marry someone from somewhere else. Could that have an effect over generations?
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by tibman on Monday May 29 2017, @01:58AM
There are a lot of blue-collar jobs that are a more dangerous than companies acknowledge.
https://www.farmworkerjustice.org/content/pesticide-safety [farmworkerjustice.org]
Blue collar protections are eroding under Trump's presidency. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/may/17/pesticide-trump-ban-california-farm-workers-sick [theguardian.com]
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 29 2017, @04:24PM
I lived in Philly for a long time. (I no longer do).
Philadelphia is great for this type of research because it's a microcosm of the geographic containment that goes on around the country. An infamous article in the Philadelphia Inquirer published a "murder map" of the city. That is, a map with dots in places where there were murders. You see the whole city covered, with the exception of an area called "Old City". This is where people with money live if they live in the city and where you will find the great majority of trendy bars and tourist attractions. A great statistic I have heard is, on Friday and Saturday nights, 1/3 of the entire Philadelphia Police force is deployed into Old City. Philadelphia knows where the money is and they protect it.
Most of the crime in Philadelphia is concentrated into certain areas and those areas are nearly 100% black. By proportion and by absolute numbers, black people are most likely to be the perpetrator and victim of a crime in the city. They are most likely to live a highly impoverished area and most likely to have serious lifestyle related health problem (e.g., diabetes). These are facts that are not controversial and easily cited. In the US, most development money is allocated at a county level and town level. This happened because most taxation at that level is managed at the town level.
Towns are self-regulating entities, only allowing certain type of building, and then certain types of tax levels. These are policies design to keep out people that the town does not want. Make no mistake about that. A town close to me does not allow sewers to be built because then they could not mandate certain housing lot minimum sizes which in turn guarantee minimum house prices. Another town close to me, floated an enormous bond to buy all the development rights for the farm and undeveloped land in the town to prevent tract house builders from building houses.
Geography in America has an almost 1:1 correlation with wealth and wealth, in general, buys better living standards which, of course, heavily correlates to life expectancy.
(Score: 2) by fadrian on Tuesday May 30 2017, @12:13AM
Because the theory of social Darwinism wasn't enough - we needed to bring it into being and promote it via our for-profit medical system. People should understand the endgame here: If you have no utility (as defined by the current powers), you should die - quickly, if at all possible. And, if you don't have the good graces to do it quickly enough, we will help you along. It's better for our new social Darwinist society - you just don't need the dead weight of useless "eaters". Much more efficient that way after all, and that's what economic theory teaches us - efficiency is the main good. You know what else is inefficient? Democracy. An oligarchy is much more efficient, if you can't manage an outright dictatorship. I hope the idiots are happy now. Democracy is fragile. It only takes one stupid vote to crush it.
That is all.