Page 1 of 13 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 187

Thread: People live longer in blue states than red; new study points to impact-state policies

  1. #1 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    State of Bliss
    Posts
    26,246
    Thanks
    7,095
    Thanked 5,196 Times in 3,829 Posts
    Groans
    433
    Groaned 261 Times in 257 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5

    Werewolf People live longer in blue states than red; new study points to impact-state policies


    Noam N. Levey 10 hrs ago

    Weak environmental protections, safety rules and labor and civil rights protections may be cutting lives short in conservative states and deepening the divide between red and blue states, according to a new study on links between life expectancy and state policy.

    The report, published Tuesday in the health policy journal Milbank Quarterly, finds that states where residents live longest, including California, tend to have much more stringent environmental laws, tougher tobacco and firearms regulations and more protections for workers, minorities and LGBTQ residents.

    Since the mid-1980s, the gap among U.S. states in how long their residents live has widened, reversing decades of progress toward greater equality.

    One group of states, mostly in the Northeast and the West, have seen average life expectancies rise relatively steadily, placing them on par with the wealthiest nations of Western Europe. Those states tend to have more stringent regulations.

    By contrast, the life expectancy in states with more conservative health, labor and social policies — concentrated in the South andAppalachia — have stagnated in recent decades, according to the study, which adds to growing research on health and political disparities between states.

    California has among the highest average life expectancies in the country, at 81.3 years. It also had the most liberal policies in the nation in 2014, the most recent year the study analyzed, according to the system the authors developed to rank states.

    Although the study's authors note that they can't prove that state policies caused the gap in life expectancy, the correlation is a persistent one across multiple states and several decades.

    “It’s disheartening to see another example of a missed opportunity by policymakers,” said David Radley, senior scientist at the nonprofit Commonwealth Fund who studies differences in state health policies and the effects on people’s health. Radley was not involved in Milbank report.

    The new report may help shape efforts to rethink government policy in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic, which has exposed deep structural weaknesses in the U.S. as well as yawning gaps in many state safety nets.

    “The overarching conclusion is clear: States that have invested in their populations’ social and economic well-being by enacting more liberal policies over time tend to be the same states that have made considerable gains in life expectancy,” the study’s authors wrote.

    Even before the current public health crisis, life expectancy in the U.S. had been declining, setting America apart from most other wealthy nations. That decline has fueled tough questions about domestic policy.

    The opioid epidemic, which has had a devastating impact on regions of the country already hit hard by economic stagnation, has been the focus of a lot of the discussion about that shift.

    But Syracuse University sociologist Jennifer Karas Montez, the lead author of the new study, said the impact of opioids may be only part of the story.

    “When we look at what is happening with life expectancy, the tendency is to focus on individual explanations about what Americans are doing,” she said, noting obesity and smoking behaviors as well as drug use. “But state policies are so important.”

    To assess what role these policies may be playing, Montez and other researchers reviewed more than 120 policies enacted by states over the years and assessed whether each policy choice in each state was more liberal or more conservative.

    Policies included housing rules such as rent control; health and welfare policies such as Medicaid eligibility and welfare limits; labor protections such as paid sick leave and minimum wages; and civil rights policies such as gender discrimination bans, hate-crime laws and same-sex marriage.

    They also looked at state abortion restrictions, tax policy, education spending, immigration rules and gun control laws.

    Each state was ranked by how liberal or conservative its policies overall have been, going back to 1970.

    The researchers then compared these findings to trends in life expectancy in all 50 states.

    Montez said the trends they saw were unmistakable. They also correlated with important points in the nation’s political history.

    Through the 1960s and 1970s, for example, state life expectancies generally converged. That trend began to reverse in the mid-1980s, around the same time that a conservative movement, led by President Reagan and mirrored in many state capitols, became ascendant.

    The gap between states accelerated further after 2010, when sweeping Republican victories in state elections shifted policies further to the right in many places
    .

    By 2017, residents of the state with the highest life expectancy — Hawaii — were living on average seven years longer than residents of the state with the lowest life expectancy — Mississippi.


    By contrast, the gap between the best- and worst-performing states in 1984 was less than five years.

    The gap is not only about policy: States where people live longer tend to be wealthier and have better educated populations, for example.

    But Montez noted that decisions by state leaders have helped shape those factors.

    “States like Connecticut are investing in their population, investing in schools, setting an economic floor for their workers, discouraging behaviors like smoking that kill people,” she explained. “You have other states like Mississippi and Oklahoma that aren’t doing any of this.”

    In Connecticut, whose policies have become steadily more liberal over the last half century, life expectancy increased 5.8 years between 1980 and 2017 to 80.7 years.

    In Oklahoma, which has become markedly more conservative, life expectancy increased only 2.2 years over the same period, reaching 75.8 years in 2017.


    Identifying which state policies may have the most impact on how long people live is difficult, the researchers concede. But the study points to a group of policies that appear to correlate most closely with longer lives.

    These include some unsurprising candidates such as tougher environmental laws, which the authors note may protect people from toxic substances. The authors also found a correlation between longer life expectancy and labor policies that increase economic security, such as a minimum wage.

    Tougher gun laws appear to track with longer life expectancies, the study notes, as do stricter tobacco controls.

    The authors also point to civil rights laws, which they suggest may protect residents from ill health related to persistent stress.

    And they found a correlation between longer life expectancy and better access to abortion, which the study notes may reflect other research that has linked abortion restrictions to women’s poverty and ill health.

    more @ source

    Corporate America is the lobbying arm of the CCP and Wall Street is the investor relations department

    Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people - does not even pretend to try, instead, he tries to divide us

    We are witnessing the consequences of three years of this deliberate effort. We are witnessing the consequences of three years without mature leadership Mattis

  2. #2 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Prairieville
    Posts
    18,743
    Thanks
    1,951
    Thanked 8,348 Times in 5,568 Posts
    Groans
    331
    Groaned 2,614 Times in 2,359 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bill View Post

    Noam N. Levey 10 hrs ago

    Weak environmental protections, safety rules and labor and civil rights protections may be cutting lives short in conservative states and deepening the divide between red and blue states, according to a new study on links between life expectancy and state policy.

    The report, published Tuesday in the health policy journal Milbank Quarterly, finds that states where residents live longest, including California, tend to have much more stringent environmental laws, tougher tobacco and firearms regulations and more protections for workers, minorities and LGBTQ residents.

    Since the mid-1980s, the gap among U.S. states in how long their residents live has widened, reversing decades of progress toward greater equality.

    One group of states, mostly in the Northeast and the West, have seen average life expectancies rise relatively steadily, placing them on par with the wealthiest nations of Western Europe. Those states tend to have more stringent regulations.

    By contrast, the life expectancy in states with more conservative health, labor and social policies — concentrated in the South andAppalachia — have stagnated in recent decades, according to the study, which adds to growing research on health and political disparities between states.

    California has among the highest average life expectancies in the country, at 81.3 years. It also had the most liberal policies in the nation in 2014, the most recent year the study analyzed, according to the system the authors developed to rank states.

    Although the study's authors note that they can't prove that state policies caused the gap in life expectancy, the correlation is a persistent one across multiple states and several decades.

    “It’s disheartening to see another example of a missed opportunity by policymakers,” said David Radley, senior scientist at the nonprofit Commonwealth Fund who studies differences in state health policies and the effects on people’s health. Radley was not involved in Milbank report.

    The new report may help shape efforts to rethink government policy in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic, which has exposed deep structural weaknesses in the U.S. as well as yawning gaps in many state safety nets.

    “The overarching conclusion is clear: States that have invested in their populations’ social and economic well-being by enacting more liberal policies over time tend to be the same states that have made considerable gains in life expectancy,” the study’s authors wrote.

    Even before the current public health crisis, life expectancy in the U.S. had been declining, setting America apart from most other wealthy nations. That decline has fueled tough questions about domestic policy.

    The opioid epidemic, which has had a devastating impact on regions of the country already hit hard by economic stagnation, has been the focus of a lot of the discussion about that shift.

    But Syracuse University sociologist Jennifer Karas Montez, the lead author of the new study, said the impact of opioids may be only part of the story.

    “When we look at what is happening with life expectancy, the tendency is to focus on individual explanations about what Americans are doing,” she said, noting obesity and smoking behaviors as well as drug use. “But state policies are so important.”

    To assess what role these policies may be playing, Montez and other researchers reviewed more than 120 policies enacted by states over the years and assessed whether each policy choice in each state was more liberal or more conservative.

    Policies included housing rules such as rent control; health and welfare policies such as Medicaid eligibility and welfare limits; labor protections such as paid sick leave and minimum wages; and civil rights policies such as gender discrimination bans, hate-crime laws and same-sex marriage.

    They also looked at state abortion restrictions, tax policy, education spending, immigration rules and gun control laws.

    Each state was ranked by how liberal or conservative its policies overall have been, going back to 1970.

    The researchers then compared these findings to trends in life expectancy in all 50 states.

    Montez said the trends they saw were unmistakable. They also correlated with important points in the nation’s political history.

    Through the 1960s and 1970s, for example, state life expectancies generally converged. That trend began to reverse in the mid-1980s, around the same time that a conservative movement, led by President Reagan and mirrored in many state capitols, became ascendant.

    The gap between states accelerated further after 2010, when sweeping Republican victories in state elections shifted policies further to the right in many places
    .

    By 2017, residents of the state with the highest life expectancy — Hawaii — were living on average seven years longer than residents of the state with the lowest life expectancy — Mississippi.


    By contrast, the gap between the best- and worst-performing states in 1984 was less than five years.

    The gap is not only about policy: States where people live longer tend to be wealthier and have better educated populations, for example.

    But Montez noted that decisions by state leaders have helped shape those factors.

    “States like Connecticut are investing in their population, investing in schools, setting an economic floor for their workers, discouraging behaviors like smoking that kill people,” she explained. “You have other states like Mississippi and Oklahoma that aren’t doing any of this.”

    In Connecticut, whose policies have become steadily more liberal over the last half century, life expectancy increased 5.8 years between 1980 and 2017 to 80.7 years.

    In Oklahoma, which has become markedly more conservative, life expectancy increased only 2.2 years over the same period, reaching 75.8 years in 2017.


    Identifying which state policies may have the most impact on how long people live is difficult, the researchers concede. But the study points to a group of policies that appear to correlate most closely with longer lives.

    These include some unsurprising candidates such as tougher environmental laws, which the authors note may protect people from toxic substances. The authors also found a correlation between longer life expectancy and labor policies that increase economic security, such as a minimum wage.

    Tougher gun laws appear to track with longer life expectancies, the study notes, as do stricter tobacco controls.

    The authors also point to civil rights laws, which they suggest may protect residents from ill health related to persistent stress.

    And they found a correlation between longer life expectancy and better access to abortion, which the study notes may reflect other research that has linked abortion restrictions to women’s poverty and ill health.

    more @ source

    Republicans do love to live in shitholes

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to katzgar For This Post:

    guno (08-23-2020)

  4. #3 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    State of Bliss
    Posts
    26,246
    Thanks
    7,095
    Thanked 5,196 Times in 3,829 Posts
    Groans
    433
    Groaned 261 Times in 257 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default

    lol, they may, but they won't be living there as long, that's for sure..........

    SEVEN YEARS is a long time...........

    Corporate America is the lobbying arm of the CCP and Wall Street is the investor relations department

    Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people - does not even pretend to try, instead, he tries to divide us

    We are witnessing the consequences of three years of this deliberate effort. We are witnessing the consequences of three years without mature leadership Mattis

  5. #4 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    56,095
    Thanks
    3,434
    Thanked 17,146 Times in 11,892 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 618 Times in 585 Posts

    Default

    It’s an interesting argument that policies that produce the highest cost of living, create the highest poverty rate and force much of the middle class to leave is best for longest life span.

  6. #5 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    29,072
    Thanks
    10,126
    Thanked 17,758 Times in 12,256 Posts
    Groans
    23
    Groaned 434 Times in 418 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cawacko View Post
    It’s an interesting argument that policies that produce the highest cost of living, create the highest poverty rate and force much of the middle class to leave is best for longest life span.
    It is. For Democrat politicians. Citizens? Not so much.
    Consider the Oyster.

    C-4 is just angry playdoh.

  7. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Sailor For This Post:

    Into the Night (08-05-2020), Stretch (08-06-2020)

  8. #6 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    23,007
    Thanks
    623
    Thanked 4,277 Times in 3,390 Posts
    Groans
    85
    Groaned 1,524 Times in 1,399 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cawacko View Post
    It’s an interesting argument that policies that produce the highest cost of living, create the highest poverty rate and force much of the middle class to leave is best for longest life span.
    Red states have higher poverty rates than blue states. As for cost of living, that isn't always an accurate reflection of quality of life. European countries with a higher cost of living than America usually have better health, education, employment, and so on.

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to StoneByStone For This Post:

    PoliTalker (08-05-2020)

  10. #7 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    56,095
    Thanks
    3,434
    Thanked 17,146 Times in 11,892 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 618 Times in 585 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by StoneByStone View Post
    Red states have higher poverty rates than blue states. As for cost of living, that isn't always an accurate reflection of quality of life. European countries with a higher cost of living than America usually have better health, education, employment, and so on.
    California has the highest poverty rate in the country. More people have left the state for years than migrated here because of the cost of living. Raising the minimum wage to $15 does nothing when a one bedroom apartment costs $3K/mnth. You think there’s less stress in California like the authors claim because we have liberal policies? Come live here and say that.

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to cawacko For This Post:

    Into the Night (08-05-2020)

  12. #8 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Mid-West
    Posts
    21,699
    Thanks
    2,258
    Thanked 12,754 Times in 7,741 Posts
    Groans
    4
    Groaned 765 Times in 678 Posts

    Default

    Good, the Sooner they're GONE the BETTER
    TRUMP KNEW, YOU GOT CONNED, YOU GOT PLAYED

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to Bourbon For This Post:

    guno (08-23-2020)

  14. #9 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    23,007
    Thanks
    623
    Thanked 4,277 Times in 3,390 Posts
    Groans
    85
    Groaned 1,524 Times in 1,399 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cawacko View Post
    California has the highest poverty rate in the country. More people have left the state for years than migrated here because of the cost of living. Raising the minimum wage to $15 does nothing when a one bedroom apartment costs $3K/mnth. You think there’s less stress in California like the authors claim because we have liberal policies? Come live here and say that.
    California is one state. It's the exception, not the rule.

  15. #10 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    56,095
    Thanks
    3,434
    Thanked 17,146 Times in 11,892 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 618 Times in 585 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by StoneByStone View Post
    California is one state. It's the exception, not the rule.
    Except its the largest state in the Union with 40 million people. I can help you out here without some bogus study. Generally speaking rich people are healthier and live longer lives. Thus areas with more wealthier people will have longer life spans.

    Now if you want to give me a study that compares the life span of rich Asians in Ohio compared to rich Asians in California. Compares poor white people in New York to poor white people in Kentucky. Compares poor black people in Connecticut to poor black people in Georgia and we have material differences then that is saying something.

  16. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to cawacko For This Post:

    Sailor (08-04-2020), Stretch (08-06-2020)

  17. #11 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    56,095
    Thanks
    3,434
    Thanked 17,146 Times in 11,892 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 618 Times in 585 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bourbon View Post
    Good, the Sooner they're GONE the BETTER
    Gone like all the people in those states dying?

  18. #12 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    3,158
    Thanks
    2,590
    Thanked 1,923 Times in 1,393 Posts
    Groans
    163
    Groaned 35 Times in 35 Posts
    Blog Entries
    7

    Default

    They don't live longer it just feels like they live longer.

  19. #13 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    26,547
    Thanks
    8,116
    Thanked 11,393 Times in 6,895 Posts
    Groans
    9
    Groaned 809 Times in 753 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6

    Default

    Coincides with the fact that 9 out of 10 poorest states in America are red states .. needing more government bailouts
    Cognitive Dissonance is a powerful mindfuck. It transfixes it's host with the terror of inconvenient truth .. the brain becomes motionless .. and all avenues to critical thought are blocked.

    Even science no longer makes sense.

  20. The Following User Says Thank You to blackascoal For This Post:

    PoliTalker (08-05-2020)

  21. #14 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    26,547
    Thanks
    8,116
    Thanked 11,393 Times in 6,895 Posts
    Groans
    9
    Groaned 809 Times in 753 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cawacko View Post
    California has the highest poverty rate in the country. More people have left the state for years than migrated here because of the cost of living. Raising the minimum wage to $15 does nothing when a one bedroom apartment costs $3K/mnth. You think there’s less stress in California like the authors claim because we have liberal policies? Come live here and say that.
    WRONG .. that distinction goes to Mississippi and Louisiana.

    Why are you still there if you hate it so much?
    Cognitive Dissonance is a powerful mindfuck. It transfixes it's host with the terror of inconvenient truth .. the brain becomes motionless .. and all avenues to critical thought are blocked.

    Even science no longer makes sense.

  22. #15 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    56,095
    Thanks
    3,434
    Thanked 17,146 Times in 11,892 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 618 Times in 585 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blackascoal View Post
    WRONG .. that distinction goes to Mississippi and Louisiana.

    Why are you still there if you hate it so much?
    ELLE OH ELLE!!

    It's called the Supplemental Poverty Rate which is the updated version of tracking poverty and California is number one.

    It's funny how you think saying that means I hate the state and shouldn't live here. Why would anyone live in a state then, according to your logic, that doesn't vote the same way they do?

    Why do you, or anyone, live in America if you have disagreements or issues with its politics which equates to hating America by your logic?

  23. The Following User Says Thank You to cawacko For This Post:

    Into the Night (08-05-2020)

Similar Threads

  1. Blue states need to pool their taxes for their blue state programs
    By Cinnabar in forum General Politics Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-06-2020, 11:06 AM
  2. Replies: 99
    Last Post: 02-26-2019, 03:00 PM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-19-2017, 06:28 AM
  4. The states-the givers blue states & the takers red states
    By Bill in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 07-12-2017, 04:36 PM
  5. AP IMPACT: Obama's favors blue states for travel
    By meme in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-13-2009, 09:02 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •