Page 6 of 13 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 187

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

  1. #76 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    28,583
    Thanks
    10,247
    Thanked 13,294 Times in 8,007 Posts
    Groans
    12
    Groaned 1,132 Times in 1,059 Posts
    Blog Entries
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PostmodernProphet View Post
    to be fair, cawacko isn't crying about California's poverty rate........he is correcting the lies about which states have the highest poverty rate.......
    To be fair, Cawacko is expressing his usual California / blue state angst .. using incorrect "data." The official poverty measure puts California nowhere near the bottom and the SPM measure he's using puts it at 26th, not the bottom.

    He and other right-wingers, like YOU, simply don't like the fact that 9 of 10 of the poorest states in the county are led by republicans.
    "Nine out of the 10 poorest states are Red states."

    https://www.politifact.com/factcheck...states-are-re/

    Poorest states have Republican legislatures, and richest have Democratic ones
    Eighteen of the 19 poorest states have legislatures where both chambers are Republican controlled.

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/money...es/1694273002/

    AND NINETY-SEVEN PERCENT (97%) of the poorest counties in the nation have been measured in red states.


    POLITIFACT - "97 percent of the 100 poorest counties in America are in red states."

    https://www.politifact.com/factcheck...es-red-states/

    Do come again.
    AMERICAN HISTORY ITSELF IS A TESTAMENT TO THE STRENGTH AND RESILIENCE OF AFRICAN PEOPLE. WE, ALONG WITH THE COURGE AND SACRIFICES OF CONSCIOUS WHITE AMERICANS, LIKE VIOLA LIUZZO, EVERETT DIRKSEN, AND MANY OTHERS, HAVE FOUGHT AND DIED TOGETHER FOR OUR FREEDOM, AND FOR OUR SURVIVAL.

    In America, rights are are not determined by what is just, fair, equitable, honest, nor by what Jesus would do. Rights are determined ONLY by what you can DEMAND.

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

    Guno צְבִי (08-05-2020), Phantasmal (08-05-2020)

  3. #77 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    28,583
    Thanks
    10,247
    Thanked 13,294 Times in 8,007 Posts
    Groans
    12
    Groaned 1,132 Times in 1,059 Posts
    Blog Entries
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Into the Night View Post
    BULLSHIT numbers. You are making shit up.
    Imbecile

    Accept the fact that you're ignorant .. thus requiring for you to look shit up before you speak
    AMERICAN HISTORY ITSELF IS A TESTAMENT TO THE STRENGTH AND RESILIENCE OF AFRICAN PEOPLE. WE, ALONG WITH THE COURGE AND SACRIFICES OF CONSCIOUS WHITE AMERICANS, LIKE VIOLA LIUZZO, EVERETT DIRKSEN, AND MANY OTHERS, HAVE FOUGHT AND DIED TOGETHER FOR OUR FREEDOM, AND FOR OUR SURVIVAL.

    In America, rights are are not determined by what is just, fair, equitable, honest, nor by what Jesus would do. Rights are determined ONLY by what you can DEMAND.

  4. #78 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Location
    Phoenix
    Posts
    38,029
    Thanks
    14
    Thanked 18,918 Times in 13,188 Posts
    Groans
    3
    Groaned 832 Times in 791 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by StoneByStone View Post
    That doesn't make sense. We're not talking about population, we're talking about how these states are run. And even with the inequality issues, New York and California still have higher living standards than most red states.
    Blue states are run poorly on the whole. Lots of poverty, lots of income inequity. The living standards for those with high pay and the rich are good. Even the middle class average worker is worse off in those states.



    Because the cost of living in those states is uniformly higher--often much higher--the average person ends up with less. They pay more in taxes, have less in housing, and have to manage a budget that has less in it for extras like entertainment or luxuries. That high cost of living doesn't impact The Rich. They don't particularly care.

  5. #79 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    26,116
    Thanks
    694
    Thanked 5,043 Times in 3,907 Posts
    Groans
    85
    Groaned 1,697 Times in 1,555 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    Blue states are run poorly on the whole. Lots of poverty, lots of income inequity. The living standards for those with high pay and the rich are good. Even the middle class average worker is worse off in those states.



    Because the cost of living in those states is uniformly higher--often much higher--the average person ends up with less. They pay more in taxes, have less in housing, and have to manage a budget that has less in it for extras like entertainment or luxuries. That high cost of living doesn't impact The Rich. They don't particularly care.
    https://www.homesnacks.net/these-are...merica-123067/

  6. #80 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Prairieville
    Posts
    27,356
    Thanks
    2,896
    Thanked 10,626 Times in 7,127 Posts
    Groans
    331
    Groaned 2,985 Times in 2,707 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    Blue states are run poorly on the whole. Lots of poverty, lots of income inequity. The living standards for those with high pay and the rich are good. Even the middle class average worker is worse off in those states.



    Because the cost of living in those states is uniformly higher--often much higher--the average person ends up with less. They pay more in taxes, have less in housing, and have to manage a budget that has less in it for extras like entertainment or luxuries. That high cost of living doesn't impact The Rich. They don't particularly care.

    republican states are shithole states... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...y_poverty_rate

  7. #81 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Location
    Phoenix
    Posts
    38,029
    Thanks
    14
    Thanked 18,918 Times in 13,188 Posts
    Groans
    3
    Groaned 832 Times in 791 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by StoneByStone View Post
    The article clearly states it is opinion. What makes somewhere "best" depends on a wide range of factors that are personal. This article takes a few that the author thinks are important and ranks them.

    republican states are shithole states... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...y_poverty_rate
    California ranks 26th
    New York 34th
    Illinois 22nd
    Michigan (until recently solid blue) 38th
    Oregon 25th

    And the worst is New Mexico, a consistently blue state coming in at 50th.

    So, your statement is wrong. Blue states do no better on poverty than red ones. I'd also bet if I took the population of those states and multiplied that by their poverty rates, in terms of total population they far exceed red states in the number living in poverty.

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to T. A. Gardner For This Post:

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

  9. #82 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    26,116
    Thanks
    694
    Thanked 5,043 Times in 3,907 Posts
    Groans
    85
    Groaned 1,697 Times in 1,555 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    The article clearly states it is opinion. What makes somewhere "best" depends on a wide range of factors that are personal. This article takes a few that the author thinks are important and ranks them.



    California ranks 26th
    New York 34th
    Illinois 22nd
    Michigan (until recently solid blue) 38th
    Oregon 25th

    And the worst is New Mexico, a consistently blue state coming in at 50th.

    So, your statement is wrong. Blue states do no better on poverty than red ones. I'd also bet if I took the population of those states and multiplied that by their poverty rates, in terms of total population they far exceed red states in the number living in poverty.
    But the article shows other factors. You're only going by one factor and you're singling out two states to represent all of the blue states.

  10. #83 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    134,840
    Thanks
    13,241
    Thanked 40,785 Times in 32,151 Posts
    Groans
    3,660
    Groaned 2,865 Times in 2,752 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blackascoal View Post
    To be fair, Cawacko is expressing his usual California / blue state angst .. using incorrect "data." The official poverty measure puts California nowhere near the bottom and the SPM measure he's using puts it at 26th, not the bottom.

    He and other right-wingers, like YOU, simply don't like the fact that 9 of 10 of the poorest states in the county are led by republicans.
    "Nine out of the 10 poorest states are Red states."

    https://www.politifact.com/factcheck...states-are-re/

    Poorest states have Republican legislatures, and richest have Democratic ones
    Eighteen of the 19 poorest states have legislatures where both chambers are Republican controlled.

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/money...es/1694273002/

    AND NINETY-SEVEN PERCENT (97%) of the poorest counties in the nation have been measured in red states.


    POLITIFACT - "97 percent of the 100 poorest counties in America are in red states."

    https://www.politifact.com/factcheck...es-red-states/

    Do come again.
    sorry, not sorry......fake news from an admittedly lib'rul source.......cawacko is correct.......
    Isaiah 6:5
    “Woe to me!” I cried. “I am ruined! For I am a man of unclean lips, and I live among a people of unclean lips, and my eyes have seen the King, the Lord Almighty.”

  11. #84 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Location
    Phoenix
    Posts
    38,029
    Thanks
    14
    Thanked 18,918 Times in 13,188 Posts
    Groans
    3
    Groaned 832 Times in 791 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by StoneByStone View Post
    But the article shows other factors. You're only going by one factor and you're singling out two states to represent all of the blue states.


    Looks more like a regional issue than one of individual states and who's governing them. Outside of the South, there also appears to be a very small difference between states. The second area of low life expectancy appears to be the Rust Belt. It's better than the South, but worse than the rest of the country.

    The conclusion that could be reached is climate, long term use (industrialization and pollution in the rust belt), and factors other than government play a significant role in life expectancy.

  12. #85 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    26,116
    Thanks
    694
    Thanked 5,043 Times in 3,907 Posts
    Groans
    85
    Groaned 1,697 Times in 1,555 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by T. A. Gardner View Post


    Looks more like a regional issue than one of individual states and who's governing them. Outside of the South, there also appears to be a very small difference between states. The second area of low life expectancy appears to be the Rust Belt. It's better than the South, but worse than the rest of the country.

    The conclusion that could be reached is climate, long term use (industrialization and pollution in the rust belt), and factors other than government play a significant role in life expectancy.
    I'm going by overall living standards, not single issues.

  13. #86 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    40,213
    Thanks
    14,475
    Thanked 23,679 Times in 16,485 Posts
    Groans
    23
    Groaned 585 Times in 561 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Coumo is literally begging for the rich to come back to NY. NY needs money. I am sure this is happening in other states also.

  14. #87 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    34,430
    Thanks
    23,941
    Thanked 19,095 Times in 13,072 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 5,908 Times in 5,169 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Hello Bill,

    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
    Makes total sense. Not really surprised to hear it. Nice work to show scientifically what simply follows from common sense and logic.
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.

  15. #88 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    34,430
    Thanks
    23,941
    Thanked 19,095 Times in 13,072 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 5,908 Times in 5,169 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Hello cawacko,

    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.
    Forcing poor people to have unwanted children increases poverty. Especially when abortion is readily available to the rich who can afford to travel for it.
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.

  16. #89 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    34,430
    Thanks
    23,941
    Thanked 19,095 Times in 13,072 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 5,908 Times in 5,169 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Hello T. A. Gardner,

    Quote Originally Posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    What matters most is a life lived well, not a life long lived without meaning.
    As if such a choice need be made at all.
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.

  17. #90 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    34,430
    Thanks
    23,941
    Thanked 19,095 Times in 13,072 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 5,908 Times in 5,169 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Hello cawacko,

    Quote Originally Posted by cawacko View Post
    If disagreeing with politics be they local, state or federal is crying then all we do in America is cry.

    It's like in America today there's zero room for nuance. There's a lot about California I love. I also strongly disagree with many things we do here politically and yes I discuss them on a political discussion board. And as many of us know the old adage is 'as goes California so goes the country'. So if I lived in Montana and discuss local Montana politics most people understandably wouldn't give a sh*t. But California is the largest state in the Union and what happens here affects what happens around the country. And when people point to California and say I want to transport their politics nationally I will talk about it. That doesn't mean I hate California.

    And not living here you probably don't read the local papers on a regular basis. Whether it's the SF Chronicle, LA Times or Sac Bee a google search will show you numerous articles they have written stating California has the highest poverty rate. Here's just one article.

    California still No. 1 in poverty

    https://calmatters.org/commentary/20...-1-in-poverty/
    In SanFran it is illegal to use any other search engine, I know, but there are others out there and some of them do not track your every freaking move.
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.

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, 04:00 PM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-19-2017, 07:28 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
  •