Media Search:



People in Republican Counties Have Higher Death Rates Than Those in Democratic Counties – Scientific American

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the link between politics and health became glaringly obvious. Democrat-leaning blue states were more likely to enact mask requirements and vaccine and social distancing mandates. Republican-leaning red states were much more resistant to health measures. The consequences of those differences emerged by the end of 2020, when rates of hospitalization and death from COVID rose in conservative counties and dropped in liberal ones. That divergence continued through 2021, when vaccines became widely available. And although the highly transmissible Omicron variant narrowed the gap in infection rates, hospitalization and death rates, which are dramatically reduced by vaccines, remain higher in Republican-leaning parts of the country.

But COVID is only the latest chapter in the story of politics and health. COVID has really magnified what had already been brewing in American society, which was that, based on where you lived, your risk of death was much different, says Haider J. Warraich, a physician and researcher at the VA Boston Healthcare System and Brigham and Womens Hospital in Boston.

In a study published in June in The BMJ, Warraich and his colleagues showed that over the two decades prior to the pandemic, there was a growing gap in mortality rates for residents of Republican and Democratic counties across the U.S. In 2001, the studys starting point, the risk of death among red and blue counties (as defined by the results of presidential elections) was similar. Overall, the U.S. mortality rate has decreased in the nearly two decades since then (albeit not as much as in most other high-income countries). But the improvement for those living in Republican counties by 2019 was half that of those in Democratic counties11 percent lower versus 22 percent lower.

The studys longitudinal approach and county-by-county analysis replicate and extend a clear pattern, says Jennifer Karas Montez, a sociologist and demographer at Syracuse University, who was not involved in the research. It joins an already existing, pretty robust literature showing that politics [and] polarization do have life-and-death consequences, Montez says.

The new study, conducted by researchers in Texas, Missouri, Massachusetts and Pakistan, covers the years 2001 through 2019 and examines age-adjusted mortality ratesthe number of deaths per 100,000 people each yearfrom the top 10 leading causes of death, as recorded in 2019. These include heart disease, cancer, lung disease, unintentional injuries and suicide. The researchers then analyzed county-level results in each of the five presidential elections that took place during their study period, identifying counties as Republican or Democratic for the subsequent four years. They found the gap in mortality rates between Republican and Democratic counties increased for nine out of 10 causes of death. (The gap for cerebrovascular disease, which includes stroke and aneurysms, remained but narrowed.) Political environment, the authors suggest in the paper, is a core determinant of health.

What is it about conservative areas that might lead to this disadvantage in health outcomes? Multiple factors probably contribute to the gap. Previous research has found differences between Republican and Democratic regions in health-related behaviors such as exercising or smoking. Those findings were nuanced. For example, Democrats had higher odds of smoking, and Republicans were less likely to exercise. But people living in Republican states, whatever their own political leanings, were more likely to smoke.

And an analysis of the new studys data by subgroups supports the idea that individual choices play a role. Hispanic Americans everywhere saw significant improvements in their risk of death. Black Americans still have the highest mortality rates of any racial group, but they saw relatively similar improvement. It didnt really matter where they lived, Warraich says. For white Americans, however, the difference was profounda fourfold increase in the mortality gap between those living in Republican and Democratic areas.

Still, experts say some policy choices may have a larger role than individual behavior in causing poor health. As health outcomes such as life expectancy have diverged in recent years, state policies have been becoming more polarized, says Steven Woolf, a physician and epidemiologist at Virginia Commonwealth University. In an editorial that accompanied the BMJ paper, Woolf wrote, Corroborating evidence about the potential health consequences of conservative policies is building.

In a study that focused on life expectancy in the U.S. between 1970 and 2014 and that also looked at some benchmarks beyond those years, Montez, Woolf and others showed that in 1959 a person in Oklahoma could expect to live, on average, about the same number of years as a person in similar circumstances who lived in Connecticut. And both states performed relatively well, compared to the other 48. But by 2017 Connecticuts citizens had a five-year advantage in life expectancy over their peers in Oklahoma, which is a politically conservative state. They were near the top of the chart, whereas Oklahomans were near the bottom.

In the intervening decades liberal states enacted more policies to address health concerns while conservative states went in the opposite direction, with inflection points in the early 1980s 1994 and 2010. Montez notes that those dates line up with Ronald Reagans election as U.S. president, Newt Gingrichs control of Congress and the rise of Tea Party politics. Political affiliation drives social policies and spending, says Lois Lee, a pediatric emergency physician at Boston Childrens Hospital and Harvard Medical School. Conservatives tend to see health as a matter of individual responsibility and to prefer less government intervention. Liberals often promote the role of government to implement regulations to protect health. The Democratic approach has included expanding Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act. Access to health care and having health insurance are important for well-being, Warraich says. Democrats also spend more on what are known as the social determinants of health. We know things like your housing situation, your socioeconomic status, your access to healthy foods and healthy lifestyles, as well as exposure to toxic stressall these things affect your overall physical as well as emotional and mental health, Lee says.

Several kinds of policiesaround tobacco, labor laws, the environment and gunsrepeatedly emerge as significant. Each party has bundled multiple policies together, Montez says. In Mississippi, for example, there are no statewide clean indoor air policies restricting smoking in bars, restaurants or workplaces, Montez says. In California, on the other hand, smoking is restricted in all three environments. Cigarette taxes also differ dramatically. The places where you cant smoke indoors are also the places where cigarettes cost a lot, Montez says.

As with COVID, the divergence between states over gun safety laws is dramatic. Firearms contribute to deaths from suicide and unintentional injury and to many nonlethal injuries. Blue states are more likely to require background checks, whereas red states more often allow concealed carry of guns. With gun laws, too, researchers are beginning to look at the effects of policies in aggregate, says Garen Wintemute, emergency physician and director of the Violence Prevention Research Program at the University of California, Davis. Before California enacted a suite of laws regulating firearms and their ownership and use in the late 1980s and early 1990s, firearm violence mortality rates here were higher than in the rest of the country, he says. After those laws were enacted, rates plummeted in California. The most likely explanation, which Wintemute hopes to test, is that the laws were in part responsible. Until recently, that kind of research has been severely curtailed by the Dickey Amendment, a 1996 addition to a federal spending bill that effectively prevented the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention from conducting research on firearm violence. Congress clarified the law in 2018, paving the way for research funding. Things are modestly looking up, Wintemute says. The CDC and [National Institutes of Health] both have small amounts of research funding and are using it.

Cultural differences between red and blue counties also likely contributed to COVID deaths. Youre affected by your neighbors, says Neil Sehgal, a public health professor at the University of Maryland and co-author of a recent study of the association between COVID mortality and county-level voting. Sehgal and his colleagues found that through October 2021, majority-Republican counties experienced 72.9 additional deaths per 100,000 people relative to majority-Democratic counties. To the researchers surprise, however, vaccine uptake explained only 10 percent of the difference. The finding suggests that differences in COVID outcomes are driven by a combination of factors, including the likelihood of, say, engaging in unmasked social events or in-person dining, Sehgal says. By February 2022 the COVID death rate in all counties Donald Trump won in the 2020 presidential election was substantially higher than in counties that Joe Biden won326 deaths per 100,000 people versus 258. COVID was probably the most dramatic example Ive seen in my career of the influence of policy choices on health outcomes, Woolf says.

A key takeaway from these studies is that the partisan mortality gap doesnt have to keep growing. As a public health expert and as a physician, it doesnt matter to me whether my patient is a Republican or Democrat, Warraich says. I want the best outcome for both of those patients and both of those communities. Acknowledging the mortality gap, as challenging as that is in our polarized environment, is the first step toward engaging with solutions, he says. The worst thing that could happen is that [the BMJ study] just becomes labeled as political or partisan, he saysand that the people who really need to look at these findings ignore it because it is providing a truth that is uncomfortable or difficult to interpret.

Read the rest here:
People in Republican Counties Have Higher Death Rates Than Those in Democratic Counties - Scientific American

Socialism for the bankers, capitalism for the rest of us so it goes – London School of Economics

On 21 July, the European Central Bank decided to raise interest rates for the first time since 2011 and unveiled a new tool aimed at protecting eurozone states from rising borrowing costs. Responding to the decision, Bob Hanck argues the ECBs response to inflation essentially boils down to a massive transfer of funds to banks, almost certainly without any positive effects for the population at large and especially for those who most feel the negative effects of inflation on essentials like energy and food.

About a decade ago, the billionaire Warren Buffett stated, with thinly veiled sarcasm, theres been class warfare for the last 20 years, and my class has won. The recent decision by the ECB on 21 July to raise interest rates reminded me of this. Not only is there a lot of confusion among central bankers about what is going on in the advanced capitalist economies today (a topic for a post later this summer); the simultaneous rate rises and the central banks aim to contain bond spreads among EMU member states will also likely lead to a significant transfer of wealth to the bankers.

Enter ECB interest rates

The basics first. The inflation that looked temporary in 2021 following on from the supply bottlenecks after the shutdown of the global economy in 2020 and much of 2021 lasted longer, in fact significantly longer, than many (including me) thought. High inflation (still) has little to do with too much money sloshing around in the system, despite what you will read almost everywhere. The main causes are still in the real world: the remaining uncertainty around Covid-19, confusion about fiscal responses to the necessary support packages for households and business, Putins war in Ukraine and its repercussions, and the stagnation (or decline?) of Chinas export-led growth model have created the perfect storm.

Food and energy prices have rocketed, hurting all, but those with smaller incomes considerably more, as they spend a larger share on these essentials. In fact, core inflation, stripping out volatile items such as food and energy, is much lower: Paul Krugman pointed out a few weeks ago that it was, at about 4.5%, roughly where Paul Volcker declared victory forty-odd years ago. Ignore for a moment the issue of what a small rate rise will do when inflation is running at close to 10% (as I said, a topic for another blog) or the question of how exactly a wage-price spiral will develop when real wages are falling almost everywhere (another blog post). With inflation rising, the ECB needs to do something, and to be seen to do something.

One money, many government bonds

The snag is that the ECB, like all other central banks, has only one tool to handle inflationary pressures: interest rates. Higher rates dampen demand (but remember that current inflation resulted from a supply shock), and increase returns on savings, especially bonds.

Yet in EMU that has a nasty side effect: bond spreads between countries (the differential in the borrowing costs of governments) rise as well. In normal times, the bond yields on the 19 euro members debt moves more or less in tandem, with only small differences. But times of crisis upset that synchronicity, and EMU members that are deemed weaker by financial markets are punished with a higher risk premium they pay a higher interest rate (in large part because their growth prospects are lower now, which means tax revenues fall).

Enter ECB cash

So, since it wants to counter that centripetal force, the ECB needs to think of ways to reduce the risk for lower-quality bonds, such as Italy. For that, it also only has essentially one tool: buying up the bonds, directly or indirectly (by subsidising banks), of the weaker member states to push their actual interest rate down (the interest rate falls when demand for the bonds rises).

We have had a long flavour of that policy since 2012 under the guise of quantitative easing, and we are about to witness another incarnation. We now know where all that extra cash went not in investment, as hoped, predicted or desired, which is at its lowest level for two decades, according to Martin Sandbu in the FT a few days ago. So where did the money go? To the banks, and especially the bankers, whose bonuses are broadly back where they were 15 years ago. So it goes.

In essence, therefore, we are entering Alices Wonderland (again). The ECBs reaction to the cost-of-living crisis for the bottom half of the income distribution is a rate increase to manufacture slower growth and a recession with high unemployment (which was probably on the books anyway, courtesy of Putin). In other words, if you were screwed then, youll be even more screwed after the ECB has its way with the European economy. So it goes.

To those who have, shall be given

But very few observers mention that the QE-type policy the ECB is engineering today has the opposite effect at the top (trust me: I scan the FT pages for those insights and have yet to find them). Banks will receive more cash to buy Italian bonds. Part of that will go to the bankers in the shape of increased income. Now, since even banks cannot pay several hundreds of billions to their employees without blushing these days, they look for alternative opportunities to use that cash.

In a world entering a recession or at least a period of very, very low growth the main, if not sole condition for investment is absent, and only one avenue makes sense: save the money. How do banks save, you might ask? They park the money at the ECB. Its called a central bank for a reason. And here the perverse policy comes full circle, because the higher interest rate that the ECB has just imposed on the economy ends up being a nice present to the banks. The free money from the ECB has been turned into more money, paid for by the ECB. We pay twice, the banks only gain, and the lower 75% of the income distribution loses their jobs or see their standards of living fall. So it goes.

Echoes of Kalecki

It is impossible to tell if this is simply incompetence by the ECBs governing board, an almost criminal bottom-up redistribution of life chances, or a Kaleckian institutional class struggle that has moved from individual capitalists to the only government arm that cannot be politically influenced.

The FTs Martin Wolf lamented, early in the financial crisis, that socialism for the bankers and capitalism for everyone else was not a viable growth model but thats where we are headed again: the ECB as a giant welfare system for the banks. At least Buffett suggested that he had to work for his money capitalism applied for everyone in that sense; his point was that taxes were increasingly regressive.

One of the old Marxist tropes talked of the state as the executive committee of the bourgeoisie, safeguarding the collective interests of the capitalist class. The advent of social-democratic parties in government took, at least for some, the bite out of that argument. But the fact that central banks everywhere, including the ECB, are now raising rates just when labour markets seem to be structurally tightening for the first time in fifty years, reopens that can of worms.

If you ever wondered who the principal is in the conservative monetary policy set-up that we have lived with for over three decades in the OECD, stop wondering. It is not the population at large. It is not the European Parliament, the Commission, or the Council either. It seems to be the financial sector: its called a central bank, after all. So it goes.

Note: This article gives the views of theauthor, not the position of EUROPP European Politics and Policy or the London School of Economics. Featured image credit: Adrian Petty/ECB (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)

Follow this link:
Socialism for the bankers, capitalism for the rest of us so it goes - London School of Economics

Cuba responds with socialism and ideas against imperial domination – Prensa Latina

The president spoke extensively with the members of the Economic Affairs Commission of the National Peoples Power Assembly (Parliament) about the complex situation in the country, subjected to pressure from the United States in various fields, with the purpose of making the Revolution succumb.

They fear socialist construction in a Cuba without an economic blockade, said Diaz-Canel, who pointed out that we have not been able to do what we wanted, but rather what was possible in the midst of so many aggressions and at a very high cost in terms of the sacrifice of the population.

The first secretary of the Communist Party of Cuba pointed out that the imperialist logic aspires to suffocate Cuba economically to cause social unrest, a policy that he described as dishonest, criminal and genocidal, since no nation has the right to prevent the development of another.

It is hypocritical to affirm that the blockade is to help the Cuban people, when all its actions directly affect them, he remarked.

Diaz-Canel pointed out that the strategy of imperial domination has three fundamental elements: the first is the platform of cultural colonization, which uses social networks and the entertainment industry to impose its values and that the peoples deny their roots, culture and identity.

The second is in the economic field, which in the case of Cuba is committed to coercive measures and the intensification of the blockade policy, and the third is subversion, to which millions of dollars are dedicated each year to try to destroy the social political system that Cubans chose.

They are frustrated for not having achieved what they set out to do on July 11 last year, the president said. They failed and have failed in all the soft-coup actions implemented.

Diaz-Canel emphasized that the answer to this strategy is socialist construction. We cannot give up social justice, he added, the essence of our system is the greatest possible social justice, with the greatest possible democracy and social participation.

The Cuban head of State commented that the country is committed to a cultural decolonization program, whose objective is to ensure that current generations know their history and culture, to convert them into convictions that contribute to the defense of our ideas.

The president added that in the face of subversion, we put revolutionary articulation before, with greater participation in social networks, more social debate, and the increasingly broad participation of representatives of social sectors in the analysis of public policies and laws in process.

Likewise, he noted that new measures and alternatives for economic problems continue to be studied; in the midst of shortages we have not stopped, we continue working, but always within socialism, he explained.

jg/car/kmg

Read more:
Cuba responds with socialism and ideas against imperial domination - Prensa Latina

Booklaunch: Selected writings on socialism and revolutions with author John Molyneux – Socialist Worker

Booklaunch: Selected writings on socialism and revolutions with author John Molyneux - Socialist Worker` + `

Wednesday 03 Aug 2022 07:00pm

Wednesday 27 Jul 2022 07:00pm

` + `This branch does not have any upcoming events yet, please check back soon or click the link above to see meetings nearby.` + `

Wednesday 31 Aug 2022 07:00pm

Wednesday 24 Aug 2022 07:00pm

Wednesday 17 Aug 2022 07:00pm

Wednesday 10 Aug 2022 07:00pm

Wednesday 03 Aug 2022 07:00pm

Wednesday 27 Jul 2022 07:00pm

Thursday 04 Aug 2022 07:30pm

Thursday 18 Aug 2022 07:00pm

Thursday 11 Aug 2022 07:00pm

Thursday 04 Aug 2022 07:00pm

Thursday 28 Jul 2022 07:00pm

Thursday 11 Aug 2022 06:30pm

Thursday 04 Aug 2022 06:30pm

Thursday 28 Jul 2022 06:30pm

Thursday 28 Jul 2022 07:00pm

` + `This branch does not have any upcoming events yet, please check back soon or click the link above to see meetings nearby.` + `

Thursday 11 Aug 2022 07:30pm

Thursday 04 Aug 2022 07:30pm

Wednesday 27 Jul 2022 07:30pm

Wednesday 10 Aug 2022 07:30pm

Wednesday 03 Aug 2022 07:30pm

Wednesday 27 Jul 2022 07:30pm

Thursday 11 Aug 2022 07:00pm

Thursday 04 Aug 2022 07:00pm

Thursday 28 Jul 2022 07:00pm

Thursday 28 Jul 2022 07:30pm

Wednesday 10 Aug 2022 07:30pm

Wednesday 27 Jul 2022 07:30pm

Thursday 04 Aug 2022 07:15pm

` + `This branch does not have any upcoming events yet, please check back soon or click the link above to see meetings nearby.` + `

Thursday 01 Sep 2022 07:30pm

Thursday 25 Aug 2022 07:30pm

Thursday 18 Aug 2022 07:30pm

Thursday 11 Aug 2022 07:30pm

Thursday 04 Aug 2022 07:30pm

Thursday 28 Jul 2022 07:30pm

Friday 22 Jul 2022 07:30pm

` + `This branch does not have any upcoming events yet, please check back soon or click the link above to see meetings nearby.` + `

` + `This branch does not have any upcoming events yet, please check back soon or click the link above to see meetings nearby.` + `

` + `This branch does not have any upcoming events yet, please check back soon or click the link above to see meetings nearby.` + `

Wednesday 24 Aug 2022 07:00pm

Wednesday 17 Aug 2022 07:00pm

Wednesday 10 Aug 2022 07:00pm

Wednesday 03 Aug 2022 07:00pm

Wednesday 27 Jul 2022 07:00pm

Wednesday 10 Aug 2022 07:30pm

Wednesday 03 Aug 2022 07:30pm

Wednesday 27 Jul 2022 07:30pm

` + `This branch does not have any upcoming events yet, please check back soon or click the link above to see meetings nearby.` + `

Thursday 28 Jul 2022 07:00pm

Thursday 25 Aug 2022 07:00pm

Thursday 18 Aug 2022 07:00pm

Thursday 11 Aug 2022 07:00pm

Thursday 04 Aug 2022 07:00pm

Thursday 28 Jul 2022 07:00pm

Thursday 01 Sep 2022 07:30pm

Thursday 25 Aug 2022 07:30pm

Thursday 18 Aug 2022 07:30pm

Thursday 11 Aug 2022 07:30pm

Thursday 04 Aug 2022 07:30pm

Thursday 28 Jul 2022 07:30pm

` + `This branch does not have any upcoming events yet, please check back soon or click the link above to see meetings nearby.` + `

Thursday 11 Aug 2022 06:30pm

Thursday 04 Aug 2022 06:30pm

Wednesday 27 Jul 2022 06:30pm

Wednesday 10 Aug 2022 06:30pm

Thursday 04 Aug 2022 06:30pm

Wednesday 27 Jul 2022 06:30pm

` + `This branch does not have any upcoming events yet, please check back soon or click the link above to see meetings nearby.` + `

Thursday 25 Aug 2022 07:30pm

Thursday 18 Aug 2022 07:30pm

Thursday 11 Aug 2022 07:30pm

Thursday 04 Aug 2022 07:30pm

Thursday 28 Jul 2022 07:30pm

` + `This branch does not have any upcoming events yet, please check back soon or click the link above to see meetings nearby.` + `

Thursday 25 Aug 2022 07:00pm

Thursday 18 Aug 2022 07:00pm

Thursday 11 Aug 2022 07:00pm

Thursday 04 Aug 2022 07:00pm

Thursday 28 Jul 2022 07:00pm

` + `This branch does not have any upcoming events yet, please check back soon or click the link above to see meetings nearby.` + `

` + `This branch does not have any upcoming events yet, please check back soon or click the link above to see meetings nearby.` + `

Thursday 11 Aug 2022 07:30pm

Thursday 04 Aug 2022 07:30pm

Thursday 28 Jul 2022 07:30pm

Wednesday 31 Aug 2022 07:30pm

Wednesday 24 Aug 2022 07:30pm

Wednesday 17 Aug 2022 07:30pm

Wednesday 10 Aug 2022 07:30pm

Wednesday 03 Aug 2022 07:30pm

Wednesday 27 Jul 2022 07:30pm

Thursday 25 Aug 2022 07:00pm

Thursday 18 Aug 2022 07:00pm

Thursday 11 Aug 2022 07:00pm

Thursday 04 Aug 2022 07:00pm

` + `This branch does not have any upcoming events yet, please check back soon or click the link above to see meetings nearby.` + `

Excerpt from:
Booklaunch: Selected writings on socialism and revolutions with author John Molyneux - Socialist Worker

Letter: In response to "Democrats and Socialism | Letters to the Editor | tucson.com – Arizona Daily Star

Socialism and Communism are not the same thing.They are diametrically opposed.North Korea,China and Cuba are Communist countries.Sweden, Switzerland,Norway and Portugal practice Socialism.Socialism is more democratic than what we have here in U.S.A which is a Republic. In Norway and Sweden and Switzerland they do not use voter suppression to win an election.They do not have courts that take away a person's rights or try to overturn a fair and fair eletion.

It was Republicans that tried to overturn an election by rioting at our nation's capitol and by trying to use electors. my responce to this person is to take a basic course in Gov't 101

John Cleary , Northwest Side

Disclaimer: As submitted to the Arizona Daily Star.

Get opinion pieces, letters and editorials sent directly to your inbox weekly!

See the rest here:
Letter: In response to "Democrats and Socialism | Letters to the Editor | tucson.com - Arizona Daily Star