Neglected political issues I: Life expectancy

A number of decades ago, I attended an Arlo Guthrie concert. A presidential primary campaign cycle was heating up — probably 1980, but I’m not sure. Guthrie, in his wise-fool persona, claimed to be anxious about the state of the nation because “All these people on TV, they’re telling me we need leadership and we’re just not getting it.” Then he described how on some recent evening, just before going to bed, he had brushed his teeth and then looked in the mirror and asked himself: “Arlo, did you need leadership today?”

That line was funny — and continues to be funny years later — because it captures the disconnect between political rhetoric and our actual lives. Guthrie’s joke is on us, and how easily manipulated we are. In the heat of a campaign, it’s easy to become either excited or enraged over some “issue” that (when you boil it down) really has no effect on either yourself or anyone you know or care about, and may be little more than a phrase or an image.

And so, during his campaign launch Wednesday, Ron DeSantis talked about the “the woke mind virus”, “woke ideology”, and “critical race theory”. The Republican he hopes to catch up to, Donald Trump, spends most of his speeches talking about his persecution by the Deep State. He offers to replace President Biden’s “weakness” with his own “strength”. Kevin McCarthy and Republicans in Congress have been focused on America’s “spending problem”, an issue whose lack of substance I examined a few weeks ago.

Any of those “issues” might take the place of Guthrie’s “leadership”. I can imagine myself staring into my own bathroom mirror and asking, “Doug, did you need protection from the woke mind virus today?”

Meanwhile, President Biden has been spending his time trying to avoid crashing into the debt ceiling, a looming disaster that is real enough, but is also entirely manufactured. Rather than solve our problems, politicians have created a new one to wrestle with.

Isn’t it wonderful that the external world isn’t presenting any challenges that require our collective action?

Well, except for climate change. Biden seems to know about that problem, but it was all he could do this week to avoid rolling back the anti-climate-change parts of the Inflation Reduction Act. Despite governing a state that will soon start vanishing under rising oceans, DeSantis seemed oblivious, saying “I’ve always rejected the politicization of the weather.” Trump still occasionally refers to climate change as a hoax.

Biden and other Democrats occasionally talk about gun violence, domestic terrorism, and the threats to American democracy. But there is little pending legislation of any consequence on any of those issues, other than efforts at the state level to roll back gun restrictions, increase gerrymandering, and take control of its elections away from one of our largest cities.

And then there are the problems that neither party is talking about. In the coming months I plan to call attention to a few, starting with: declining life expectancy in the United States. It would be bad enough if our political system were simply oblivious to the problem. But in fact political action is causing a lot of it.

Talk about a matter of life and death.

Declining life expectancy. In the United States, like most of the world, life expectancy had gone up and up for centuries, until the last few years. Here’s a graph of US life expectancy from 1860 to 2020.

Except for brief glitches during the Civil War and the World War I/Spanish flu era, life expectancy at birth goes inexorably upward, almost exactly doubling from 39.41 in 1860 to 78.94 in 2015. Not even World War II could bring it down (probably because the health advantages of ending the Depression overcame the casualties of war). Until recently, Americans had come to think of increasing lifespans as an inevitable dividend of scientific progress. Of course our generation would live longer than our parents’ generation, and our children would live longer yet.

Different sources produce slightly different numbers, but just about everybody sees a leveling-off in the mid-2010s, followed by a sharp drop in the last few years to levels not seen since 1996. Nearly three decades of progress have vanished.

Now, there’s an obvious reason for this: the Covid pandemic, which has killed 1.1 million Americans since it started in 2020 (and is not done, even if we’ve stopped paying attention to it). Largely because of mismanagement by the Trump administration and misinformation from the larger MAGA movement (which encouraged lax attitudes, snake-oil cures, and vaccine resistance), we took a bigger hit than most comparable countries. The US has had 3,480 Covid deaths per million people, while Canada has had 1,364, Norway 986, and Australia 801. Even some of the countries hit earlier and harder than the US have fared better in the long run: Italy has had 3,159 deaths per million and Spain 2,595. One likely reason: 86% of Spaniards and 81% of Italians have been vaccinated, compared to 69% of Americans.

But OK then: If Covid is the problem, it should go away as Covid recedes. And that’s happening in the rest of the world. But not here.

The headline from this graph is that life expectancy in comparable countries bounced back in 2021, almost regaining its 2019 level, while life expectancy in the US dropped further. But there’s also a long-term story here: In 1980, US life expectancy was lower than the comparable-country average by less than a year. By 2021, though, the gap had grown to more than six years. Even pre-Covid, there was a 3.8 year gap.

Where did that come from?

Bad habits or bad government? The simple explanations for our long-term life expectancy gap focus on our bad habits: We’re too fat, we’re out of shape, we take drugs, and we kill ourselves and each other at a high rate. It’s easy to tell the life-expectancy story as a crisis of individual moral gumption: If Americans would just eat better, get off the couch, get clean from drug abuse, and deal with our depression and anger problems, we’d live longer.

And all that is true as far as it goes. But if you look at those “moral” problems, each one has a political component.

Guns. Most obviously, our high suicide and murder rates are related to our gun policies. People get depressed and angry in other countries too. But depressed or angry Americans are more likely to have ready access to guns. In 2020, researchers at Stanford published a study on the relationship between guns and suicides:

The researchers found that people who owned handguns had rates of suicide that were nearly four times higher than people living in the same neighborhood who did not own handguns. The elevated risk was driven by higher rates of suicide by firearm. Handgun owners did not have higher rates of suicide by other methods or higher rates of death generally.

The researchers themselves wrote:

Suicide attempts are often impulsive acts, driven by transient life crises. Most attempts are not fatal, and most people who attempt suicide do not go on to die in a future suicide. Whether a suicide attempt is fatal depends heavily on the lethality of the method used — and firearms are extremely lethal. These facts focus attention on firearm access as a risk factor for suicide especially in the United States, which has a higher prevalence of civilian-owned firearms than any other country and one of the highest rates of suicide by firearm.

In general, gun deaths are higher in states with more guns.

Food policy. Obesity is a major factor in Americans’ poor health, and is the one most likely to be seen as a moral issue. (“Just stop stuffing your face, fatso.”) But while we can all imagine ways that we could improve our discipline regarding diet and exercise, it’s also true that it’s hard to live a healthy lifestyle in the United States.

Nationally, our food policy tilts towards putting high-fructose corn syrup in just about everything. Our giant factory farms make meat and dairy cheaper here than in many other countries, but also less healthy. Particularly in our poorer neighborhoods, fast food is easier to find than fresh vegetables. The food industry spends billions every year trying to persuade us to eat fat- and sugar-laden foods.

Compared to cities in other countries, American cities encourage travel by car and discourage walking.

In short, there are reasons we’re fat. And not all of them are lack of willpower.

The place this really becomes clear is when you look at children. Even if you think obese adults lack willpower, do you really hold children responsible for their food-and-exercise choices?

Healthcare. Some politicians like to claim that American healthcare is “the best in the world”. And that may be true if you’re rich or have excellent health insurance, live near a top medical center, and need the kind of major medical interventions American medicine specializes in.

But overall, our public health is terrible compared to other rich countries, all of whom spend less per capita on healthcare than we do. For example,

Among 11 developed countries, the United States has the highest maternal mortality rate, a relative undersupply of maternity care providers, and is the only country not to guarantee access to provider home visits or paid parental leave in the postpartum period, a recent report from The Commonwealth Fund concluded. Compared with any other wealthy nation, the United States also spends the highest percentage of its gross domestic product on health care.

Maternal deaths have been increasing in the United States since 2000, and although 700 pregnancy-related deaths occur each year, two-thirds of these deaths are considered to be preventable.

The statistical term for preventable deaths is “amenable mortality”. In 2019 — pre-Covid, in other words — amenable mortality in the US was responsible for 177 deaths for every 100K people, compared to a 38-country average of 126. Japan and Switzerland had 83, and Canada 116.

The difference is our reliance on the private sector. In the US health-insurance business, the way to make money is to insure only healthy people. Much of the administrative effort in our health-insurance companies is devoted to shifting costs onto someone else, rather than improving health overall.

And of course, the private health-insurance industry has no interest in the poor at all. If poor and lower-working-class Americans aren’t on Medicaid, they’re probably uninsured. Uninsured people fear our expensive healthcare system, and are likely to hope problems go away on their own rather than get them checked out. Those decisions end up killing a lot of people.

One conservative policy designed to limit healthcare spending is to give people more “skin in the game“. In other words, to increase copayments so that people (especially the poor) have more incentive to ignore problems and hope they go away on their own.

Red states and blue states. The policies I’ve been talking about — limiting gun access, subsidizing healthy food choices (or penalizing unhealthy ones), promoting public health, lowering medical copayments, pushing for walkable cities, and making it easier to get health insurance — are classic liberal policies that conservatives ridicule as examples of the “nanny state”. Blue states are more likely to take these actions than red states.

And guess what? Blue states have higher life expectancy than red states. Paul Krugman tweeted the following chart comparing Biden’s margin over Trump in 2020 to each state’s change in life expectancy over the previous 30 years:

He comments:

Life expectancy is hugely unequal across U.S. regions, with major coastal cities not looking much worse than Europe but the South and the eastern heartland doing far worse.

But wasn’t it always thus? No. Geographic health disparities have surged in recent decades. According to the U.S. mortality database, as recently as 1990, Ohio had slightly higher life expectancy than New York. Since then, New York’s life expectancy has risen rapidly, nearly converging with that of other rich countries, while Ohio’s has hardly risen at all and is now four years less than New York’s.

Summing up. Life expectancy ought to be a major political issue. Americans aren’t living as long as citizens of other rich countries, but that isn’t due to some unforeseeable act of God. We’re doing it to ourselves through our political choices.

Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

Comments

  • Creigh Gordon  On May 29, 2023 at 11:22 am

    Did I need bipartisanship today?

  • Professor Tom  On May 29, 2023 at 11:23 am

    “Arlo, did you need leadership today?”

    Good old Arlo – we old geezers remember ..

    No – we did just fine before there 1862 was an income tax 3% by Lincoln to pay for civil our war that then grew to funding a huge bureaucracy, but on the other hand sure was nice Teddy Roosevelt 1901 used Anti-Trust to break up big biz like now, big Pharma, Media, Energy and Tech should be broken up.

    Well, except for climate change.

    But in February 2023 they figured out the glaciers are melting from underneath where they found already 20,000 seafloor volcanoes and soon 50,000 more, and that they and tectonic rifts release heat, like they did 14,500-13,000 years ago creating with CO2 the Antarctic Cold Reversal Climate Change.

    Maybe buying Sahara where there is lots of water underneath and then planting trees to absorb CO2 and growing food for the world could be a better idea? Would also give Africans jobs instead of forced to migrate away from home? Would cost $10 trillion but Saudi Aramco oil is $2 trillion and if UN climate guys get what they want will cost more and leave China India still continuing. Seems silly to fix a boat with two big holes left leaking,

    Then declining life expectancy in the United States.

    Maybe it’s good we old guys die earlier, instead of the babies we abort, or with both of us giving more room, to the 3.5 billion Gallup says wants to come here, despite all of our weaknesses – I guess they who are coming know only 8% of 8 billion live as well as we do or almost as well as we do.

    As to suicide I’m sad to report my native happiest people on earth in Finland has now the highest youth suicide rate in EU – they all have guns but kill themselves like here with fentanyl coming in over their open EU border – not over border with Russia which is as long as ours with Mexico – because the Finn’s built a wall there and put snipers on the wall.

    Well happy Memorial Day to all Americans

    • Jason  On May 29, 2023 at 2:19 pm

      You think Finland’s border with Russia is the same length as the US border with Mexico?!

      • Prof Tom  On May 29, 2023 at 2:27 pm

        830 miles land plus water border yes

      • Jason  On May 29, 2023 at 2:36 pm

        I see you’re a member in good standing of the Alternative Facts Community.

      • Prof Tom  On May 29, 2023 at 2:44 pm

        I think you never visited or defended – Finland – once commies attacked you, like Stalin did or Putin in Ukraine – and you know they are present in Kaliningrad – like I’ve seen for myself, then your border of defense ends where Swedens territorial water starts – I don’t know that society you say you belong to but doesn’t sound like one where you hold a gun to stop commies from entering your country , happy Memorial Day and thank you for serving if you did

      • rwforce  On May 29, 2023 at 4:17 pm

        US Border with Mexico is 1,950 miles.

    • George Washington, Jr.  On May 29, 2023 at 6:37 pm

      Actually, the marginal tax rate in the 1950s was over 90%. We also had the highest rate of unionization at that time. Not coincidentally, that period was also marked by massive infrastructure projects like the interstate highway system, and the ability of a man with a high school education to live a comfortable middle-class lifestyle. I don’t mean to present the period as a paradise – it’s also remembered for anti-communist hysteria and oppression of women, LGBT, and people of color. But we should reconsider the potential benefits of taxing the super-rich and encouraging workers to collectively bargain.

  • DV Henkel-Wallace  On May 29, 2023 at 1:54 pm

    Is there a vaccine for this terrible “woke mind virus”?

    More seriously: that gun ownership chart doesn’t say what you claim it does. More specifically it doesn’t address any causal link: perhaps those states with a high rate of gun ownership are simply more dangerous, and without all the guns “for defense” the gun death rate would be even higher.

    Now I know you think that’s unlikely and I think the same, but the chart is silent on this issue.

    This happens in reverse too: conservatives will often cite the rate of antidepressive usage as a sign that society is terrible. But when I hear that I think, “wow, depression has been around forever, so isn’t it great that now there are drugs that can relieve the suffering of many people”.

    (BTW depression must have some sort of survival benefit, at least statistically at a societal level, or it would long have been eliminated from the genome).

    • Prof Tom  On May 29, 2023 at 2:25 pm

      People with no dream and no hope are depressed and often lack of light cause depression

    • David Goldfarb  On May 29, 2023 at 4:01 pm

      You go from quibbling about causation on the chart, to making an utterly unsupported assertion about benefits of depression — quite the whiplash there. Perhaps depression is a side effect of, or a detrimental mutation in, some other trait that conveys more benefit, on the whole, than the depression yields detriment. Natural selection works on entire organisms, not on individual traits.

      Note that I am not expressing any opinion myself there, one way or the other. I lack the expertise to do so. I’m just noting that your argument is flawed.

  • Luke Swartz  On May 30, 2023 at 12:54 am

    Great post Doug, but I can’t believe that you never mentioned race…?!

    There’s a lot to say about racial disparities and systemic racism on this topic. I suspect that, like many aspects of American politics and public policy, it’s impossible to tell the full story without considering race.

    • Professor Tom  On May 30, 2023 at 12:05 pm

      Luke if there ever was a genuine reason for bringing in the aspect of race , longevity sure is one.

      If you have been relegated to living, eating, shopping and educating your children in a zip code were free time for healthy outdoor life is already limited by long commutes and rundown environment plus often crime and drugs, with limited opportunities for good educational and recreational children’s activities, and food is fast, unhealthy or unaffordable, it builds up perpetual bad habits leading to obesity and all related cardio and sugar related life health issue.

      While this misery is not exclusive based on your race but as it certainly was longer and is the starting point for our fellow African Americans one wonders why at least today we can’t go give the “get out of jail” card that school choice would give to young black and other often poor minorities that could let them start building networks at 6 that then at time of college builds the careers and better living conditions lifting them and their families out of poverty that is referred to as our American Dream?

      • George Washington, Jr.  On May 30, 2023 at 2:30 pm

        School choice (I assume you mean vouchers) aren’t enough to cover most private schools, so they’re really just a giveaway for wealthy people at the expense of the public school system. Instead of destroying the one remaining large-scale public benefit for children, we should instead be strengthening it.

      • Professor Tom  On May 30, 2023 at 2:47 pm

        The topic was I believe longevity and in that context race. If you can keep your focus on that for a moment the people according to Gallup regardless of party or wealth are a vast majority in favor of school choice because freedom to choose a better future for your child is paramount to parents.

        In that context it does not add to tax-burden and gives what child needs and parents want thus the monetary part is irrelevant.

        If 65% chose to leave the buying power would create better choices to cater to this demand and the 35% feeling this competition would improve the current delivery which is dismal.

        My three children attended public schools in Jersey City as group 4 18% of the three larger ethnic groups but because our zip code was good we had choice of the only 3 good ones out of 68 total.

        Why would you even care if your tax burden did not go up , and kids were better off , who used the money for what chosen solution they each took?

        Probably those now with kids in private prep horrible schools would get a subsidy and others not.

        After all of $23,000 per student in JC only$9k reached school and bureaucrats took $14k belonging to kids

      • George Washington, Jr.  On May 30, 2023 at 9:58 pm

        Post a link to the Gallup survey. If people think their kids will attend private school for free, that could skew the results. Also, everyone assumes that their kid will get into some top private academy, but there aren’t enough of them to meet the demand. So you’ll have fly-by-night, low-quality schools popping up to take advantage of gullible parents who just want their kids out of public school.

        The solution is to improve public schools, not destroy them by making a bunch of grifters rich while giving a break to people who are already wealthy and are sending their kids to private schools right now.

      • Prof Tom  On May 30, 2023 at 10:44 pm

        I respectfully disagree as even Finlands famous public school system of ten years ago 2011 , has faltered 12 years as a result of lack of competition, and as parents are legal guardians until 18 , it should be parents deciding, and as country has a legal interest in an educated populous, a law and paying for education with taxpayer money is warranted. Same is true for health care moving in that direction in EU. Pensions as well. You seem more concerned about the money than the kids – do you have children ? I have 3 thus money distribution less important

      • Prof Tom  On May 31, 2023 at 9:41 am

        Here is the one I saw but there are many studies all have both parties majorities in support of school choice funded by federal money ..

        Gallup Poll: 59% of Americans Support School Choice
        Posted on April 11, 2017
        by No Comments
        A Gallup poll released today made a not-so-secret secret, even more not-so-secret: lots of people really like and support the idea of school choice!
        Even more?
        The prospect of a federally-backed school choice program is also strongly supported.
        Here are the numbers (and a few details).
        When asked if Americans agreed or disagreed with the following statement, here’s how they answered:
        Gallup Poll: 59% of Americans Support School Choice

    • Anonymous  On June 1, 2023 at 9:59 pm

      “The solution is to improve public schools, not destroy them” YES!

      • Prof tom  On June 1, 2023 at 10:52 pm

        Why are you so fascinated by our our public schools? Isn’t the most important thing to do to get all young Americans the best possible education – much more important than how or where they get it?

        1839 we introduced the public schools almost 200 years ago and doing the same thing all over again throwing more money at them expecting different results is definition of insanity.

      • George Washington, Jr.  On June 2, 2023 at 10:43 am

        The American public education system is the only large-scale program in the U.S. that benefits children. It is the reason why the U.S. has more economic mobility than other countries, because education isn’t limited to a wealthy elite. This is what the Republicans want us to return to, and they’ve managed to convince a lot of Americans that the public schools are hopeless and the only solution is private school vouchers. So the wealthy will be subsidized and the poor will either be stuck in underfunded public schools or crappy private schools. It’s just another example of poor and middle class wealth being shifted to the upper class under the guise of “freedom.”

      • Prof Tom  On June 2, 2023 at 11:39 am

        With all due respect that is not accurate. Results on international tests have shown 50 years our system is not working and parents are not happy. It’s not an ideological issue or should not be it should be about the kids all of them learning what they need to get jobs or better future in life.

        When I moved to Jersey City to obtain diverse education for my own three children 2003 I investigated the public school system in depth.

        Taxes allocated were $ 22,000 per student to 68 schools. All 68 schools got $9,000 to play with and the rest disappeared after the school board got the $22,000. Three schools were performing much better than the rest all in zip codes where parents could afford to add to the $9000 and 16 schools were dangerous. The three took first from the zip codes where they were students then if free spot a few seldom got lucky.

        The $14,000 funded political corruption and politics l campaigns and hiring relatives to sit in empty offices.

        Principals had no power to hire or fire bad teachers school board did not report to great mayor – progressive democrat Steven Fulop who is running fit governor and should be one day in the White House.

        School board elections funded to 85% by teachers union who loves status quo as it gives them power and part of the $14,000.

        I don’t care if left or right win – I want all kids to win and no poor kid smart working hard failing in life because she has to walk through a metal detector in the poor zip code where she lives because mom can’t afford to move

Trackbacks

Leave a comment