"Large And Growing" Life Expectancy Gap Between Rich And Poor Americans

The New York Times   |  Robert Pear   |   March 22, 2008 04:48 PM


stumble digg reddit del.ico.us news trust

New government research has found "large and growing" disparities in life expectancy for richer and poorer Americans, paralleling the growth of income inequality in the last two decades.

Life expectancy for the nation as a whole has increased, the researchers said, but affluent people have experienced greater gains, and this, in turn, has caused a widening gap.

One of the researchers, Gopal K. Singh, a demographer at the Department of Health and Human Services, said "the growing inequalities in life expectancy" mirrored trends in infant mortality and in death from heart disease and certain cancers.

The gaps have been increasing despite efforts by the federal government to reduce them. One of the top goals of "Healthy People 2010," an official statement of national health objectives issued in 2000, is to "eliminate health disparities among different segments of the population," including higher- and lower-income groups and people of different racial and ethnic background.

Dr. Singh said last week that federal officials had found "widening socioeconomic inequalities in life expectancy" at birth and at every age level.

He and another researcher, Mohammad Siahpush, a professor at the University of Nebraska Medical Center in Omaha, developed an index to measure social and economic conditions in every county, using census data on education, income, poverty, housing and other factors. Counties were then classified into 10 groups of equal population size.

In 1980-82, Dr. Singh said, people in the most affluent group could expect to live 2.8 years longer than people in the most deprived group (75.8 versus 73 years). By 1998-2000, the difference in life expectancy had increased to 4.5 years (79.2 versus 74.7 years), and it continues to grow, he said.

After 20 years, the lowest socioeconomic group lagged further behind the most affluent, Dr. Singh said, noting that "life expectancy was higher for the most affluent in 1980 than for the most deprived group in 2000."

Keep reading.


 
 

Comments
148
Pending Comments
0

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 Next › Last » (3 pages total)

Yeah, but the the 74.7 years of the poor probably SEEMS longer than the 79.2 of the affluent.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:18 PM on 03/23/2008

The reasons behind this are pretty obvious, people who are not rich work and are exposed to all kinds of chemicals and working enviroments that Rich people would never see. After all have you ever seen a millionaire work on a coal mine for example, or work in a factory 60 hours a week ?

Most poor people take little or no vacation simply because they cannot afford it, the Rich have far more vacations and longer ones. Pretty simple why then the Rich live longer, not to mention the last reason having the money or the resources to top notch health care.

The government wants to fix this? Sure they do, it would mean having health care for everyone increasing wages and making companies even less competitive. I doubt they will change anything simply because it is not easily fixable like chainging a flat tire.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:38 PM on 03/23/2008

Well, this post about does it, right?

We can all now realize that income redistribution to the tune of 7 trillion dollars, Medicare, Medicaid, handicapped parking spaces, handicapped ramps, forced federal lunches (breakfasts, snacks & midnight basketball leagues) which were begun to offset starvation and now which "combat" obesity, as well as the Family Leave Act, Americans with Disabilities Act and any other number of forced federal programs (entirely too numerous to list) to "equalize" all of us, have not & are not working.

Right?

Time to try different "solutions."

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:25 PM on 03/23/2008

JohnKemp; How about equal treatment in the health care industry.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:50 PM on 03/23/2008

Reganomics shut down California in the 70's. Regonomics Via Greenspan shut down Social Security in the 80's. The (feds. central Bank) paid debts with our security,now we have to sweat it that some jerk in the white house, will get us cut off by changing the NEW DEAL. If anything is unamerican activitys, its canceling social security. About living longer; my sister died at 64 as a direct result of no meds for diabetic condition. I tried to get her to humbly go to the Lions Club for help, but her feeling of shame for being poor was to great. Thus she died for all advocates of socialised Med. It's a mystery to me how anyone can set by, and watch seniors suffer.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:41 PM on 03/23/2008

i love it when the rightwingers say our system gives us choice! How untrue, so much to be a vomit inducing lie. I pay $600 a month for private insurance and have to drive 18 miles to see the doctor my insurance company picked for me, passing by dozens of family care clinics on the way. I have to get approval for any type of specialized treatment, and the insurance company can and does say no. I live if fear that someone in my family will become seriously ill or have a bad accident, and we will lose our home because of it. But, hey, the insurance company executives will all make their million dollar bonus's, and to rightwingers, that is all that matters.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:14 PM on 03/23/2008

Better than driving 18 miles to a givernment-run clinic to find it either closed or to be told that there is a two-day wait for you to be seen.

And of course that is assuming you neither smoke nor drink, eat eggplant daily & have a fetish for tofu.

Then you might not have to wait so long.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:29 PM on 03/23/2008

you are a liar. liar liar liar. dozens of posts from people living in countries with socialized med, and nothing you say is true. liar, liar, liar.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:46 PM on 03/23/2008

He must be in some kind of medical biz

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:32 PM on 03/23/2008

"After 20 years, the lowest socioeconomic group lagged further behind the most affluent."

Wow! Richer people live longer and have better access to medical care than poor people

The same group of genius researchers, finally confirmed that Earth revolved around the sun. And it only took a $10 million research grant, six double-blind studies and three trips to Hawaii for scientific conferences.

I wanna grant like that too!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:26 PM on 03/23/2008

This study is no surprise. The policies of new global order powers that be don't believe in the rights of all men to live with an economical fair shake let alone to a ripe old age. They'll pay to spead war and death, but not life or equality. Thus in order for the free western world to survive, an objective scientific community is going to have to study the human species the same way they do the animal kingdom. That is to say, we must look at might makes righter wrongdoers without top 1% political correctness.

Fact is, that the world is populated by human predator elitists with absolutely no compassion for their fellow man and no regard for the environment whatsoever. Other than this life, their money, power and control, they have no moral perspective on the big picture and support fascism as an agenda. They're Great White Sharks in the sea of mother earth. Such evil, selfish people must we weeded out before it's too late. This is already happening via natural selection. But it won't save the world from NeoCons.

It is said that 7 of the world's most weathiest people could themselves cure world hunger. That safer, cleaner, alternative bio fuel sources are easily within our technological grasp. That a system based on printing make believe money with no real value exposes funny money Fed debt that taxpayers are forced to subsidize. Given this scenario, it's not a stretch to pretend everyone has enough to live on. Yet a corrupt system endures as if the US will last forever and shit will never hit the fan. So I fear 2012.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:19 PM on 03/23/2008

Actually, ironically enough, I've heard it propostioned that it was natural selection that put those same predators, the sociopath, in our midst. That their belief they are somehow not subject to the same rules of cause and effect as their non-sociopathic counterparts, provided the impetus for them to lead the charge against the nasty beasties that roamed about, and with predictable cause and effect they were mostly slaughtered as a result, keeping the ratio of sociopathic and non-sociopathic humans in a healthy balance.

Unfortunately the beasties dissapeared, and the sociopaths are now over-represented.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:24 PM on 03/23/2008


Populism is the cure to the cancer of corporatism.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:10 PM on 03/23/2008

Too bad those fat cats in the GOP don't get it, Middle America built this country, and will always be necessary so they can keep those fat cats going, I guess their of the attitude of we've got ours, so like Cheney says, what about what 2/3 of the country says! And he says SO.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:40 PM on 03/23/2008

Consolation prize: America's rich still don't live as long as some of Europe's poor.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:54 PM on 03/23/2008

One very important reason so many of the poor and uneducated suffer more medical problems,complications and a shorter life span seems to be ,for the most part ignored,and that is so many of them are just plain dumb,even stupid!
I was born into a large poor uneducated poverty ridden family and find that some of my sibs and I have been able to live a long reasonably healthy life and our offspring also have.
One thing that is certain from experience,those of us who were able to rise above poverty because of our native intelegence,and access ourselves to the health care available have lived pretty long lives and successfuly overcame heath problems that inevitably occur to us all.
Also we and our offspring either quit or did not smoke at all,we avoided excesses,controlled the size of our families,and eqally important avoided out of wedlock births.
Those members of my large extended family that did not do these things,lived and still live just like the people descibed in the study.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:10 PM on 03/23/2008

We need to level the playing field. The rich should not be allowed to live any longer than the average life expectancy age of the poor. Think of all the jobs we could create in the business of, well, leveling the rich so they don't live longer than they should.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:48 PM on 03/23/2008

lowering the life expectancy to the level of the poor is not the answer. Instead we need to seek to make healthcare more affordable. Enough of this insurance company bullshit. Fuck UHC, BCBS and the rest of the murdering ilk. They can go hang themselves with their pre-existing conditions. Time for Universal Healthcare is now. If people don't want to sign up for it fine, go pay thousands to some insurance company to tell you in your time of need that they can't cover you.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:54 PM on 03/23/2008

Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness

Without Life there is no Liberty and without Life and Liberty one cannot pursue happiness. However, the idea of Life in its basic form must include the access to affordable healthcare for all.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:01 PM on 03/23/2008

What's the point of being rich if you're not doing better, much better, than everyone else, in every conceivable measure of social success? This is a capitalistic society. It's the way things should be.

A gap of only 4.5 years isn't nearly enough. A billionaire ought to live 40-50 years longer than the poorest among us. And he ought to be in better shape at 80 than the average peon at 40, in a decent, capitalistic society. We need to get government off our backs and really let loose with this social Darwinism.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:33 AM on 03/23/2008


How very ChristoFascist of you.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:18 PM on 03/23/2008

believe it or not Liberals, you are going to be the reason why Obama loses in November (or August if Hillary gets her way). You better start taking Obama to tasks before Conservative Talk Radio dose!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:30 AM on 03/23/2008

You can't even spell the word "does" and you expect all of us "liberals" to take anything you say seriously??

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:44 PM on 03/23/2008

JohnKemp See Profile I'm a Fan of JohnKemp
80,000 people left England last year for "medical vacations" in Japan, Austrailia & the US; that number is expected to exceed 200,000 in 2008.

What's wrong with Britains' healthcare is Maggie Thatcher.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:09 AM on 03/23/2008

Socialism is "what's wrong" with British healthcare.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:13 AM on 03/23/2008

Prove how it's "wrong".

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:13 PM on 03/23/2008

Well, lasik surgery & cosmetic surgery are two good examples; neither covered by insurance nor Medicare, & both are now readily available at very reasonable cost.

In the 1960's when Medicare was introduced, my Mother's version of a "doctor's house call" was taking me & my brother to the doctor's house (no joke). Many paid their doctor with a baked cake or a homemade dress; going to the doctor or dentist was no big deal.

We were dirt-poor, and our doctor lived on the same street that we did.

Medicare changed all that, and now even broken arms or appendectomies are "crisis," and further socialization will only make matters worse, just as it is doing in England.

Two out of 11 doctors born & educated in Canada now practice in the US, or as one Canadian educator stated, "Two of our own medical schools do nothing more than produce doctors for America."

Same thing will happen here if we become infected by nationalized healthcare; many doctors, clinics, pharmacists, etc. will "set up shop" in Mexico.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:27 PM on 03/23/2008

so many complain about US "socialized" education

and yet so many people are still bringing their kids here to get an education.

It can work, you know.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:48 AM on 03/23/2008

What dose this has to do with me?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:08 AM on 03/23/2008

Since the Nixon administration their have been Republican Party plans to reduce the population of the earth which is probably why they want to gut Medicare. This is their fascist agenda and I've seen it articulated on TV by some NEOCON fascist implementers who flat out say "we don't want sick people".

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:52 AM on 03/23/2008

I guess I missed that TV program...refresh my memory, and while you're at it, tell us what "NEOCON fascist" you quote as saying "flat out", "we don't want sick people."

I think a better explanation for the growing gap between rich and poor is our entitlement society and liberal philosophy that preaches "victimhood" and class warfare. Liberal / socialist policies also undermine self reliance, accountability, and responsibility. I'm sure you agree.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:32 PM on 03/23/2008

Farcical.

A more accurate example would be Planned Parenthood which was begun in order to eliminate the Black race

"Birth control must lead ultimately to a cleaner race."
Margaret Sanger, Founder of Planned Parenthood

You are familiar with Planned Parenthood, right? It's a big love of all libs.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:17 AM on 03/23/2008

Eugenics were wrong both from the left and from the right ... Margaret Sanger did not want to eliminate any group of children and neither did Emma Goldman they were trying to prevent poverty and illness ...
However, right wing eugenics had a far more nefarious history of sterilizing poor whites, and blacks up until the 1960s ...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:22 PM on 03/23/2008

What I know about eugenics is that it was a widely accepted philosophy by the pointy-headed intellectuals.

Sort of like global warming, or global cooling, or whichever on it is now that is "happening."

Intellectuals? - WOW! - What a term!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:58 PM on 03/23/2008

I totally believe in universal health care but as a 60-year old with a lot of 90-year old relatives who have dementia and a very poor quality of life, I'm wondering if living a long time is such a great thing.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:15 AM on 03/23/2008

Since there is a possibility that John Sidney McCain will become POTUS #44, I'll take comfort in believeing that it isn't how long you live but how well you live. It's difficult to see how anyone could live well in another 4 years of the USA as a warfare state McCain offers us.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:03 AM on 03/23/2008

one more time with feeling...

Who in their right mind argues against Universal Healthcare?...a poor person in the UK still lives longer than a rich person in the US. Our health care system is broken and the free market isn't going to fix it.

In the mean time check out this video "Run From The Cure - The Rick Simpson Story."

http://www.youtube.com/chrychek

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:39 AM on 03/23/2008

80,000 people left England last year for "medical vacations" in Japan, Austrailia & the US; that number is expected to exceed 200,000 in 2008.

England's public healthcare is a disaster & has quite rationally spawned a "cash-only" for-profit system that anyone who can afford to use does so.

Complaints about emergency room care were so wide-spread & numerous that the government bureaucrats announced an edict; "all persons entering an emergency room will be treated within four hours."

The reality? Patients needing emergency care are kept "outside" of emergency rooms for hours, prohibited from "checking in" until their time for service is near.

Seems to me that the libs have done enough damage to enough people with nationalized education; national healthcare would be another farce.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:35 AM on 03/23/2008

Both Australia and Japan have national health care systems you have no idea what you are talking about ... and the UK system despite complaints from some (who also can see a private physician if they want) have elevated the life expectancy in the UK well above ours ... we are the only western developed country without nationalized health care ...
I do not know where the hell you get your facts from but you certainly do not get them from the AMA or the world health organization ... you are WRONG

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:20 PM on 03/23/2008

http://www.azstarnet.com/metro/229879.php

Death by ER. In America.
Your "facts" are changing.
By the minute.
Stay tuned.