TLHLIM

Money quote from the paper: The data suggest that residents of high-income states have enacted policies and adopted behaviors with long-run payoffs to midlife mortality that are becoming increasingly apparent over time.
 
Even more important for the time period we study, the implementation of Medicaid and its later expansions to pregnant low-income women have been linked to lower morbidity and mortality in the long run (Goodman-Bacon 2021; Miller and Wherry 2019). Again, using state variation in eligibility for Medicaid when first implemented due to its link to state participation in the Aid to Families with Dependent Children, Goodman-Bacon (2021) estimates: “Medicaid added 10 million quality adjusted life-years for cohorts born between 1955 and 1975 and saved the government more than twice its original cost” (p. 2588). This latter point is important since states share up to half the Medicaid program costs, so spending more crowds out other beneficial state spending. Later Medicaid expansions of the 1990s also had lasting effects, with infants whose mothers gained Medicaid coverage in the early 1990s experiencing lower rates of chronic conditions or hospitalizations for diabetes and obesity in adulthood (Miller and Wherry 2019).

Other health programs targeting low-income populations matter for the evolution of long-term health, too. Using variation in the opening of Community Health Centers in the 1960s and 1970s (designed to care for medically under-served populations), Bailey and Goodman-Bacon (2015) showed that age-adjusted mortality rates had declined by an additional 2 percent in counties that opened Community Health Centers compared to those that did not. Further, the mortality decline was driven by deaths to adults over age 50. This pattern we see is also consistent with the hypothesis suggested by Case and Deaton (2017) that cohorts entering the workforce in the 1970s and 1980s experienced a changed economic landscape, one which shifted particularly against people without college degrees.
 
Money quote from the paper: The data suggest that residents of high-income states have enacted policies and adopted behaviors with long-run payoffs to midlife mortality that are becoming increasingly apparent over time.
Yes we continue to hone in on the point that states like VA has rich people living there who make better choices than poor people. Their outcomes are due to that, not due to the amazing new policies of ending cash bail and mandatory sentencing for convicted felons
 
Yes we continue to hone in on the point that states like VA has rich people living there who make better choices than poor people. Their outcomes are due to that, not due to the amazing new policies of ending cash bail and mandatory sentencing for convicted felons
The part you seem capable of contemplating is people who are given more information will make better choices. And state health programs play a vital role in providing this information. On thangs like smoking, pre-natal care, vaccines, etc, etc. If we care about life we should be in favor of funding these programs generously. They more than pay for themselves.
 
The part you seem capable of contemplating is people who are given more information will make better choices. And state health programs play a vital role in providing this information.
Ok if my choice is to vote for a party who reduces sentencing for violent criminals and increases homelessness annually or a party who chooses not to make a commercial that smoking is bad, i know my choice
 
Ok if my choice is to vote for a party who reduces sentencing for violent criminals and increases homelessness annually or a party who chooses not to make a commercial that smoking is bad, i know my choice
Blue states btw also have lower recidivism rates. Virginia and Minnesota being standouts!!
 
Believe it or not resources spent on rehabilitation and giving people a second and third chance often pays off!!

I know it's hard to lay off the crack pipe that is your twitter feed. Enjoy it!!
 
It is not really a question of race or ethnicity. We are talking about changes in health outcomes over time. Race/ethnicity can account for the range of outcomes in a given period of time, but not changes over time.
 
It is not really a question of race or ethnicity. We are talking about changes in health outcomes over time. Race/ethnicity can account for the range of outcomes in a given period of time, but not changes over time.
When you have more negative outliers and worsening the change over a period of time is cloudy.
 
The guy im currently arguing with made the argument just yesterday that dems would win elections if only net producers voted

What am i even doing here...
They would if you accounted for all the fact that Republicans who don't pay taxes vote at a much higher rate than Democratic voters that don't. I'd be willing to take that tradeoff any time.
 
What % of dem voters are net producers?
I don't know but I will point out something I said earlier. Democratic districts have much higher median income than Republican districts. Republican districts are at Mexican levels of GDP per capita. The differences in per capita income between states are not as pronounced as they are at the Congressional district level. We're happy to take care of our poor and ship out a good deal of our income to help our poor fellow Americans in red districts. No flowers or thank you notes expected.

Y'all seem unwilling to grasp that y'all not quite the ballers y'all make yourselves out to be.
 
Back
Top