Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Life expectancy in the U.S. varies greatly by region

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–99 of 99 posts

Re: Life expectancy in the U.S. varies greatly by region

#91

Post by lapcat »

23B1 wrote: post #85
lapcat wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It goes both ways though. "Woke" has now become almost exclusively pejorative. And they're pulling "Communist" out of retirement lately, despite the fact that Russia and China are both capitalist now. What about the contempt for gay people? The contempt for "hippies" in 1960s? I doubt that anyone is innocent of condescension. Here's an article about "No-Respect Politics" from 20 years ago: https://www.washingtonpost.…

Evidently you missed the part about grace and empathy? "But they started it" "They do it too" "They are meaner" 'They they they' is the problem.

> "But they started it" "They do it too" "They are meaner"

You're using quotes, but I said none of those things.

> 'They they they' is the problem.

The problem is as vaidhy suggested. You said grace and empathy is much harder than condescension and schadenfreude, but it becomes even harder when grace and empathy are met in return with condescension and schadenfreude. If you're acting in good faith, how much can you stand to be humiliated? It takes two sides to come to the table. Trust must be built mutually. Otherwise it's like talking to a brick wall.

Re: Life expectancy in the U.S. varies greatly by region

#92

Post by red-iron-pine »

Rebelgecko wrote: post #16
epgui wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, what else could be the cause? One way or another, it'll come down to some insane policy decision or other. And this "states vs federal" power struggle in America (not my country) basically guarantees that there will be variance across states. The division of powers made sense in the old days, but in today's day and age it's crazy that there are not more standards set across the board at the federal level. It'…

Even though there's definitely a strong state by state correlation, I thought it was interesting that a number of states (like South Dakota and Wyoming) had such a wide range of outcomes. Not sure of that's just randomness due to smaller population sizes or what

Smaller populations, more rural populations -- see also: rural vs urban divide -- and, as another poster mentioned, Native American reservations, which are often some of the poorest areas in the US.

Re: Life expectancy in the U.S. varies greatly by region

#93

Post by kolanos »

vaidhy wrote: post #87
kolanos wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I presume it’s not the enormous amount of asymmetric financial assistance that pours into the south every single year from the “patronizing” coastal elites? No, this is largely a myth. [0] [0]: https://mises.org/wire/no-red-state-economies-dont-depend-gr...

It is interesting that so many states are tagged blue when I would have tagged them red or purple at most. According to Wikipedia ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_state_le... ) there are 19 democratic states and 28 republican states. Your source almost splits the country into two halves which is misleading.

I believe "red state" and "blue state" is commonly referring to which party's candidate won the state in the last presidential election.

Re: Life expectancy in the U.S. varies greatly by region

#94

Post by red-iron-pine »

23B1 wrote: post #9
dfxm12 wrote: post #2

I saw all the doom and gloom tweets, but didn't realize most of the cause boils down to policy decisions. Call your elected officials and tell them you don't want to die an avoidable early death.

Sure seems to me like any time the technocrat/commentariat/coastal crowd point out the various problems with the American South, it's always with this patronizing schadenfreude vibe. "Haha guys look at the poor dumb hicks who don't know what's best for them"

> "Haha guys look at the poor dumb hicks who don't know what's best for them"

We can factually and objectively demonstrate how the south is lagging. This isn't some moralistic "lol those dumb hayseeds wear shitty clothes", there is a measurable, concrete divide in things like healthcare and scholastic outcomes.

People are dying early, considerably so. dying Child mortality is notable higher. Standardized test scores are just lower, and by non-trivial numbers.

Re: Life expectancy in the U.S. varies greatly by region

#95

Post by Rebelgecko »

zoklet-enjoyer wrote: post #25
Rebelgecko wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even though there's definitely a strong state by state correlation, I thought it was interesting that a number of states (like South Dakota and Wyoming) had such a wide range of outcomes. Not sure of that's just randomness due to smaller population sizes or what

Those are reservations. MT, ND, MN, WI too https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_reservation

Well, that's a very depressing answer to the mystery. Thanks though!

Re: Life expectancy in the U.S. varies greatly by region

#96

Post by fooker »

reducesuffering wrote: post #90
newfriend wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Umm... There is a strong political correlation here. Umm... No, there isn't. Look at the entire midwest/central US. See these two maps: * From the OP: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FsuBjJeaQAAv8EE?format=jpg&name=... * 2020 presidential: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fb/20... It's much more correlated with: * Poverty rate: https://www.census.gov/library/visualizations/2018/comm/acs-... The co…

While it looks like poverty rate is more correlated, idk how you look at those maps and see anything but an obvious political correlation, albeit not perfect. What do the stats say? "Among 3110 U.S counties and Washington, D.C., change in life expectancy at the county level was negatively associated with Republican share of the vote in the 2020 Presidential election" https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC82092…

>What do the stats say?

How about: a relatively large portion of the country is left behind by federal policies and are willing to support whatever crackpot promises good things?

Re: Life expectancy in the U.S. varies greatly by region

#97

Post by newfriend »

reducesuffering wrote: post #90
newfriend wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Umm... There is a strong political correlation here. Umm... No, there isn't. Look at the entire midwest/central US. See these two maps: * From the OP: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FsuBjJeaQAAv8EE?format=jpg&name=... * 2020 presidential: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fb/20... It's much more correlated with: * Poverty rate: https://www.census.gov/library/visualizations/2018/comm/acs-... The co…

While it looks like poverty rate is more correlated, idk how you look at those maps and see anything but an obvious political correlation, albeit not perfect. What do the stats say? "Among 3110 U.S counties and Washington, D.C., change in life expectancy at the county level was negatively associated with Republican share of the vote in the 2020 Presidential election" https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC82092…

> idk how you look at those maps and see anything but an obvious political correlation

Because I have eyes and a brain. In the first map (life expectancy), almost the entire north half of the US is marked as "high", and the "low" is almost entirely clustered in the south east. When I look at the political map, the blue parts are almost entirely on the coasts with some scattering in metros and a deep blue clump right in the middle of the south east again. In what universe would that be a political correlation? The maps are entirely different.

Also your stats are not very convincing, considering they are measuring something entirely different. Comparing the percent change in life expectancy from 1980 - 2014 to the 2020 election results seems pretty useless. Look at how vastly different the presidential voting map is since 1980: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b9/19...

A better correlation might be percent change in party voting vs percent change in life expectancy. And even then, how long does it take for policy to affect life expectancy numbers?

Re: Life expectancy in the U.S. varies greatly by region

#98

Post by epgui »

ip26 wrote: post #29
epgui wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, what else could be the cause? One way or another, it'll come down to some insane policy decision or other. And this "states vs federal" power struggle in America (not my country) basically guarantees that there will be variance across states. The division of powers made sense in the old days, but in today's day and age it's crazy that there are not more standards set across the board at the federal level. It'…

The problem with federal standards is getting everyone to agree. If state standards aren’t allowed and California wants tougher environmental standards on California land, but Texas doesn’t, you force a showdown, a loser, and simmering resentment for decades.

100% agree with the first sentence.

> If state standards aren’t allowed and California wants tougher environmental standards on California land, but Texas doesn’t, you force a showdown, a loser, and simmering resentment for decades.

Federal standards are in the interest of all citizens, whether or not they frustrate some state politician or not shouldn't even count as an objection.

I don't care if the Texas government is happy, but I do care if the people in Texas are healthy. Maybe that's just me though.

Re: Life expectancy in the U.S. varies greatly by region

#99

Post by ip26 »

epgui wrote: post #98
ip26 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with federal standards is getting everyone to agree. If state standards aren’t allowed and California wants tougher environmental standards on California land, but Texas doesn’t, you force a showdown, a loser, and simmering resentment for decades.

100% agree with the first sentence. > If state standards aren’t allowed and California wants tougher environmental standards on California land, but Texas doesn’t, you force a showdown, a loser, and simmering resentment for decades. Federal standards are in the interest of all citizens, whether or not they frustrate some state politician or not shouldn't even count as an objection. I don't care if the Texas governmen…

First, I’m sure it’s hard to imagine, but California could lose said showdown and find themselves obstructed from protecting even only California. Second, it’s not just some lone politician that would care. The whole Roe v. Wade thing should have made clear that half of the country had been seething to overturn it for decades. Our whole system is built on consent of the governed; Federal mandate is therefore tricky if one large state is in overwhelming support of an issue while another is overwhelmingly opposed.
Post reply on HN