For conservatives, it must sound like “better red than dead” all over again. A new study in the Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health suggests that liberals live longer than conservatives in the United States. The researchers looked at more than 32,000 adults and tracked them over 15 years. The result was surprising: conservatives seemed to be expiring faster than their counterparts on the left. However, conservatives claimed to be happier than their counterparts in life.
It has been reported that Hillary Clinton has been working on a new campaign theme. Perhaps they should consider a “Vote Hillary Or Die” campaign.
Roman Pabayo, a community health researcher at the University of Nevada said that the group relied on more concrete data like actual death records than did prior studies. They also eliminated other factors by comparing conservatives and liberals of similar age, sex, and socioeconomic status. Notably, when divided simply between parties, Democratic and Republican party members died at the same rate, but when compared on ideological grounds, conservatives bit the dust first on average.
Subu V. Subramanian, a professor of population health and geography at Harvard was critical of the findings. His study relied on self-reporting and found that Republicans reported better health and they were 15% less likely to smoke. He also found that Republicans and conservatives were benefitted by being more religious and “more tied into social networks and organizations.”
It may still be too early for some conservatives to embrace wage equity and global warming. The difference in death rates is described by Subramanian as “slight” in the new study.
Source: USA Today
Isaac. That’s interesting about Canada. I have never met a Hutterite. Aren’t they like a commune version of the Amish?
One more item on the federal spending list is pork. Which is something all political parties seem to wallow in.
Elaine – you object when people declare your remarks are non substantive, and yet you, yourself have referred to people spouting right wing ideology.
So, it’s OK when you do it but not OK if someone else does it?
I note that you have referred people to your links again, while still failing to address DBQ and my rebuttal of red states receiving more federal funding. Does this answer my question on if you would continue to repeat your statement that Romeny was wrong, knowing that this is a false statement?
Please address the actual facts.
Inga,
Here we go again! Paul likes to infer negative things about people who aren’t members of the right-wing echo chamber here.
Those on Welfare include those who can but refuse to work, as well as those going through temporary hardship, or even long term hardship.
But all of them share one thing in common – the majority vote Democrat. This makes intuitive sense, because Democrats are always promising more “free stuff”, higher minimum wage (regardless of job losses this incurs), remove work requirements, lengthen unemployment benefits. Who wouldn’t vote for more “free stuff”?
Studies show that if you ask participants if they would want something for free, the majority say yes. I suppose if a study was created that said you would get something for free, but your taxes would go up 4 times the cost of that stuff, perhaps we would get a different answer.
Elaine – still nothing on DBQ’s rebuttal of your statement that Romney was wrong about what Liberals call the Moocher Myth? Plus I sent along that Pew study that showed, yes, indeed, the majority of those on Welfare are indeed Democrats?
Liberals call it the Moocher Myth to stigmatize those who merely repeat the facts – those on food stamps and Welfare are majority Democrats.
My idea of a “freeloader” would be someone using Welfare who is able to work but refuses to even sincerely look for work.
Most people, of any political party, have no problem supporting people down on their luck, the handicapped, or anyone else who really needs help.
The problem is when the system allows and encourages people to stay on Welfare. Democrats, for example, consistently fight work requirements, that so successfully shrunk the rolls of Welfare in the past. The system should be designed as a trampoline, not a hammock. But it must be combined with a thriving economy. Since Obama has presided over the most stagnant economic recovery in history, it’s a challenge to find work. Plus, Democrats have done helpful things, like Obamacare, which causes employers to cut hours under 30, and layoff employees. Higher taxes on businesses also leave less money to hire. Liberals basically promise a bunch of “free stuff” and then enact policies that shrink the labor force. Unless it’s government, in which case they bloat the rolls of government employees paid for by an overburdened taxpayer base.
There is also a troubling phenomena where someone because worse off financially, if they get gainful employment. Obamacare, for example, is completely unaffordable, and yet mandated. So no one would want to lose their subsidies by making a middle class living. They also lose their Welfare, food stamps, and housing allowance. So there is this gap where they are actually worse off if they work. That clearly stagnates the Welfare roles.
Today I received a copy of The Economist magazine. They have a special tribute to The Marlborough Man. He just croaked recently. For the media to celebrate some schmuck who encouraged millions of kids to smoke and thus caused the death of a million or so is ugly and stupid. I am dropping my subscription to the Economist.
Isaac, Wow! Thank you. You taught me some Canadian history, particularly about “The Great War.” Like myself, you have had an eclectic work experience. Knowing you were the son of a Navy man makes sense to me, having to gotten to see some of your no nonsense sensibilities.
Having not been to Saskatchewan, the background on those folks is consistent w/ the people I have met from there. I’ve been to Nova Scotia[My Scotch/Irish side spent a generation there], Quebec, Ontario, Alberta, BC and the Yukon. I unabashedly like hosers, sans French Canadians.
French Canadians invade the northeast coast of the US for summer vacations, and the southeast in the Winter. I am not being hyperbolic when I saw you can search long and hard to find a waitress, bartender, hotel desk clerk, etc. who has anything nice to say about these haughty, condescending, cheap, rude people. That said, while I still did not find French Canadians very friendly when I have visited Montreal, they were not the cretins I experienced working a hotel front desk on the Jersey shore 2 summers in college. I had a friend who went to McGill. I drove her to college her freshman year and helped her move in, and visited her a couple times during her tenure. This is as mild mannered a woman you’ll meet. She did not like Les Habitants. She went on to Fordham Law School, so living amongst rude and unbearable people prepared her for 3 years in the Bronx. I will admit my bias in saying diplomatically, we have different views on Trudeau and Chretien, particularly the latter. His weasel behavior regarding the Sponsorship Scandal epitomized my view of him. My personality is if a politician admits mistakes, wrongdoing, etc. it can be a big positive w/ me. When they weasel, they go to the depths of hell in my book.
It would come as no surprise to you that while I would maybe put the Habs in the top 5 franchises of all time, few knowledgeable non provincial sports fans would put them ahead of the Yankees, AC Milan, or the Boston Celtics. That said, I grew up a Bruins fan and the Habs pimp slapped my team on a regular basis. I have seen them play in Boston Garden, MSG, and the BEST hockey venue ever, Chicago Stadium.
ChipS, is a the most intelligent commenter I have run into on any blog. He is a man of high intellect and values. I have learned much from him. He is more intelligent, eloquent and temperate than myself. I’m just a blue collar guy. For anyone to denigrate ChipS says everything about that person, and nothing about ChipS. He is a man of substance and no one to trifle w/, or slander.
Nick
Lots of Hutterites and other religious worlds in Alberta. I worked on the pipelines two summers in Northern Alberta. We put a line through a Hutterite colony and I had some interesting talks with the mechanic. He sat around most of the time as there were few machines to deal with, mostly gears and cogs that ran on wind and water. There was something wonderful about watching several riders on horses disappear into the rising sun at four in the morning, broad hat silhouettes. The local rednecks don’t like them cuz they don’t make sense. They just keep on splitting like cells and taking over supposedly worthless land and making money. The closest thing to Texas in Canada is Alberta. Calgary is the home of the biggest rodeo in the world. For two weeks, everybody is a cowboy. People sometimes get killed in the chuck wagon races. Alberta is rich in cattle, wheat, oil, and business. When Quebec threatened to split, most of the major corporations in Montreal moved their headquarters to Vancouver and Calgary, as well as Toronto. Calgary is designed as a pedestrian mini Manhattan.
You’ll find conservatives and liberals in Alberta. Right next door in Saskatchewan is the birth of socialized medicine in Canada. Tommy Douglas, the most famous Canadian. My Dad was a 35yr Navy man and we were stationed outside of Edmonton during my junior high school years. He was part of the recruiting station. Most sailors came from the prairies, he did. I grew up hearing about the us and them and doing drills in school, hiding under desks. North of Edmonton were Army bases, Canadian Air Force bases, and a US bomber base, nukes in our back yard.
Ever since I remember those in the conservative English speaking part of Canada have been complaining about Quebec, primarily because everyone needs someone to complain about. Canadians are not much different than Americans in that respect. Quebec, as you are probably aware, became part of the British colonies and then part of Canada, always dominated by two forces. Firstly the people who predate most other Europeans in North America, were always on the losing end of the stick between the French and English pissing contests. Secondly, when Canada became a Dominion over a dozen or so years around 1867, the French Canadian or ‘Habitants’ were kept in place by the dominant English leaders and the Catholic Church. The French intellectuals in Montreal and Quebec City were on a par with the English. The average Quebecer was rural, religious, and kept that way, easier to rule. The federal government was then like the US is now, Liberal or Conservative. It has since evolved into several parties to better represent the more than two opinions.
Quebecers were, for the most part seen as second class citizens by that type that needs to look down its nose at someone else. Most countries have and continue to experience this. Against this Quebecers resisted the Church, corrupt Mayors, corrupt Premiers (leader of the ruling provincial party), and turned to the past. ‘Je me souviens’ or I remember is on the Quebec license plate, kind of a soft ‘Live free or die’. So at various times Quebecers did not always go the same way as the rest of Canada. When conscription came in at the end of WW1, while English Canadians, who had already joined up, had no problem with it, Quebecers resisted, one more ingredient in the controversy. However, when they did join up the French Canadians, especially the Royal Vingt-Deuxieme Regiment-Royal 22nd or as they are known the Van Doos were some of the most feared by the Germans. They as a rule took no prisoners and when captured were more often than not killed in return. There is a story recorded where a Van Doo patrol found several of their men crucified against a barn with their own bayonets. There are lots of stories. If you really want to understand Canada read the book Vimy by Pierre Burton.
Little by little, as time went on and people communicated with each other, and examples of subservient peoples throwing off yokes became known, lots of Quebecers desired independence or, as was agreed eventually, a little bit of special treatment to make up for having been shafted for the last couple hundred years. Trudeau, a French Canadian intellectual and brilliant person, who was Prime Minister several times, redesigned the relationship: a bilingual country, certain unique rights, etc. The rest of Canada either embraced being bilingual or resisted it.
You realize this cannot be a short story. There has never been a majority that wished to break from Confederation. The worst times are over when under Rene Leveque that might have happened. Two of Canada’s greatest leaders have been from Quebec, Pierre Elliot Trudeau, an aristocrat, lawyer, who wrote law and defied the US by rowing a boat to Cuba when he was younger, and Jacques Chretien, one of eleven children of religious baby making French Canadian Catholics who talked out of the side of his mouth. I always fantasized him asking the Queen, “How’s the soup, your majesty?” out of the side of his mouth.
In my opinion Canada is richer for having Quebec, home of the Montreal Canadians, the all time greatest sports team in all the world. I can die happy. I watched the Canadians beat the Maple Leafs in the Montreal Forum, from three rows behind the Montreal bench. But, the best hockey arena is the ‘Sharktank’ in San Jose.
Canada is a country that is content with not having the responsibly of being number one but able to meet its obligations second to none when it sees fit.
Canadians also enjoy the advantage of being a little bit American even if they don’t want to admit it. This is an advantage few nations enjoy. There is an unwritten message here.
Nick said;
“You guys have Bron, and you beat him like a rented mule. It’s pathological.”
We counter Bron’s arguments. A smart man like Bron wouldn’t continue to be a regular at FFS if we beat him like a rented mule. Although he and I rarely agree on issues, he doesn’t stoop to doing what a couple of regulars here do. Bron has never personally attacked or ridiculed me. That’s why I and the rest of the FFS crew value having him as one of our regulars.
“is sac” = autocorrect for “issac”
Lloyd, thanks.
I basically agree w/ is sac that a topic like this is mostly an occasion for humor.
That doesn’t preclude addressing some general points about the interpretation of statistical analysis, which is also great fun.
I don’t see any use of statewide averages in Gerald Dolan’s comment.
Elaine, we so often see the comments like ” I paid into the SS System, I deserve my SS!” Yet, when a liberal of any color, has also worked for 30-40 years and collects SSDI they are immediatly labeled by ignoramuses as moochers and cheaters. We’ve seen these accusations here on RIL usually by the same idiots, but sometimes by conservatives who I considered a bit smarter than the average troglodyte, but they are followers, and spout the same drek.
Chip S.,
Check out what Gerald Dolan wrote. I posted excerpts from and links to two articles in response to what he said.
It shouldn’t be red states against blue states.
I agree.
So, shall we agree not to make arguments like this:
But research then and now has pointed out that the states that got the most per capita in federal dollars were more likely to vote for Republicans.
My apologies to Chip for taking out of context his ‘Where’s my reparations check?’ quote. I assumed he was being accusatory. Nick, you said ‘Reparation checks along w/ all the new SS Disability checks must be direct deposit.’ so I must have missed your sense of humor? OK….
Funny stuff. I point out what is mentioned in a study and the response is to call me dense ignorant, and offering nothing of substance. Not that I mind, but at no time have the ‘conservatives’ contradicted the study’s findings with anything but vitriol. As the study noted, ‘Previous research on the broader bases of political ideology is often interpreted as suggesting that locations on the right of the political spectrum are a deviation from the norm (or even a pathology) in need of explanation’ then it’s quite understandable how they respond. That’s how the conservative mind works and always has,,,,, always will. It’s the fault of that liberal blowhard Bill Moyers!!!
I hadn’t seen your excellent comment earlier, DBQ. Could have referenced it and saved some time.
I’m glad to see that there is some agreement here that elderly people who worked hard all their lives deserve their SS benefits. They aren’t moochers. I also think they deserve their Medicare benefits. I pay my taxes and support many of the social programs–like unemployment insurance–that are in place to help the less fortunate and those that have fallen on hard times. It is easy these days to slip from the middle class because one has lost his/her job and not be able to pay all the bills. I see so many young couples struggling these days to make ends meet.
It shouldn’t be red states against blue states. Unfortunately, that is what we are experiencing in this country today. Liberals are not lazy folks who suck off the system–just as conservatives aren’t. Sure, there are people “of both colors” who abuse the system–but I think that is a small minority of the population.
Elaine – you really do not know how unemployment works do you? You need to call their offices or check their internet site and FAQ.