Jeremiah A. Barondess
In 1839, a study of some 1,600 deaths in a London suburb – the first of its kind – revealed that those at the top of society lived, on average, 2.5 times longer than mechanics and laborers and their families. Since then, little has changed. Despite dramatic improvements in social and health conditions which have boosted the life expectancy among all socioeconomic groups, the rich continue to outlive the poor. One recent study found that those with the lowest education and income were 2-3 times more likely to die during the next ten years than those at the top. Diseases when suffered by the poor appear to be more deadly than when they afflict better off people. The less affluent, indeed, are more likely to die from cardiovascular disease, stroke, several forms of cancer, AIDS, diabetes, chronic lung disease, pneumonia, influenza, cirrhosis, accidents, homicide, and suicide than people who are rich. What is perhaps the most striking is that this phenomenon is not just a question of rich vs. poor. Differences in life expectancy operate at every socioeconomic level, so that, for example, people nearly at the top of the economic scale – and thus quite well off – do not live as long as those just above them. Why this pattern exists remains in large part a mystery. To be sure, the poor are less well educated and so are less knowledgeable about how to take care of themselves; they also live in generally worse conditions. They are more susceptible to the effects of unhealthy diets, overcrowding, unsafe working conditions, and exposure to environmental hazards. They are also more vulnerable to interpersonal aggression and risky behavior – a point not lost on marketers and suppliers of cigarettes, alcohol, drugs, guns, and junk food. But the impact of those things we usually associate with poverty – bad diet, crowding, environmental toxins, health-adverse habits, etc. – account for only about 25% of the difference in life expectancy between those at the top and those at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder. The remaining 75% of the variation appears to be due not to absolute levels of deprivation, but to less tangible causes that reflect
China’s success in the next five years will depend largely on how well the government manages the tensions underlying its complex agenda. In particular, China’s leaders will need to balance a muscular Communist Party, setting standards and protecting the public interest, with an empowered market, driving the economy into the future.
The preference of some countries to isolate themselves within their borders is anachronistic and self-defeating, but it would be a serious mistake for others, fearing contagion, to respond by imposing strict isolation. Even in states that have succumbed to reductionist discourses, much of the population has not.
When the Bretton Woods Agreement was hashed out in 1944, it was agreed that countries with current-account deficits should be able to limit temporarily purchases of goods from countries running surpluses. In the ensuing 73 years, the so-called "scarce-currency clause" has been largely forgotten; but it may be time to bring it back.
Republican leaders have a choice: they can either continue to collaborate with President Donald Trump, thereby courting disaster, or they can renounce him, finally putting their country’s democracy ahead of loyalty to their party tribe. They are hardly the first politicians to face such a decision.
As the global economic recovery strengthens, and central banks move to raise interest rates, they need to improve their communication with the general public. To do that, they should follow the trail blazed by Donald Trump.
With talks on the UK's withdrawal from the EU stalled, negotiators should shift to the temporary “transition” Prime Minister Theresa May officially requested last month. Above all, the negotiators should focus immediately on the British budget contributions that will be required to make an orderly transition possible.
In recent decades, as President Vladimir Putin has entrenched his authority, Russia has seemed to be moving backward socially and economically. But while the Kremlin knows that it must reverse this trajectory, genuine reform would be incompatible with the kleptocratic character of Putin’s regime.
As a part of their efforts to roll back the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act, congressional Republicans have approved a measure that would have courts, rather than regulators, oversee megabank bankruptcies. It is now up to the Trump administration to decide if it wants to set the stage for a repeat of the Lehman Brothers collapse in 2008.