It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The Poor Die Younger

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 20 2013 @ 08:59 PM
A new publication from the Max Planck Institute:

The poor die younger 2008, 65-year-olds with the highest incomes could expect to live another 20 years, while 65-year-olds with the smallest pensions could expect to enjoy less than 15 years of additional life.

Does this mean the divide between the poor and the rich is increasing?

I'm shocked.

posted on Oct, 20 2013 @ 09:06 PM
reply to post by soficrow

It's most likely because of the bad GMO and corn Syrup type foods they are financially forced to buy

posted on Oct, 20 2013 @ 09:09 PM
I know I couldn't be more shocked myself, if I had awoken this morning with my head sewn to the carpet. Really.

Without money for the best healthcare, nutrition, needed medications, etc. then we can safely assume the poor will AND DO die sooner. At least somebody feels the need to put it in print on occasion. It should be unacceptable, but it seems to be perfectly acceptable and expected.

When we tell our children that we are all equal.... on some level we are all lying.

posted on Oct, 20 2013 @ 09:11 PM
reply to post by soficrow

Not forgetting Homogenized fats instead of natural fats being put in to foods and supermarket milk, that stuff builds up in sewers and blocks them like it does arteries.

Natural fat does the same, except it is naturally there to plug holes in the blood stream and be washed away when no longer needed, which doesn't happen with Homogenized fats. This is a major cause of heart conditions and unexplained deaths by "Natural causes" to avoid the aforementioned truth of this type of man made fat.

posted on Oct, 20 2013 @ 09:16 PM
I am poor... and I am quite OK with this... maybe I can get off of this ride a little sooner

The longer I live, the more jaded and cynical I get...

posted on Oct, 20 2013 @ 09:25 PM
reply to post by madmac5150

Thanks for posting. But. While there be conspiracies and injustices and boogey men, knowledge need not trigger an emotional response. It is what it is. We don't have to fix it all, just our little piece. Like the man said, "I'm not here to save the world. Just 3 people."

(maybe it was 2 people.)

posted on Oct, 20 2013 @ 09:39 PM

Without money for the best healthcare, nutrition, needed medications, etc. then we can safely assume the poor will AND DO die sooner

Maybe the pro-life people will decide to transfer some wealth to the poor so they can save some of those lives?

posted on Oct, 20 2013 @ 09:45 PM

Because certain groups were excluded—i.e., foreigners, civil servants, the self-employed, and men who earned less than 30 pension points over their working lives—the data used in the analysis were incomplete. The demographers emphasized, however, that because these groups are relatively small, their exclusion should not affect the validity of the results.

This study is BS. 'The groups were relatively small'... You also excluded half the freaking population, I wonder if the numbers would change if we included women... They also seemed to ignore personal wealth. You can be drawing a very poor pension and still have millions.

Let's also mention this study was about those 65 or older...

I don't doubt wealthy people live longer. Less fortunate folks are much more likely to smoke, abuse alcohol, abuse drugs, eat poorly, have a much higher level of stress, not be able to afford the best medical care, and the list goes on.

posted on Oct, 20 2013 @ 09:54 PM
reply to post by Domo1

If this study was done just in the USA - I bet the "poor" would live longer if it wasn't for the gov't programs feeding them high fat - junk food, and keeping them from working and creating their own gardens, and exercising - instead of having them sitting around doing illicit drugs - because that's the only "black market" they can participate in.....

Only in the USA can you wiegh 300 pounds - and be "poor" - sit around in your air=conditioned paid for apt., watching your cable on your big screen t.v. - calling all of your drug contacts up on your paid for obamaphone.........

Let's look at "poor" people in Africa.....

Or the mentally ill out homeless on the streets of the USA .....

Or the military veterans in the USA..... that don't have their promised healthcare for enlisting......

posted on Oct, 20 2013 @ 09:54 PM
Is it inconceivable that these folks die earlier because they don't take care of themselves any better than they take care of their finances? Does it HAVE to be that they are, due to no fault whatsoever of their own, among the tragic "have not" group and that alone keeps them from the things that can make them live longer? Not everyone works as hard as everyone else in life. The more effort you put in, the better you're likely to do in all ways. It's not "luck".

posted on Oct, 20 2013 @ 10:12 PM
reply to post by soficrow

My ex mother in law has been living off the government and others (church members) her whole life and she is in her 80's. Genetics plays a big part, her mother made it to 99 and her siblings have made it into their 90's (there's 11 of them).

posted on Oct, 20 2013 @ 10:14 PM
reply to post by Happy1

What does any of that have to do with this thread? Not being snarky, but please explain yourself.
edit on 20-10-2013 by Domo1 because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 20 2013 @ 10:32 PM
reply to post by soficrow

Hi Sofi,

Since this is an international study,
Seems there must be a correlation, imo GMO would be a good guess
as to why the decline....GMO full of toxins, pesticides and generally
a bunch of processed carp. Sad, very sad!

While there could be other factors, something had definitely changed
since 1990's where GMO was unleashed into food stuffs.

posted on Oct, 20 2013 @ 10:36 PM
reply to post by soficrow

I've done my own study. I live in the middle of retired, elderly, white, middle class folk. They own their own home and live comfortably off the interest income from their principle savings. Most of that they acquired from lifetime career employment at one or two companies (here in Silicone Valley) in the lucrative computer industry.

All of them enjoy Pensions, stock dividends, SSI, low tax brackets and cheap, full coverage insurance. Most of them are on Medicaid or Medicare. They all have their medical issues for which they pay minimum co payments or low deductibles. Most of their meds are covered or really, really inexpensive.

If some glitch happens their only requirement is to pull the chain on life alert around their neck or manage to type 911 on a phone.

In a few minutes ambulances and fire engines, turning lights and wailing sirens come to the door and professionally trained EMTs stabilize and transport them to the best hospitals in the world.

Emergency rooms at these fine establishments don't take walk-ins that are not insured. All patients get beds and 24 hour care by the finest doctors. The meals are delivered daily from steak (they have no teeth) to turkey with dressing, mashed potatoes and hot gravy. The ice cream is frozen I am told.

After arresting whatever life threatening emergency they have (and there are many), stabilized and nursed them back to health, they release them to their home where they convalesce until the next time.

All these folks get free check ups and exams, semi annually for their teeth, eyes, general checkup and whatever else they have trouble with like heart, kidneys, etc.

I know all this because I have driven them to and from these places, waited on them, met them in their rooms to push them in their wheel chairs to the parking lot and drive them home.

If any one wants to know where all the available treatment and resources are going, look at this population of elderly, propped up by medicine folks that keep getting older.

Sure, some of these people were my friends and they have since passed on. Looking back, I don't know if they got their money's worth. Many of them suffered a lot at the end but were held back from passing on by modern medicine. I don't think they enjoyed that period of their life very much. They didn't really have much choice. The system is designed around them.

Anty up and you can live forever.

posted on Oct, 20 2013 @ 11:43 PM
reply to post by soficrow

I'm shocked.

You're naive.

What else did you expect? The rich are those who've reached or come close to the top of the human status pyramid. Among all social animals, not just humans, dominant individuals live longer and receive a disproportionate share of mating opportunities. It's nature's way, and it's good for the species.

Before you accuse me of being a Social Darwinist, let me add that I certainly don't approve of letting nature have its unrestricted way with humanity. Of course we should try to improve everyone's health and — I suppose — longevity, and even, where we can, try to equalise discrepancies of this kind.

But in fact, we have already done so very successfully. Look at your statistics again. Even if we overlook all the flaws that Domo1 identified in the study, the results are not nearly so grim as you suggest, and not at all shocking. So the poorest percentile in society live into their late seventies, and the richest make it to age 85. At worst, a ten-year difference. Besides, both groups are already living much longer than they did a generation ago, when hardly any man, and very few women, could expect to reach the age of 70. The lifespan gap between rich and poor also narrowed considerably during the twentieth century, in rich countries at least, although it is now widening again.

Think, man (or woman): it is technology — expensive technology — that helps people attain these unnatural and frankly unnecessary and slightly obscene lifespans. Obviously the rich are going to be able to afford more of it; ergo, they will live longer.

As far as this 55-year-old lover of life is concerned, they're welcome to it. Me, I hope I die with my faculties still working.

edit on 20/10/13 by Astyanax because: I'm getting old.

posted on Oct, 21 2013 @ 02:24 AM
As well, stress can totally subtract some years. The stress of being unable to have a comfortable quality of life. We are in a very bad time as far as financial security goes, and not being able to afford decent health care is another, well, nail in the coffin.

posted on Oct, 21 2013 @ 10:58 AM
reply to post by Happy1

This study was done in Germany. Which you would know if you had bothered to read the article.

To find out what happening in the USA, go here: American Women Are Dying Younger Than Their Moms

posted on Oct, 21 2013 @ 11:06 AM
reply to post by burntheships

Hi burn,

The study was done in Germany, but have you seen this one?
American Women Are Dying Younger Than Their Moms

...We've treated our world like a garbage dump, and created all manner of things that muck with our biology - we know that poor(er) people are more likely to be exposed to contaminants from all sources. But - how do we explain the effects on women in that US "corridor" described in the above study? The effects there cross all the boundaries - income, education, etc.

The poor may be the canaries in this coal mine we call Earth, but no one is safe, really.

posted on Oct, 21 2013 @ 11:10 AM
The poor die younger.

They probably want to.

More so with each coming generation, I bet.

posted on Oct, 21 2013 @ 11:16 AM

reply to post by soficrow

RE: "I'm shocked."

You're naive.

It was a joke.

...Among all social animals, not just humans, dominant individuals live longer and receive a disproportionate share of mating opportunities. It's nature's way, and it's good for the species.

The poor breed like rabbits; the rich rely on technology, fertility clinics and surrogate mothers. So much for "natural selection."

...the results are not nearly so grim as you suggest

The title and text were quoted verbatim. I flipped a oneliner - and suggested nothing.

...I hope I die with my faculties still working.

Me too. I intend to euthanize myself if/when I really start losing it. Walking out onto the ice or hitting the bush would be best but I'll probably use pills. At home. No hospices or hospitals for this girl.

edit on 21/10/13 by soficrow because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in