The New York Times ran a piece yesterday on a report that wealthy people outlive poor ones.
In 1980-82, Dr. Singh said, people in the most affluent group could expect to live 2.8 years longer than people in the most deprived group (75.8 versus 73 years). By 1998-2000, the difference in life expectancy had increased to 4.5 years (79.2 versus 74.7 years), and it continues to grow, he said.
After 20 years, the lowest socioeconomic group lagged further behind the most affluent, Dr. Singh said, noting that “life expectancy was higher for the most affluent in 1980 than for the most deprived group in 2000.”
“If you look at the extremes in 2000,” Dr. Singh said, “men in the most deprived counties had 10 years’ shorter life expectancy than women in the most affluent counties (71.5 years versus 81.3 years).” The difference between poor black men and affluent white women was more than 14 years (66.9 years vs. 81.1 years).
This news isn't particularly shocking; just one more statistic to prove the gap between the haves and have-nots in our country. This does prove one thing: Our government should be more concerned with how to provide quality, affordable healthcare to the economically disadvantaged.
First there was eco-tourism. Now, there’s “slum tourism,” a growing industry where tourists are taken way off the beaten path, into some of the most impoverished neighborhoods and districts in the world.
A New York Times article today talks about the increasing number of tours to slums, and offers both the criticisms and defense of such excursions: “Critics charge that ogling the poorest of the poor isn’t tourism at all. It’s voyeurism. The tours are exploitative, these critics say, and have no place on an ethical traveler’s itinerary…” On the other hand, “[i]gnoring poverty won’t make it go away.”
I can understand the appeal of so-called slum tourism (I really don’t like this phrase, but I’m not sure what else to call it—any ideas?) Tourism is often extremely exploitative, and dependent on an underclass native population to survive. Jamaica Kincaid’s wonderful book, A Small Place, expounds on the actual feelings of resentment, even hatred, that locals often feel to tourists, who come to “get away from it all” while blinding themselves to the life that the local population leads. Furthermore, I know I have often visited places and come away feeling like I didn’t get past a pretty basic, surface experience. In short, is it even fair to visit, say, Mumbai or Rio de Janiero, and not be faced with the crushing poverty the overwhelming majority of the cities’ residents endure on a daily basis?
Please remember that Campus Progress' terms of use do not allow promoting or endorsing any particular political party or candidate for office. Posts or comments that do this will be deleted.
Posts
