It seems logical that the more money you have, the longer you would be expected to live. This would be because you can afford better healthcare, maintain a healthier lifestyle, have access to better nutrition, and probably have less stress when it comes to day-to-day life because you are financially stable. The New York Times recently released an article that affirmed this thought, but also gave an eye-opening spin on the life expectancy of the poor based on where they live, showing that cities like LA and New York the life expectancy of those under the poverty line is higher then other cities in the US.
Health plays a significant role in the life span of a human, which seems obvious but when you look at the numbers, it can be shocking. The Journal of the American Medical Association states that the richest men live 15 years longer then the poorest 1 percent. So why do the poor living in cities like Las Vegas, Indianapolis, Dayton, and Tulsa to name a few, have lower life expectancies? David M. Cutler who is a economist at Harvard explains that a lot of cities with the lowest life expectancy for the poor fall into the “drug overdose belt”. Other explanations are just the availability to clinics and health education. Increasing health resources would slowly help to increase life expectancy in cities with the lowest life spans.
Take a look at the map from the NYT and see where your area compares. Looking at where you live, do you think your area provides enough health resources for those who can’t afford it?
All information for this post is from an article by The New York Times.