We vs. Me

New evidence that a "let's all take care of each other" approach leads to healthier, happier people than an individualistic, competitive, "figure out how to get by on your own without any help" approach.

Is Liberalism Good for Your Health?

. . . "the presence of a more liberal government is related to a higher rate of reported health, a lower rate of reported smoking, lower BMI, and fewer numbers of days with poor health." . . .

The hypothesis that Herian's paper set out to test is quite simple: Democratic or liberal states do more to make their populations healthier—for example, through spending more on health care programs and general social safety net programs. And those policies work, or at least mostly work; hence, their populations are indeed healthier. . . .

Another factor, referred to in the study as "social capital," also predicted better state-level health outcomes. This basically means having a strong sense of community where you live and being able to trust your neighbor . . .

"in places of higher levels of trust, there might be more voluntary organizations, religious organizations, that are designed to improve the health and well being of people." . . . The study found that in states with high levels of liberalism, social capital didn't have all that much of an impact on health. However, in conservative states, social capital (or the lack thereof) made a big difference.

Utah and Wyoming are two conservative states that do quite well on health measures, and they have very high levels of social capital or trust. By contrast, states like Mississippi and Kentucky have low social trust and high conservatism, and poor health outcomes. . . .