Deaton's results show that including percent Black "knocks out" income
inequality as (partly) explaining mortality in US metropolitan areas. I
wonder if the the reverse is not also be true -- are they two not well
corellated? So how can his results be taken as refuting the
Wilkinson-type argument that income inequality (in addition to the level
of income) significantly affects health? As Martin Brown wrote, percent
Black measures something, but what is it?
I like the (Reich-type?) political 'explanation' of these issues --
variables like income inequality roughly represent relative social power.
Mortality rates in the US are worse than in other countries because the
capitalist minority in the US has relatively more power to impose their
interests on the majority. There is less social solidarity. 'Free' markets
are unhealthy.
However, I agree this 'explanation' needs to be made more compelling.
Martin also noted a practical problem in relating various Reich-type
factors (like the location of 'dirty' industries) to health is that a lot
of the data is not available on the basis of the SMSA (metropolitan)
scale. As it happens I am beavering away at drawing togeather SMSA data in
Canada and the US, including doing some aggregating of data to build up
SMSA-level data on local government finances. It's a nightmare, so if
anyone knows of similar efforts please contact me directly.
Bill Burgess
------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Burgess ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Department of Geography, Tel: (604) 822-2663
University of British Columbia, B.C. Fax: (604) 822-6150
