Skip to main content

Austerity kills people

The stark reality of a decade of austerity is laid bare, and the truth told.  Austerity kills people.  For the first time since the beginning of the 20th century, the improvements in life expectancy have ground to a halt.

This is the conclusion of the latest Health Review of England, published by the Institute of Health Equality.

Let's not beat about the bush.  This is politics.  It is the result of a decade of the most brutal right-wing Tory rule in the United Kingdom - and it is set to continue.   The needs of Brexit means that for all the promises made by Boris Johnson in the general election, austerity is set to continue.

The poorest are being made to pay, not just for the cost of the financial crisis, but also now for Brexit.

"From the beginning of the 20th century, England experienced continuous improvements in life expectancy but from 2011 these improvements slowed dramatically, almost grinding to a halt."
 Of course, it is difficult to demonstrate the direct causal link between austerity and the changes in population health.  But it is difficult to conclude other than that it has been the major factor.  Austerity has increased poverty for many and has put our health and social care system into crises.  This cannot be without impact.  Or, as the report states:

"austerity has adversely affected the social determinants that impact on health in the short, medium and long term."

The saddest aspect of all is that this will be carried through with great cost to the lives of our children.   First the coalition government and then under the Tories alone, this damage has been done, and it need not have been if the warnings of the Marmot report had been acted on.

Savage cuts - 70% since 2009/10 -  to central funding of local authorities have affected their ability to provide services vital for the nation's health.  This has had the greatest impact on the poorest areas.

Austerity kills people. It is a waste of lives and it is unsound economics.  An unhealthy population is an unproductive one and increases the burdens on overstretched health and social services.








Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The lion and the wildebeest

Birds flock, fish school, bees swarm, but social being is more than simply sticking together.  Social groups enable specialisation and a sharing of abilities, and enhances ability, learning and creating new tricks. The more a group works together, the more effective they become as a team.  Chimpanzees learn from each other how to use stones to crack nuts, or sticks to get termites.  All around us we see cooperation and learning in nature.  Nature is inherently creative.  Pulling together becomes a rallying cry during a crisis.  We have heard it throughout the coronavirus pandemic.  "We are all in this together", a mantra that encourages people to adopt a common strategy. In an era of 'self-interest' and 'survival of the fittest,'  and 'selfish gene', we lose sight of the obvious conclusion from the evidence all around us.   Sticking together is more often the better approach.  This is valid for the lion as it is also for the wildebeest.   We don't

Noise pollution puts nature at risk

 "I just want a bit of peace and quiet!" Let's get away from all the hustle and bustle; the sound of endless traffic on the roads, of the trains on the railway, and the planes in the sky; the incessant drone; the noise. We live in a world of man-made noise; screeching, bellowing, on-and-on in an unmelodious cacophony.  This constant background noise has now become a significant health hazard.   With average background levels of 60 decibels, those who live in cities are often exposed to noise over 85 decibels, enough to cause significant hearing loss over time.  It causes stress, high blood pressure, headache and loss of sleep and poor health and well-being.   In nature, noise has content and significance.  From the roar of the lion, the laughing of a hyena,  communication is essential for life; as the warning of danger, for bonding as a group or a pair, finding a mate, or for establishing a position in a hierarchy - chattering works.  Staying in touch is vital to working

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba