Why are Britain and Sweden and states such as Minnesota considered "Welfare
States" when policies tend to level out income and education and status in
a way that benefits all citizens, not just those on welfare.

Why can't we call Denmark and other nations "Child Welfare Nations" since
they spend 2% of GDP on age 0 - 6 and this impacts nearly all future
education and health statistics in the nation, particularly compared to
nations such as the US who spend 0.5% or less.

Americans are also very different in many ways, as pointed out in Eight
Americas and in great variations in state education and health and economic
policies.

An area of major weakness is holding certain states accountable for their
lack of investment in lower and middle income peoples.

How long other states will continue to prop up these dependent states, the
wealthiest in the world, the states where the rich distance themselves from
the poor at the highest levels, will be perhaps the major determinant for
US recovery and a future.

Robert C. Bowman, M.D.
[log in to unmask]

-------------------
Problems/Questions? Send it to Listserv owner: [log in to unmask]


To unsubscribe, send the following message in the text section -- NOT the subject header --  to [log in to unmask]
SIGNOFF SDOH

DO NOT SEND IT BY HITTING THE REPLY BUTTON. THIS SENDS THE MESSAGE TO THE ENTIRE LISTSERV AND STILL DOES NOT REMOVE YOU.

To subscribe to the SDOH list, send the following message to [log in to unmask] in the text section, NOT in the subject header.
SUBSCRIBE SDOH yourfirstname yourlastname

To post a message to all 1000+ subscribers, send it to [log in to unmask]
Include in the Subject, its content, and location and date, if relevant.

For a list of SDOH members, send a request to [log in to unmask]

To receive messages only once a day, send the following message to [log in to unmask]
SET SDOH DIGEST

To view the SDOH archives, go to: https://listserv.yorku.ca/archives/sdoh.html