The Wall Street Journal is reporting that urbanites live better and longer than do their country cousins. Data indicates that city dwellers live, on average, just over a year longer. And country bumpkins suffer more from diabetes and obesity and, of course, morbid stupidity. Yup, no question about it, ‘data backed‘, it is safer to live in the city.
Mind you, them coal-rollin’ rural Bubbas who take Oxycontin for recreational reasons, shoot guns, raise Pitt bulls and reject basic health measures might just skew the data a smidge, don’cha think?
The reality is that a dumb Bubba will have a much longer lifespan outside of the city because, when he ODs, shoots guns, his dog eats his baby and he acts like a fool, there is more room and fewer ugly opportunists or police to victimize him. Or get reported in the data.
In other words, if all the Bubbas moved to the big city, they would simply just not last as long as they do in Haystack, Kansas. Not even close. And, if they did go to the city (as they did on January 6th), then what, Mr. W.S. Journal? Would you revise that report to indicate ‘Somehow a dramatic shift has recently taken place which has reduced the lifespan of the average urbanite and markedly increased the longevity of the stay-at-home hick?”
Basically, the stupid just die younger. And so do the poor and the addicted. That is what the data really says. I should NOT have to state that to the Wall Street Journal.
And so it all goes all the time with the media. Some doofus extrapolates from some data pile and a headline is born. It may be true. It may be a lie. But the selected and edited and misunderstood data alone proves nothing. A healthy 3-digit IQ person will live longer than the average idiot regardless of where they live and, if I had to guess, that poor, idiot Bubba just might last a bit longer in the country.
“Why?” Well the same WSJ doofus reported that country mice did report considerably less stress in their life. I half expect the WSJ to do a follow-up article reporting that ‘new studies reveal urban-based stress leads to longer life!’
“Dave, what’s your point?” Well, besides the obvious, that the media reports a lot of ‘fake news’ and that, it seems, any old data dump can be mined for a headline (even by the WSJ!), it seems that an urban writer NOT living a green and OTG lifestyle, or even getting out of their home office, simply cannot write about it based on so-called research.
Living OTG has a lot of hard-to-describe benefits. Tons. But, I admit that much of the positive is not data driven or proven. Instead, it is lived, it is experienced, it is ‘felt’ rather than measured. It is also cheaper….jus’ sayin’.
In the very simplest of illustrations, imagine the amount of tedious work, commuting and travel one must go through just to take a much needed vacation seeing whales while riding on a tourist boat? Compare that to me…who sees them every week while standing on my deck?
And I can do that kind of anecdotal comparative analysis from, for example, eating fresh veggies from your own garden rather than the plastic-wrapped, store-bought or processed-food restaurants, from doing some healthy, satisfying, real work vs shuffling papers in a government office, from managing my own day compared to punching a clock…..and, if you wanna get down and dirty….imagine the air, the water, the taxes, the police-in-your-face, the in-the-car commuting time. Compare living on wild acreage vs being cooped up in a strata-council condo on a busy street complete with sirens wailing all the live-long day.
The WSJ does not know diddly-squat about what they are talking about.
Now, if they had revised the headline to: poor, stupid, ignorant, unhealthy people live shorter lives than their polar opposite….well, it would not be much of a headline now, would it?
I mention all this because – once again – I am reminded of the shallow and facile level of journalism (propaganda) we are all subject to….day in and day out. I do not doubt that Kabul happened as they said, that Ida flooded as they said, that another camo nut-bar in Florida killed four…those are facts. Easy to report. And quick, too. Too quick.
The problem is the media needs to fill the air 24/7/365 and so they need ‘filler’. Then the spokes-model doofuses give their opinions, they psuedo-analyze, they are subjective. And that nonsense is cheaper to produce, all you need is an attractive, well-dressed, well-spoken entertainer. No one has to go anywhere or do anything. Or KNOW anything. And so we get 20-somethings living in Toronto or New York trying to earn their media chops by spewing nonsense. Some even aspire to being a spokes-model on Fox (what kind of nutty aspiration is that?) Which, for the most part is all that FOX News ever does – present good lookin’ fools with ignorant opinions…….but so many other outlets follow the same pattern.
News is 85% garbage, 10% facts and 5% feel-good vignettes about cute little animals told to you at the end of the newscast by handsome and pretty people. Yech!
And then there is the weather, sports and entertainment…..a whole other level of stupid.
Other than that, I am fine, thank you. Just had to get that WSJ ‘story’ rebutted and off my chest. Don’t worry, I’ll be fine.