Economic crises are bad for your health, right? Wrong. They may be very bad, or they may even improve your health. It all depends on government policies, how your health system was organised before the recession hit and what kind of support is offered when you become unemployed.
That in a nutshell is what David Stuckler and Sanjay Basu argue in their fascinating and highly readable book looking at the human costs of financial crisis across Europe and North America. As public health specialists they are deeply concerned with what happens to the body – and the mind – under the impact of austerity policies. They are arguing that the body is economic, since the politics of austerity cause unnecessary death and suffering; ‘Economic forces determine who is more likely to binge on alcohol, catch tuberculosis in a homeless shelter, or spiral into depression.’
The authors have ploughed through mountains of data to ask why some economic crises across the world since the 1930s have made people sicker and others have actually improved people’s heath. In Iceland after the 2008 crash, for example, the health of the population improved due to better diet (McDonald’s pulled out), less smoking and drinking, and sustained universal healthcare. But in Greece, a country that used to have one of the lowest suicide rates in Europe, has experienced a 60 per cent increase since 2008. There has also been a very sharp rise in HIV infections due to cuts in HIV-prevention budgets and an increase in intravenous drug use – a key symptom of increased homelessness and youth unemployment.
The authors point to many more cases and draw two key conclusions. The first is that how you organise your health service matters. If it depends on ability to pay, then a health crisis rapidly develops as people lose their jobs in a recession. If it does not, and the government maintains its support, then health is largely protected. The second is that if governments sustain universal access to healthcare and active support for those losing their jobs, economic crises need not be bad for their bodies economic. But if they go for austerity, cutting back on social protection, abandoning the sick and the unemployed, then the health of the population deteriorates fast.
Recessions might hurt, but austerity kills. It is down to a political choice whether or not economic crises result in poorer public health.
#229 No Return to ‘Normal’ ● Sir David King blasts the government ● State power, policing and civil rights under Covid-19 ● Hope and determination in grassroots resistance ● Black liberation and Palestine ● The future of ‘live’ ● Pubs, patriotism and precarity ● Latest book reviews ● And much more!
And you choose how much to pay for your subscription...
Anna Clayton reviews Natalie Olah's book, which explores how upper middle-class pop culture has affected British politics
Suchandrika Chakrabarti reviews Wendy Liu's proposals to reclaim technology's potential for the public good
Connor Beaton reviews Daniel Finn's account of the politics and personalities which drove the IRA
As apocalypse rhetoric spreads during Covid-19, James Hendrix Elsey explores what 'the end of the world' really means under racialised capitalism – and what comes next
The BBC hit drama shows the complexities of class mobility, but can’t avoid class and gender stereotypes, says Frances Hatherley
Mask Off offers a toolbox of explanations and arguments to question and challenge toxic masculinity, writes Huw Lemmey