Abortion is costing America !!

[NYcarbineer]

with the death of 50 million potential tax payers the government has lost hundreds of billions in tax revenues !! Physicians For Life - Abstinence, Abortion, Birth Control - Abortion Effect: U.S. Seeing Slowest Population Growth Since 1930

A child born into the average American family in say, 2000, lowers that family's tax liability for probably $2000 a year, and as a public school student, costs the taxpayer probably somewhere around the same per year. Take into account various other tax revenue losses associated with a child, let's just say that a child decreases tax revenues about $5000 a year for 18 years.

That's a net taxpayer cost of $90,000. So then, among those children who go on to become taxpayers, not counting the ones who end up in prison, or dead, or in jobs that themselves are financed by the taxpayer,

when does that person begin to become a net asset to the tax revenue/expenditure equation??

eh?

 

[FJO]

JoeB131 puked:

"At the point that most abortions are performed, the fetus is the size of a kidney bean and looks like a cocktail shrimp. It's sort of silly to call it a "baby" at that point."

That is exactly the same as saying that Rosa Parks refusing to give up her seat on the bus for a white guy, is nothing more than a rebellious tantrum of a malcontent black woman.
You know, from small things grow BIG things.

Your President Obama was once a fetus the size of a kidney bean. Now, if there ever was a case for abortion, it stares at you from the Oval Office, where he should be conducting the Nation's business, instead on the permanent campaign trail, even after duping the idiots to reelect him.

Your other idols were also nothing more than insignificant "COCKTAIL SHRIMPS" like the eternal fountain of wisdom, Maxine Waters. Or Al Sharpton. Or John Kerry, the so-called Catholic, along with the other so-called Catholics like the gratefully departed murderer Ted Kennedy, the error-prone idiot Joe Biden and the gigolo John Kerry.

Aren't you glad their mothers were pro-life and gave the undeserved lives to these pieces of human garbage, lives which they are hell bent on denying babies in the womb?

 

[logical4u]

Tax payers? Or welfare recipients? Or human lives that shouldn't be so cheaply used for your own fucking political purposes?

But it is okay to murder those humans that cannot speak, yet?

 

[JoeB131]

JoeB131 puked:

"At the point that most abortions are performed, the fetus is the size of a kidney bean and looks like a cocktail shrimp. It's sort of silly to call it a "baby" at that point."

That is exactly the same as saying that Rosa Parks refusing to give up her seat on the bus for a white guy, is nothing more than a rebellious tantrum of a malcontent black woman.
You know, from small things grow BIG things.

Not sure why you even think this is a valid comparison. it's not like the cocktail shrimp can object to being aborted.

Your President Obama was once a fetus the size of a kidney bean. Now, if there ever was a case for abortion, it stares at you from the Oval Office, where he should be conducting the Nation's business, instead on the permanent campaign trail, even after duping the idiots to reelect him.

Your other idols were also nothing more than insignificant "COCKTAIL SHRIMPS" like the eternal fountain of wisdom, Maxine Waters. Or Al Sharpton. Or John Kerry, the so-called Catholic, along with the other so-called Catholics like the gratefully departed murderer Ted Kennedy, the error-prone idiot Joe Biden and the gigolo John Kerry.

None of these people are my idols, guy. I'm a life long republican, at least until religious whacks hijacked the party and started a lot of crazy talk about "gift from god rapes" and "I likes to fire people".

Aren't you glad their mothers were pro-life and gave the undeserved lives to these pieces of human garbage, lives which they are hell bent on denying babies in the womb?

I have no opinion about that one way or the other. People make their own choices at the end of the day, and there are gong to be be abortions no matter what the law is.

 

[logical4u]

Tax payers? Or welfare recipients? Or human lives that shouldn't be so cheaply used for your own fucking political purposes?

ha, now they claim that it's tax revenue when all they want is tax cuts?

What a joke, they will be bitching about welfare, social security, etc next.

Tax revenue, thru growth of the economy has always been welcome in conservatism. It is the only way to improve the lives of more people. The President wants more "revenue", but wants to do so, by forcing "hardship" onto the producers, while petting the non-productive. Abortion murders "people" (though they are absolutely helpless, cannot speak yet, and are ignored by all the people trying to manipulate using Sandy Hook and other things with "children").

 

[logical4u]

with the death of 50 million potential tax payers the government has lost hundreds of billions in tax revenues !! Physicians For Life - Abstinence, Abortion, Birth Control - Abortion Effect: U.S. Seeing Slowest Population Growth Since 1930

One more time for stupid people-

There were just as many abortions occurring before Roe v. Wade than after.

Most abortions were performed quietly by doctors and called something else on medical charts.

There was no huge drop in the birth rate after 1974, in fact the birth rate went up.

YES, we are seeing a slowing of population growth due to the crappy economy, a reduction of immigration and people putting off having kids. Nothing to do with abortion.

Evidence? Links?

 

[Katzndogz]

We've just imported 50 million people so we haven't really lost anything except what the idea of Country means.

I thought importing people was what the country means....

Those would be Americans who just happened to be born someplace else. Today's immigrants aren't your grandpa's immigrants. Not a one of them would have refused to say the Pledge of Allegiance to the American flag.

 

[JoeB131]

Those would be Americans who just happened to be born someplace else. Today's immigrants aren't your grandpa's immigrants. Not a one of them would have refused to say the Pledge of Allegiance to the American flag.

Actually, my grandparents WERE Immigrants (from Germany) and frankly, the welcome they got in 1925 was so un-warm they went back to Germany in 1930. Then Germany lost it's collective mind and they went back to America.

I also find it hilarious that you guys go nuts over Cinco Di Mayo, but St. Paddy's Day, Oktoberfest or Columbus Day festivities don't even get you to bat an eye.

 

[JoeB131]

with the death of 50 million potential tax payers the government has lost hundreds of billions in tax revenues !! Physicians For Life - Abstinence, Abortion, Birth Control - Abortion Effect: U.S. Seeing Slowest Population Growth Since 1930

One more time for stupid people-

There were just as many abortions occurring before Roe v. Wade than after.

Most abortions were performed quietly by doctors and called something else on medical charts.

There was no huge drop in the birth rate after 1974, in fact the birth rate went up.

YES, we are seeing a slowing of population growth due to the crappy economy, a reduction of immigration and people putting off having kids. Nothing to do with abortion.

Evidence? Links?

Okay, here you go.

Live Births and Birth Rates, by Year | Infoplease.com

Number of live births in the US by year.

1970 3,731,386 18.4
1971 3,555,970 17.2
1972 3,258,411 15.6
1973 3,136,965 14.9
1974 3,159,958 14.9
1975 3,144,198 14.8
1976 3,167,788 14.8
1977 3,326,632 15.4

The change between 1972 (The last year abortions were illegal) and 1974 (The first full year of legal abortions) was negliable. by 1977, it started creeping back up again.

In short, legalizing abortion did not cause teh birth rate to drop. Because the kind of woman who was inclined to have an abortion was going to get one, regardless.

 

[whitehall]

Actually the modern approach to abortion is exactly what Margaret Sanger and Adolph Hitler envisioned. A brave new world where only the fittest are allowed to live. Modern technology can determine everything from eye color to the future size and weight of the biomass. In the brave new progressive world there will be no need for a "special olympics" and future children will be judged by their looks.

 

[JustSomeGuy]

There were just as many abortions occurring before Roe v. Wade than after.

[citation needed]

Actually, don't bother. The above is a virtual lie. If there were just as many abortions occurring prior to Roe v. Wade than afterwards, then why did the abortion rate and total number of abortions increase for years following the decision? One of the simple facts that libs don't want to address, is that when you legalize something, you increase its incidence.

Most abortions were performed quietly by doctors and called something else on medical charts.

So how would you know how many abortions were performed prior to Roe v. Wade if they weren't documented as abortions?

There was no huge drop in the birth rate after 1974, in fact the birth rate went up.

You are cherry picking stats. Yes, the birth rate went up after Roe v. Wade, but this was due to first generation immigrants having children, thus offsetting the decreased fertility of U.S. born persons/2nd generation+ immigrants.

 

[logical4u]

One more time for stupid people-

There were just as many abortions occurring before Roe v. Wade than after.

Most abortions were performed quietly by doctors and called something else on medical charts.

There was no huge drop in the birth rate after 1974, in fact the birth rate went up.

YES, we are seeing a slowing of population growth due to the crappy economy, a reduction of immigration and people putting off having kids. Nothing to do with abortion.

Evidence? Links?

Okay, here you go.

Live Births and Birth Rates, by Year | Infoplease.com

Number of live births in the US by year.

1970 3,731,386 18.4
1971 3,555,970 17.2
1972 3,258,411 15.6
1973 3,136,965 14.9
1974 3,159,958 14.9
1975 3,144,198 14.8
1976 3,167,788 14.8
1977 3,326,632 15.4

The change between 1972 (The last year abortions were illegal) and 1974 (The first full year of legal abortions) was negliable. by 1977, it started creeping back up again.

In short, legalizing abortion did not cause teh birth rate to drop. Because the kind of woman who was inclined to have an abortion was going to get one, regardless.

And the evidence that abortions were occurring at the same rate before 1972?.......

 

[AmyNation]

Lol! What a weird concept.

Abortion is bad because every unwanted fetus could have turned into a taxpayer?

 

[JoeB131]

Actually the modern approach to abortion is exactly what Margaret Sanger and Adolph Hitler envisioned. A brave new world where only the fittest are allowed to live. Modern technology can determine everything from eye color to the future size and weight of the biomass. In the brave new progressive world there will be no need for a "special olympics" and future children will be judged by their looks.

That would be almost a not-crazy argument if the government was determining who was having abortions.

But since the choice is the woman with the unwanted visitor, it just goes into crazy land...

 

[JoeB131]

Evidence? Links?

Okay, here you go.

Live Births and Birth Rates, by Year | Infoplease.com

Number of live births in the US by year.

1970 3,731,386 18.4
1971 3,555,970 17.2
1972 3,258,411 15.6
1973 3,136,965 14.9
1974 3,159,958 14.9
1975 3,144,198 14.8
1976 3,167,788 14.8
1977 3,326,632 15.4

The change between 1972 (The last year abortions were illegal) and 1974 (The first full year of legal abortions) was negliable. by 1977, it started creeping back up again.

In short, legalizing abortion did not cause teh birth rate to drop. Because the kind of woman who was inclined to have an abortion was going to get one, regardless.

And the evidence that abortions were occurring at the same rate before 1972?.......

What, are you fuckin' retarded?

 

[JoeB131]

There were just as many abortions occurring before Roe v. Wade than after.

[citation needed]

Actually, don't bother. The above is a virtual lie. If there were just as many abortions occurring prior to Roe v. Wade than afterwards, then why did the abortion rate and total number of abortions increase for years following the decision? One of the simple facts that libs don't want to address, is that when you legalize something, you increase its incidence.

Actually, REPORTAGE increased, not incidence.

[

Most abortions were performed quietly by doctors and called something else on medical charts.

So how would you know how many abortions were performed prior to Roe v. Wade if they weren't documented as abortions?

Because, off the record, doctors admitted that was exactly what they were doing.

[

There was no huge drop in the birth rate after 1974, in fact the birth rate went up.

You are cherry picking stats. Yes, the birth rate went up after Roe v. Wade, but this was due to first generation immigrants having children, thus offsetting the decreased fertility of U.S. born persons/2nd generation+ immigrants.

No, it was due to birth rates remaining steady. Abortion had no effect because it was already widespread.

Here's a clue for you. How many women were arrested for HAVING abortions between 1900 and 1973?

Answer- 2.

Are you really trying to claim only 2 abortions were preformed from 1900 to 1973, or that these were just laws no one wanted to enforce.

 

[FJO]

Quote: Originally Posted by FJO View Post
Aren't you glad their mothers were pro-life and gave the undeserved lives to these pieces of human garbage, lives which they are hell bent on denying babies in the womb?
I have no opinion about that one way or the other. People make their own choices at the end of the day, and there are gong to be be abortions no matter what the law is.
Reply With Quote

OK, let me ask YOU, personally, JoeB131, aren't you glad that your mommy was pro life and gave you the chance to spew anti-life garbage here?

 

[AmyNation]

The majority of women who have abortions are mothers. Being a mother doesn't equal being pro-life.

 

[JustSomeGuy]

Actually, REPORTAGE increased, not incidence.

You're being dishonest. You said the incidence of abortion was the same prior to 1973 as post 1973. You've been asked for a citation of this twice, from two different posters, and both times you have dodged providing a citation. Now why is that? Could it be because your original assertion was complete BS?

Because, off the record, doctors admitted that was exactly what they were doing.

And this has no effect on anything. It's just a dodge.

No, it was due to birth rates remaining steady. Abortion had no effect because it was already widespread.

The Effect of Abortion Legalization on Fertility

While the simultaneous occurrence of abortion legalization and fertility declines might appear to show that the former was a cause of the latter, in fact the two are not necessarily linked. Some of the couples who aborted their pregnancies after legalization might have chosen another way (e.g., other forms of birth control, abstinence) to achieve the same levels of fertility.

Nevertheless, Klerman finds that legalization of abortion, particularly the broad access afforded by Roe, had some effect in reducing fertility. The effects were larger for first than for subsequent births. That is, legalization had a greater effect on couples who would be having their first child than it did on couples who would be having their second or subsequent child. Legalization had larger effects in cutting the fertility of unmarried women than for married women. Overall, the details of legalization do affect the magnitude of the effect on fertility rates.

Overall Impact of Abortion Policy on Total Fertility Rates

What, then, are the overall effects of abortion legalization and funding on total fertility rates? For whites, all the effects are small (see the figure). The white TFR where abortion is legal and Medicaid funding for the procedure available is estimated to be 1.81. Ending Medicaid funding would increase the TFR for whites by 2 percent. Klerman estimates that making abortion illegal would increase white fertility by an additional 3 percent, still below replacement levels.

For blacks, the effects are larger. The black TFR where abortion is legal and Medicaid funding for the procedure available is estimated to be 2.18. Ending Medicaid funding would increase black fertility by 10 percent. Making abortion illegal would increase the black TFR by another 5 percent.

Link

If the incidence of abortion was the same as prior to Roe v. Wade as post Roe v. Wade, then making abortions illegal should have no effect on the total fertility rate. Unfortunately for you, this is untrue. There are numerous other studies which calculate the fertility rate in the absence of legalized abortion that I'm too lazy to go hunt down right now. Point is, you're wrong and you don't know what you're talking about.

 

[whitehall]

Actually the modern approach to abortion is exactly what Margaret Sanger and Adolph Hitler envisioned. A brave new world where only the fittest are allowed to live. Modern technology can determine everything from eye color to the future size and weight of the biomass. In the brave new progressive world there will be no need for a "special olympics" and future children will be judged by their looks.

That would be almost a not-crazy argument if the government was determining who was having abortions.

But since the choice is the woman with the unwanted visitor, it just goes into crazy land...

I'm telling you what Sanger and Hitler dreamed. A world where only the fittest (and prettiest) would be allowed to live. Of course it isn't mandated but the result is the same. You could say that confiscated money that pays for the technology that examines the biomass and advises mothers about the option to terminate comes pretty close to the ultimate dream of Eugenics which was supported by most liberal American politicians and the Nazi regime in the 30's.