billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,476
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Jan 22, 2011 15:09:32 GMT -5
A small percentage is not "a generation". 45 million??? That number is spread over roughly two generations and it is only a percentage of the whole, not the whole of either of those generations.
|
|
|
Post by sanityjones on Jan 22, 2011 15:10:48 GMT -5
I just love watching the Left attempt to rationalize murder.
|
|
|
Post by traelin0 on Jan 22, 2011 15:12:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by lakhota on Jan 22, 2011 15:13:33 GMT -5
Yeah, the right likes to wait until children are of military age to abort them.
|
|
|
Post by traelin0 on Jan 22, 2011 15:14:08 GMT -5
And this idea that we need to all be breeders? WTF? I had 1 child. I use birth control to ensure that I have no more. Why should I have to have a litter of kids? We couldn't afford a litter of kids and choose not to put ourselves in that financial situation. That's being responsible and making sure we can support ourselves and wanting to give our son opportunities we didn't have? You're not listening to what I'm saying here. The decision to abort has unintended economic consequences in the future. Way outside the familial consequences. There is no free lunch and you can't have your cake and eat it, too. Welfare in this country is unsustainable because we are reducing the ratio of producers to consumers in those programs. This is not speculation.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,476
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Jan 22, 2011 15:14:40 GMT -5
I just love watching the Left attempt to rationalize murder. Isn't it fun. I have similar fun when conservatives rationalize killing someone because they are taking their stuff.
|
|
|
Post by traelin0 on Jan 22, 2011 15:15:26 GMT -5
Yeah, the right likes to wait until children are of military age to abort them. I'm not a "rightie" and I don't care about the groupthink moral equivalency arguments. We are talking about abortion. On this issue, liberals are notorious for not understanding the basic economics of such decisions.
|
|
|
Post by sanityjones on Jan 22, 2011 15:16:06 GMT -5
Yeah, the right likes to wait until children are of military age to abort them. But at least they are given a choice in the matter, unless of course the draft is re-instituted. Then we have a problem.
|
|
|
Post by sanityjones on Jan 22, 2011 15:17:25 GMT -5
I just love watching the Left attempt to rationalize murder. Isn't it fun. I have similar fun when conservatives rationalize killing someone because they are taking their stuff. A thief is not innocent Bills. Your thinking is a bit off here.
|
|
chiver78
Administrator
Current Events Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:04:45 GMT -5
Posts: 38,553
|
Post by chiver78 on Jan 22, 2011 15:17:47 GMT -5
There is no free lunch and you can't have your cake and eat it, too. Welfare in this country is unsustainable because we are reducing the ratio of producers to consumers in those programs. This is not speculation. and yet you seem to think that adding more children to the equation, most of which will require assistance, is going to help improve the state of the country? why don't we see about helping the ones that are already here first.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,476
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Jan 22, 2011 15:22:03 GMT -5
Isn't it fun. I have similar fun when conservatives rationalize killing someone because they are taking their stuff. A thief is not innocent Bills. Your thinking is a bit off here. Innocence is nice to use as a reason for someone not to be killed but rarely plays out in the reality of the world.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 1, 2024 23:00:19 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2011 15:22:30 GMT -5
Who is John Galt?
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,476
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Jan 22, 2011 15:24:27 GMT -5
Then relax, we have all just been playing our parts.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,476
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Jan 22, 2011 15:25:27 GMT -5
Is that an honest question?
|
|
steff
Senior Associate
I'll sleep when I'm dead
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 17:34:24 GMT -5
Posts: 10,772
|
Post by steff on Jan 22, 2011 15:28:29 GMT -5
Is that an honest question? ******************************* I googled it and omg I'm LMAO thanks for the laughs
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 1, 2024 23:00:19 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2011 15:30:15 GMT -5
From what I see in Tucson-- there are plenty of welfare babies born. The people that could afford to raise children are aborting. My kids are in the middle of that. They work, pay taxes, their kids have a very good chance of becoming whatever they choose to be. You guys can do what you want, it is legal to kill your babies. In MY family we do not do that. We may never amount to something GREAT, but we work, we pay taxes, we serve in the military. You guys want to kill your babies-- knock yourselves out. You should read Atlas Shrugged.
|
|
|
Post by sanityjones on Jan 22, 2011 15:35:17 GMT -5
Such hollow "justification". One would have to be hopelessly selfish to think this way IMO. Thank you for clarifying and further cementing in my mind the real reasons this country is doomed.
|
|
|
Post by traelin0 on Jan 22, 2011 15:37:59 GMT -5
There is no free lunch and you can't have your cake and eat it, too. Welfare in this country is unsustainable because we are reducing the ratio of producers to consumers in those programs. This is not speculation. and yet you seem to think that adding more children to the equation, most of which will require assistance, is going to help improve the state of the country? why don't we see about helping the ones that are already here first. I am trying to make it clear in simple terms why most of those children would have been net producers. Here's an economic compromise I came up with, in order to meet (or at least sustain for the intermediate term) the welfare programs which will NOT be terminated due to the demands of the mob. Allow abortion to remain legal. But for each abortion, each parent must pay into Social Security half of what the child would have paid into it once they would have reached the earnings years. Another economic compromise would be to take my taxes already paid into the system, cut the programs today except for the worst cases, thereby defaulting on promises to me that could never be kept, and admit what the private sector already knows: Ponzi Schemes always fail. I realize the systems will collapse before a common sense compromise such as the above would ever hope to be implemented. But at least I have been thinking about solutions that expand beyond the next election cycle. I can't say that for 99.9% of Americans. Raising the retirement age is a farce and is just kicking the can to my children.
|
|
|
Post by traelin0 on Jan 22, 2011 15:45:46 GMT -5
Such hollow "justification". One would have to be hopelessly selfish to think this way IMO. Thank you for clarifying and further cementing in my mind the real reasons this country is doomed. This country was doomed from day one because Thomas Jefferson was not able to get ratified an Amendment that prevented govt. from emitting bills of credit/issuing bonds. He also didn't want lifetime judges but hey, we all know they never cause problems and should be trusted for life. LOL
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 1, 2024 23:00:19 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2011 15:49:20 GMT -5
Women living at or below the poverty line have 3X the number of abortions as women living at twice or above the poverty line... and given you alls argment on 'generational welfare'... that would seem to negate your consumers/contributors argument there trae...
Although, like most people, i understand that abortion is not murder, the truth is that people justify murder all of the time...
krickitt... lmao... here's a clip of AYN RAND.. SUPPORTING a woman's right to choose an abortion... maybe YOU should read Atlas Shrugged... lmao... ttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H0yUjMklVuI
|
|
|
Post by traelin0 on Jan 22, 2011 15:50:29 GMT -5
Women living at or below the poverty line have 3X the number of abortions as women living at twice or above the poverty line... and given you alls argment on 'generational welfare'... that would seem to negate your consumers/contributors argument there trae... Although, like most people, i understand that abortion is not murder, the truth is that people justify murder all of the time... krickitt... lmao... here's a clip of AYN RAND.. SUPPORTING abortion... maybe YOU should read Atlas Shrugged... lmao... ttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H0yUjMklVuI If you want to abort, you should be taxed for it via the payroll or some other taxation instrument. Surely liberals would have no problems with taxing people for medical care, right?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 1, 2024 23:00:19 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2011 15:52:57 GMT -5
?? ... Why... do you pay taxes on other medical procedures? on other medications?
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jan 22, 2011 15:54:31 GMT -5
Nothing like watching a bunch of men trying to decide the fate of women they have never met and don't have a clue to their circumstances or situation. Never truer words were spoken and thus my feelings on the subject...yet Men allways want to get their two cents in and also their control of the situation..good post my friend...will they listen and agree? NO.
|
|
|
Post by traelin0 on Jan 22, 2011 15:54:52 GMT -5
?? ... Why... do you pay taxes on other medical procedures? on other medications? Because eventually I am going to have to pay for the stupid decisions of the aborters removing a likely taxpayer from the system. Tax the decision immediately and quit playing kick the can games. Liberals have no problems with taxing those who DON'T get medical care. Why not tax people who DO get certain medical care, especially when it affects the Collective?
|
|
|
Post by ed1066 on Jan 22, 2011 15:55:08 GMT -5
I'd rather not reflect on 50,000,000 dead children, thank you very much...but if it makes you happy, well, this IS a free country (so far)...
|
|
|
Post by traelin0 on Jan 22, 2011 15:56:59 GMT -5
I'd rather not reflect on 50,000,000 dead children, thank you very much...but if it makes you happy, well, this IS a free country (so far)... I like to reduce everything to economics. Remove the morality out of the equation and in this case, liberals are left with hollow arguments.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 1, 2024 23:00:19 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2011 16:00:20 GMT -5
Economics... of allowing poor people to reproduce MORE? Economics of forcing people who are pregnant with disabled fetuses to carry to term? ... Do you REALY want this to be a matter of economics?
Because it will get ugly... and you will still lose...
|
|
|
Post by traelin0 on Jan 22, 2011 16:02:50 GMT -5
Economics... of allowing poor people to reproduce MORE? Economics of forcing people who are pregnant with disabled fetuses to carry to term? ... Do you REALY want this to be a matter of economics? Because it will get ugly... and you will still lose... It IS a matter of economics. It is an economic axiom that, unless you live in a society with no govt., the public are net producers and the govt. is a net consumer. Otherwise the govt. collapses as we saw in numerous empires and nation-states throughout history which tried to manage the means of production. None of the examples presented in this thread can dispute the simple economics of the situation that killing millions of future taxpayers does not allow for sustainable governance. Social Security is merely one case study of proof of the above.
|
|
|
Post by piratesparrot on Jan 22, 2011 16:04:54 GMT -5
I am against abortion in most cases. This time is not like decades ago when birth control was not widely available. There are so many options most of which are highly effective. With a few exceptions (rape & incest being a couple) there really shouldn't be so many unplanned pregnancies. Women need to be in control of thier bodies before abortion is even necessary.
|
|
chiver78
Administrator
Current Events Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:04:45 GMT -5
Posts: 38,553
|
Post by chiver78 on Jan 22, 2011 16:06:59 GMT -5
and yet you seem to think that adding more children to the equation, most of which will require assistance, is going to help improve the state of the country? why don't we see about helping the ones that are already here first. I am trying to make it clear in simple terms why most of those children would have been net producers. Here's an economic compromise I came up with, in order to meet (or at least sustain for the intermediate term) the welfare programs which will NOT be terminated due to the demands of the mob. Allow abortion to remain legal. But for each abortion, each parent must pay into Social Security half of what the child would have paid into it once they would have reached the earnings years. Another economic compromise would be to take my taxes already paid into the system, cut the programs today except for the worst cases, thereby defaulting on promises to me that could never be kept, and admit what the private sector already knows: Ponzi Schemes always fail. I realize the systems will collapse before a common sense compromise such as the above would ever hope to be implemented. But at least I have been thinking about solutions that expand beyond the next election cycle. I can't say that for 99.9% of Americans. Raising the retirement age is a farce and is just kicking the can to my children. no, it doesn't work that way. you can't assume a real value for potential and declare it as fact. there are reasons these women chose to terminate. reasons that bring the average person to assume that life would not have been peaches and roses for the child that would result from a complete pregnancy. reasons like horrible deformities that may not even allow the child to live past birth, abuse, rape, abject poverty. yes, there are success stories for survivors of all of the above, but the reality is that the vast majority of children that would result from all those pregnancies would indeed require some assistance from the government before there's even any hope of them paying into Social Security. why are so many of you more interested in protecting what is technically a parasite until birth, rather than the woman that is already here? or better yet, children that are unwanted and also already here?
|
|