Posted on 01/01/2013 5:05:21 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Actions have consequences. This is one of them.
Chickens are coming home to roost!
They are using the average rate stats here, so you’ll have to prove that this is the case.
Yep, which is why the immigrants themselves are going to dry up, but don’t tell people this - they will call you a liar. :)
“we’re a small fish (300 million) compared to Asia’s monster fish (India & Red China, with 1 billion+ each).”
Remember the one child policy? Even if you take every single available extra person in all of Asia - it will *just* cover their yearly manpower losses.
I have no plans to produce a cost-benefit ratio for abortion, insofar as it affects the federal budget.
I merely pointed out that one should be performed before claiming that the aborted children would alleviate our present fiscal mess.
Then you concede your argument. :)
Who would want to bring a child into this country which is so badly adrift? I am glad I have had the honor of having been here when the U.S. was once a great nation. I am nearing my end of years and have great pity for the yet to be born.
I’m not making an argument, merely pointing out that the article makes no effort to show that its argument is valid.
“pointing out that the article makes no effort to show that its argument is valid.”
Their argument is that every child aborted would have contributed as much on average as the children who were not aborted.
Seems a reasonable premise to me.
Yes, but in our present system is each additional person a net asset or expense to society, speaking financially only of course?
Given our present deficit situation, I think it is highly dubious to claim that we would be saved if only we had more people. It is true only if the additional people would be a net fiscal benefit to society, which is what the author made no attempt to prove.
The Morlocks in the big liberal cities aren’t reproducing. Meanwhile, the population is growing in the conservative Bible belt. Patriots and conservatives now control 30 states, which is up from 25 in 2010. That represents more than half the population in the United States. The leftist demographers don’t want to talk about that.
Families are having babies, but not in the liberal hellholes. Seattle, for example, has more dogs than children. Surveys show that families with children are leaving big cities by the millions and are moving to exurbia. That’s the area that Bush II tapped to win reelection in 2004.
Sherman Logan to JCBreckenridge
“Yes, but in our present system is each additional person a net asset or expense to society, speaking financially only of course?”
On average? Without a doubt.
“Given our present deficit situation, I think it is highly dubious to claim that we would be saved if only we had more people. It is true only if the additional people would be a net fiscal benefit to society, which is what the author made no attempt to prove.”
If people on average consumed more than they produced, society’s productivity would be zero.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.