Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, bill wants to cut the worlds population by 75%...imagine than gates want to see 4-5 billion people wiped off this beautiful earth
Youtube is on it!
That was way too dangerous for us to see for ourselves!!
Perhaps they had the amount of kids they could support and that additional kid would push them over the threshold. Maybe they aborted that additional pregnancy.
Maybe they have a husband with a higher income. What is the demographic of the average women who chooses to abort? Is she happily married middle to high income with a supportive husband and 2.5 kids.
Recently we have had two married women with working husbands at my place of employment who quit due to pregnancy. After doing the math they came out as well being a SAHM. Over the years we have had many females who dropped out of the work force after they married and had a child. They were able to do this because they had income generating supportive husbands. For women who have no partner and low income jobs a baby very likely forces them out of the workforce and onto government assistance.
I dont know about the numbers but it makes perfect sense to me that legal abortion has made it possible for many women to remain in the workforce.
Perhaps, maybe, maybe. Opening word of your first three sentences.
Does that tell you anything about this topic, where everything is some form of wild ass guess and pure hypothetical? even my numbers....like any of that is fact? It is a few assumptions run through a spreadsheet, resulting in fancier assumptions and brainy sounding wild ass guesses.
We cannot possibly know what all those aborted children and their mothers would have contributed to the economy, nor can we quantify what those women contributed because of abortion that they wouldn't have contributed anyway. It's all conjecture, subjective hypothetical, and nonsense.
My reply was using the same POOMA (pulled out of...) "statistics" that Clintn used. As Gungnir said in another thread, her assertions required no facts, therefore my rebuttal requires none either. Argument defeated, case closed.
Perhaps, maybe, maybe. Opening word of your first three sentences.
Does that tell you anything about this topic, where everything is some form of wild ass guess and pure hypothetical? even my numbers....like any of that is fact? It is a few assumptions run through a spreadsheet, resulting in fancier assumptions and brainy sounding wild ass guesses.
We cannot possibly know what all those aborted children and their mothers would have contributed to the economy, nor can we quantify what those women contributed because of abortion that they wouldn't have contributed anyway. It's all conjecture, subjective hypothetical, and nonsense.
My reply was using the same POOMA (pulled out of...) "statistics" that Clintn used. As Gungnir said in another thread, her assertions required no facts, therefore my rebuttal requires none either. Argument defeated, case closed.
Ok. so if abortion was illegal and every pregnant woman were forced to deliver there would be no change in the number of women in the workforce or their ability to contribute to the economy. Got ya.
Ok. so if abortion was illegal and every pregnant woman were forced to deliver there would be no change in the number of women in the workforce or their ability to contribute to the economy. Got ya.
Yes, no and maybe.
You clearly don't understand how chaotic and infinitely complex systems like timelines work. tiny changes in initial conditions have wildly unpredictable, unknowable consequences even at the very earliest iterations away from time_0.
Abortion staying illegal in 1973 might have resulted in nuclear armageddon in 1983, or a new Ice Age, or Argentina being annexed by Vietnam. All the infinite possibilities are equally likely once we vary inputs int any infinitely complex system.
You cannot alter one thing at a point in a timeline and expect all variables past that point to remain the exact same. It doesn't work like that. So you, Chelsea Clinton and I are all making utterly nonsensical arguments that cannot possibly be proven.
The government reports that each child costs $247,000 to bring to age 18 for just the basics. So those costs plus the wages earned amount to a lot per person.
The government reports that each child costs $247,000 to bring to age 18 for just the basics. So those costs plus the wages earned amount to a lot per person.
Is that $247k lit on fire, or circulated within the economy? Based on the claim that each missing child takes $247k out of the economy over an 18 year period, our economy is missing $14.8 trillion in lost activity (60 million abortions * $247k per kid raised to 18).
Again, none of these inferences and extrapolations can possibly be proven, since timelines do not work like simple arithmetic and accounting ledgers.
Another abortion loving democrat who thinks she is going to be voted in due to her name.
Sound familiar?
Politicians get voted in by name and family clout within the party all the time.
Gore and Bush for prime examples of getting vastly further than they ever deserved.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.