Why Abortion may have destroyed the US Economy

[Katganistan]

We all know the story. We killed Hitler, then everyone went home and had (lots of) babies.

The Baby Boomer Period, or, to better explain
The term "baby boom" most often refers to the post–World War II baby boom (1946–1964) when the number of annual births exceeded 2 per 100 women (or approximately 2% of the total population size). There are an estimated 78.3 million Americans who were born during this demographic boom in births.

So what does that have to do with the economy?

Well, we all believe that the President rules the economy with an iron fist. I have seen many people think that on the forums. That, is horseshit.

Those 78.3 million Americans are now retiring (or dead already, but they really don't effect the economy anymore), and no longer in the workforce. For better or for worse, Social Security now pays them. So why does that matter?

Well, 78.3 million workers is a lot, almost the entire population of Germany. But still, abortion doesn't seem to play in.

Well, the Abortion movement started in 1973 (Hey Roski, stfu, you don't know what you are talking about, some random ass movement nine years after your damn point), meaning that instead of making babies, they were terminating pregnancies more.
This also means that there would be no baby boom after Vietnam as well. So now, you don't have enough people to replace the workforce of 78 MILLION people. That is why the economy is collapsing.

Or not. I don't know. It might be fucking aliens. What do you guys think?
Am I right?
Or not?

Abortion has existed since forever. Your point is ridiculous. Even if there were some correlation, who is anyone to force another person to have kids so the rest of society's experience in life is cushier?

[Katganistan]

Abortion disn't cause this economic collapse but it contributes. People allow abortions and are against/ignore/for it but it causes a psychological factor. We realize we kill the closest thing to a baby, if not a baby-for it feels pain and thinks. Science even backs this up. Biologically they are human. We say they aren't a person. Jews were once not people. Blacks were once not people. We realize or don't realize the hypocrisy of our situation as it being equal rights yet killing nannies to appease whores and monsters. We realize this that we murder millions upon millions and nothing happens. It causes a tick tock in society. People move away from sanity. We don't care as much and the corrupt seize power. Corruption causes more chaos and crime. There are no legitimate exercises for abortions except to save the mother's life and most if not all of the time she chooses her baby's life in place of her own. You may be for abortion but ask yourself this, what if your parents wanted you to be aborted? Hmm? Also as an Israeli who has relatives die fir the French Resistance, U.S. Army and Marines, and had members killed in the German Army because they weren't considered people is different from aborted fetuses, but it's pretty darn fucking close.Just think that my relatives died fighting for Hitler's dream by Hitler himself because they weren't PEOPLE! Tells you who's on your side, huh. When the day comes unroll the next PEOPLE aren't considered PEOPLE I don't know. So, is a fetus not being a "person" a valid excuse to painfully slaughter it you brood of voters! You hypocritical fools! You have doomed us all to hell!

ah.......what?

Abortion BAD. Unwanted pregnancies GOOD.

[Katganistan]

I'm pretty sure Hitler didn't have lots of babies after WW2, though.

Well... maybe Doktor Mengele cloned him!

I heard Brazil is a nice place for this.

[Hurdegaryp]

ah.......what?

Abortion BAD. Unwanted pregnancies GOOD.

That goes without saying. How else to fill the ranks of future stormtrooper legions? But maybe it's just that New Holy Germania is not entirely stable. His writings make me think of the average conspiracy website.

[Salandriagado]

Abortion has nothing to do with birth rates. Like, at all. This is a demographic inevitability, a response to the same socioeconomic shifts that caused the death rate to fall (and hence the population to grow) in the first place. Fundamentally: in developed countries, you don't need a whole bunch of children to ensure that at least some of them survive (and to get them out working to help fund their siblings) any more, so people don't have as many children any more. Unfortunately, social changes like that take rather longer than the economic and scientific shifts that caused the death rate to fall, resulting in a large (and utterly unsustainable) burst of population growth that is now coming to an end. This is absolutely a good thing in the long term, it just gives a few short-term difficulties.

[Farnhamia]

All dem sperm, man. I've probably killed more than a hundred billion potential Americans.

I am literally Hitler.

You are an idiot. We say conception, not before conception. Once conception has began it is more than a "potential"

*** 1 day ban for flaming *** as documented here: viewtopic.php?p=20301445#p20301445 and for ignoring Moderator requests that you deal with the actual topic and no abortion in general.

[Norstal]

All dem sperm, man. I've probably killed more than a hundred billion potential Americans.

I am literally Hitler.

You are an idiot. We say conception, not before conception. Once conception has began it is more than a "potential"

Yeah? What happens if the woman menstruates during conception? Or a stillborn?

It's still a potential. A house under construction is still a house under construction. It's not a 100% guarantee the fetus/embryo will survive. Jesus fucking Christ, learn some biology.

[Roski]

We all know the story. We killed Hitler, then everyone went home and had (lots of) babies.

The Baby Boomer Period, or, to better explain
The term "baby boom" most often refers to the post–World War II baby boom (1946–1964) when the number of annual births exceeded 2 per 100 women (or approximately 2% of the total population size). There are an estimated 78.3 million Americans who were born during this demographic boom in births.

So what does that have to do with the economy?

Well, we all believe that the President rules the economy with an iron fist. I have seen many people think that on the forums. That, is horseshit.

Those 78.3 million Americans are now retiring (or dead already, but they really don't effect the economy anymore), and no longer in the workforce. For better or for worse, Social Security now pays them. So why does that matter?

Well, 78.3 million workers is a lot, almost the entire population of Germany. But still, abortion doesn't seem to play in.

Well, the Abortion movement started in 1973 (Hey Roski, stfu, you don't know what you are talking about, some random ass movement nine years after your damn point), meaning that instead of making babies, they were terminating pregnancies more.
This also means that there would be no baby boom after Vietnam as well. So now, you don't have enough people to replace the workforce of 78 MILLION people. That is why the economy is collapsing.

Or not. I don't know. It might be fucking aliens. What do you guys think?
Am I right?
Or not?

Abortion has existed since forever. Your point is ridiculous. Even if there were some correlation, who is anyone to force another person to have kids so the rest of society's experience in life is cushier?

And you took it as me being against abortion.
This is not an argument for or against abortion.
Its an argument on the abortion factor of the economy.

[Esternial]

Abortion has existed since forever. Your point is ridiculous. Even if there were some correlation, who is anyone to force another person to have kids so the rest of society's experience in life is cushier?

And you took it as me being against abortion.
This is not an argument for or against abortion.
Its an argument on the abortion factor of the economy.

It's hardly significant enough to warrant any action against it to benefit the economy.

[Hurdegaryp]

And you took it as me being against abortion.
This is not an argument for or against abortion.
Its an argument on the abortion factor of the economy.

It's hardly significant enough to warrant any action against it to benefit the economy.

Indeed. Intelligent machines can do a better job than the current human model, so it is not as if we need more anonymous employees for the assembly lines.

[Esternial]

It's hardly significant enough to warrant any action against it to benefit the economy.

Indeed. Intelligent machines can do a better job than the current human model, so it is not as if we need more anonymous employees for the assembly lines.

Heh, that's actually a pretty good point.

If anything, abortion compensates for the possible decline in job opportunities as automation increases.

[Islamic republiq of Julundar]

Indeed. Intelligent machines can do a better job than the current human model, so it is not as if we need more anonymous employees for the assembly lines.

Heh, that's actually a pretty good point.

If anything, abortion compensates for the possible decline in job opportunities as automation increases.

Indeed: OP asserts that lots of babies leads to good economy; I assert that good economy leads to babies.

[Salandriagado]

Heh, that's actually a pretty good point.

If anything, abortion compensates for the possible decline in job opportunities as automation increases.

Indeed: OP asserts that lots of babies leads to good economy; I assert that good economy leads to babies.

Exactly the opposite, in fact. Economic development correlates negatively with birth rates, and it's entirely a causal link: if people are having good careers, they're busy having careers, rather than children. If the country is economically developed, then that's true of more people.


If you want something to "blame" (though it's not a bad thing) the declining birth rates on, blame it on economic development, good medicine and equality.



Hmmm.... more children, or equality, good medicine and economic development? Such a difficult decision.

[Andersen Tribal States]

Indeed: OP asserts that lots of babies leads to good economy; I assert that good economy leads to babies.

Exactly the opposite, in fact. Economic development correlates negatively with birth rates, and it's entirely a causal link: if people are having good careers, they're busy having careers, rather than children. If the country is economically developed, then that's true of more people.


If you want something to "blame" (though it's not a bad thing) the declining birth rates on, blame it on economic development, good medicine and equality.



Hmmm.... more children, or equality, good medicine and economic development? Such a difficult decision.

That's all true, but you are missing another point. Higher income nations are more educated on sex, have access to contraception, and our western society promotes casual sex with protection. Lower income nations have little to no education on sex or access to contraception. Also as a percentage, more lower income nations are more religious thus the argument on abortion. Catholics as a whole have opposed abortion, but in recent years have softened. Others have a more interesting story. For those interested here is a link: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/ ... 4xns16l3na

[Andersen Tribal States]

Indeed: OP asserts that lots of babies leads to good economy; I assert that good economy leads to babies.

Exactly the opposite, in fact. Economic development correlates negatively with birth rates, and it's entirely a causal link: if people are having good careers, they're busy having careers, rather than children. If the country is economically developed, then that's true of more people.


If you want something to "blame" (though it's not a bad thing) the declining birth rates on, blame it on economic development, good medicine and equality.



Hmmm.... more children, or equality, good medicine and economic development? Such a difficult decision.

That's all true, but you are missing another point. Higher income nations are more educated on sex, have access to contraception, and our western society promotes casual sex with protection. Lower income nations have little to no education on sex or access to contraception. Also as a percentage, more lower income nations are more religious thus the argument on abortion. Catholics as a whole have opposed abortion, but in recent years have softened. Others have a more interesting story. For those interested here is a link: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/ ... 4xns16l3na

[Purpelia]

Heh, that's actually a pretty good point.

If anything, abortion compensates for the possible decline in job opportunities as automation increases.

Indeed: OP asserts that lots of babies leads to good economy; I assert that good economy leads to babies.

And I would assert the opposite in both cases.

Fact is that with the growth of automation the required makeup of the labor force for a prosperous economy is changing rapidly and has indeed already changed. With every iteration of more advanced tools and manufacturing methods we move away from the concept of a large horde of semi-educated factory workers and toward a very small and highly educated work force. You can see this trend going all the way back to the industrial revolution.

So no, not only does more babies not make for a better economy. It flat out makes the economy worse because our current economic model simply can not provide jobs for most of them. The concept of full employment is pretty much dead. And society has to adapt to it.


At the same time, as has been said before a better economy leads to more people exhibiting a higher standard of intelligent behavior. And thus having less sex (since there are other things to do than just farm and mate when you are in a western society) and using more contraception. Which leads to less babies.

[Valica]

something something Henrietta Lacks something something Jesus.

[The Sotoan Union]

The baby boomer generation was not normal, that level of population growth will never happen again. Even without bright control we still couldn't pay for them.

[Benuty]

The baby boomer generation was not normal, that level of population growth will never happen again. Even without bright control we still couldn't pay for them.

What is this "bright" control you speak of?

[Lalaki]

Plus, we have the immigration factor. The United States has one of the highest growth rates in the developed world, not because of high fertility, but because of people coming in.