• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The $$ Costs if all abortions stopped

joko104

Banned
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
65,981
Reaction score
23,408
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Like at a car dealership, "Sure, that's a BEAUTIFUL MERCEDES! But lets talk dollars and cents..."

Let's talk dollars and cents about the wonderous respect for the sanctity of human life from the moment of conception if perfection of this was obtained.

What's the price tag of pro-life's goal? What would it have been without Roe V. Wade and pure anti-abortion laws with perfect compliance?

Well, here's the sticker price...

There have been over 50,000,000 abortions since Roe V. Wade.

What if pro-life had got it's way and none happened. Pro-life is clear that a woman should instead give up an unwanted newborn than murder it in pregnancy.

What would 50,000,000 children in foster care cost?

Well, there are 500,000 thousand children in foster care now. The cost is $33,000,000,000 per year.

50,000,000,000 would cost 3.3 trillion dollars per year. Or 59 TRILLION over 18 years.

However, this also would be growing about $80 billion more each year. Another $80 billion, then $160 billion the next year, another $240 billion by year 3, $320 billion by year 4...
$400 billion (5) $480 billion more (6) adding still another $560 billion on top of that by year 7...

So... where would the about 80 TRILLION dollars have come from? The additional $4 to $5 TRILLION per year - and always growing?

Where would you get it from now? Next year? The year after? And the extra hundreds of billions of dollars it keeps growing to?

That does NOT figure the costs of child abuse for women who keep an unwanted pregnancy. That costs about twice as much as foster care costs.

So, "pro-lifers" - how are you going to raise the $$? Tax increases? Say a 200% increase across the board? Initially by shifting the entire military budget to foster care? Then all medicare and social security money? Maybe a 50% tax on all bank accounts, stocks, mutual funds and 401Ks? Sell the midwest to China?

To buy the Mercedes you have to talk to the finance department. Let's hear pro-lifers financing plan?

We know your platitudes and slogans. Heard them ad nausea. Now let's hear how you'll pay for it.

Child Abuse and Neglect Cost Nation over $100 Billion per Year - The Pew Charitable Trusts
In U.S., Foster Care Funding in 'Crisis'
 
What is with this assumption that every single child who's ever been abused or neglected was one that was unplanned? By all accounts, since abortion is legal, doesn't that mean that there should be no more abuse and neglect?
 
Last edited:
Or, you know, people could be more responsible and wrap it up when they don't want to be financially responsible for a new human.


By the way, all those not killed by their own parents folks? They generate tax revenue when they get older. Food for thought.


But hey, nah, let's just keep talking about the financial incentives for mass culling what you consider to be the undesirables of the human race. Utilitarianism being used to justify human rights abuses is always good for a chuckle.
 
Last edited:
Or, you know, people could be more responsible and wrap it up when they don't want to be financially responsible for a new human.


By the way, all those not killed by their own parents folks? They generate tax revenue when they get older. Food for thought.


But hey, nah, let's just keep talking about the financial incentives for mass culling what you consider to be the undesirables of the human race. Utilitarianism being used to justify human rights abuses is always good for a chuckle.

You don't have a CLUE how to answer who would pay for tens of millions of abandoned children - so you just do your usual irrelevant raging.

Try has hard as you would, you can't make a 2 year old earn an income and pay taxes even with a bullwhip. You message is just irrelevant and absurd raging to duck there is no answer and what you want would financially destroy the country and throw virtually everyone including children into abject poverty.

In fact, so far, all pro-lifers haven't a clue how to pay for what they demand. TOTAL 100% financial irresponsibility and immaturity.
 
I'm sorry, apparently my sarcasm and disdain has been misconstrued in such a manner that I was raging to a duck?

How does one rage to a duck?

"Quack!"
 
I'm sorry, apparently my sarcasm and disdain has been misconstrued in such a manner that I was raging to a duck?

How does one rage to a duck?

"Quack!"


I'll accept that as you conceding.
 
Like at a car dealership, "Sure, that's a BEAUTIFUL MERCEDES! But lets talk dollars and cents..."

Let's talk dollars and cents about the wonderous respect for the sanctity of human life from the moment of conception if perfection of this was obtained.

What's the price tag of pro-life's goal? What would it have been without Roe V. Wade and pure anti-abortion laws with perfect compliance?

Well, here's the sticker price...

There have been over 50,000,000 abortions since Roe V. Wade.

What if pro-life had got it's way and none happened. Pro-life is clear that a woman should instead give up an unwanted newborn than murder it in pregnancy.

What would 50,000,000 children in foster care cost?

Well, there are 500,000 thousand children in foster care now. The cost is $33,000,000,000 per year.

50,000,000,000 would cost 3.3 trillion dollars per year. Or 59 TRILLION over 18 years.

However, this also would be growing about $80 billion more each year. Another $80 billion, then $160 billion the next year, another $240 billion by year 3, $320 billion by year 4...
$400 billion (5) $480 billion more (6) adding still another $560 billion on top of that by year 7...

So... where would the about 80 TRILLION dollars have come from? The additional $4 to $5 TRILLION per year - and always growing?

Where would you get it from now? Next year? The year after? And the extra hundreds of billions of dollars it keeps growing to?

That does NOT figure the costs of child abuse for women who keep an unwanted pregnancy. That costs about twice as much as foster care costs.

So, "pro-lifers" - how are you going to raise the $$? Tax increases? Say a 200% increase across the board? Initially by shifting the entire military budget to foster care? Then all medicare and social security money? Maybe a 50% tax on all bank accounts, stocks, mutual funds and 401Ks? Sell the midwest to China?

To buy the Mercedes you have to talk to the finance department. Let's hear pro-lifers financing plan?

We know your platitudes and slogans. Heard them ad nausea. Now let's hear how you'll pay for it.

Child Abuse and Neglect Cost Nation over $100 Billion per Year - The Pew Charitable Trusts
In U.S., Foster Care Funding in 'Crisis'

Gee. We would have to start taxing the pro-life churches and parishioners at about a rate of 95%. Wonder how many atheists that would create?

Great article.
 
What is with this assumption that every single child who's ever been abused or neglected was one that was unplanned? By all accounts, since abortion is legal, doesn't that mean that there should be no more abuse and neglect?



The idea that abuse and neglect would INCREASE is the article's point.
 
Interesting. ITT people conclude that financial savings trump life.
 
The idea that abuse and neglect would INCREASE is the article's point.

Abuse and neglect would INCREASE whenever there are more children born period, it's simple mathematics. Yet even those who are abused will get a chance to live and if they so deeply hated life then they could make the choice to end it themselves (God forbid).
 
Abuse and neglect would INCREASE whenever there are more children born period, it's simple mathematics. Yet even those who are abused will get a chance to live and if they so deeply hated life then they could make the choice to end it themselves (God forbid).

Oh great...another...let the child suffer advocate. Pre-born is holy...post born...chopped liver. Yeah... let the little booger machines tough it out. You and about a half dozen more who frequent abortion threads believe pretty much that the quality of life doesn't matter...just as long as they kids are born with the ability to breath.
 
Oh great...another...let the child suffer advocate. Pre-born is holy...post born...chopped liver. Yeah... let the little booger machines tough it out. You and about a half dozen more who frequent abortion threads believe pretty much that the quality of life doesn't matter...just as long as they kids are born with the ability to breath.

Right, let the child live and do our best to help. Not kill the child so we don't have to help.
 
Right, let the child live and do our best to help. Not kill the child so we don't have to help.

Cheap talk. PAY FOR YOUR PLAN! Tell us how. The cost comes to equate the entire current federal budget. PAY FOR IT. Explain how.

Giving everyone $100,000 a year free is a FABULOUS idea too. Particularly since where the money comes from doesn't matter.

ALL you are doing is diverting from the question back to ad nausea repeated slogans. You want all unwanted "babies" to be born - how are you going to pay for it?
 
You got it, human life.

Nope, don't got it. Human life is not synonymous with, nor equates to a fully developed child. Most abortions occur in the first trimester. And they surely don't have the developed characteristics or attributes of a born child.
 
Nope, don't got it. Human life is not synonymous with, nor equates to a fully developed child. Most abortions occur in the first trimester. And they surely don't have the developed characteristics or attributes of a born child.

It is the developing offspring of the parents. At the end of the first trimester there is enough development for it to have protection.
 
Throughout history, societies that come of have massive numbers of abandoned and orphaned children not only become impoverished and with little respect for life, radically falling lifespans, social chao, are in revolutions, wars and civil wars and have contempt of women. They also come to see children as having the worth of cannon fodder - often literally.

Europe attempted to solve the problem of mass numbers of orphans by declaring it was God's will they go fight a crusade - the Children's Crusade - marching orphans in mass to - of course - being murdered or enslaved - 100%.

Even now, populations with mass numbers of parentless children or just mass numbers of children, often face genocidal starvation, readily use their children as suicide bombers, are fully tolerant of abuse and violence against children. Even in the USA, MILLIONS already rage against the poor and immigrants having so many children - and how much they cost society. Increase the federal budget by trillions and then trillions more for abandoned, unwanted children???

I don't see ANYONE agreeing to that. Not ONE pro-lifer.

Tens of thousands of adolescent teenage girls forced to have the babies of their rapist relatives each year. "Life begins at conception" per se outlaws birth control pills/patches and MAPs for rape victims. MILLIONS of unwanted children added each year. Year after year after year after decade after decade. And, unlike the past, modern medicine will keep them alive to have their 10 children too. Starving, homeless, impoverished or stuck in massive hellacious orphanages the size of military bases.

NOTABLY, not ONE pro-lifer - EVER even hints at how they are going to pay for dramatic increases in unwanted and abandoned children. Yet, generally elsewhere on the forum, they are raging "fiscal conservatives" demanding a pay-as-you-go government and that the MONEY has to be found (without tax increases) for any new government program.

So, pro-lifers - how are you going to pay for your goal?

After 20 or 30 years of all women who become pregnant forced to have the baby, plus declaring "life begins at conception" - thus outlawing how 90% of women avoid becoming pregnant - and the government would likely be selling hunting licenses for stray/feral children.

I also suspect that it wouldn't be long before there were far more girls deciding they are gay rather than straight. The only chance she would have really if she didn't want to just become a babymaking machine - with or without her consent.
 
Last edited:
It is the developing offspring of the parents. At the end of the first trimester there is enough development for it to have protection.


So what that it's an offspring? The offspring doesn't override the constitutional rights of a woman...to terminate it within the parameters of the law.
 
So what that it's an offspring? The offspring doesn't override the constitutional rights of a woman...to terminate it within the parameters of the law.

Right, which is why R v W should be overturned in order to preserve the liberty of the developing human in the womb. That's what the discussion involves not whether it is currently legal since that much is obvious.
 
Right, which is why R v W should be overturned in order to preserve the liberty of the developing human in the womb. That's what the discussion involves not whether it is currently legal since that much is obvious.

That's funny, Libertas. Sincerely, that's funny. Now, if you had said...IN MY OPINION...but, you blew it.
 
Throughout history, societies that come of have massive numbers of abandoned and orphaned children not only become impoverished and with little respect for life, radically falling lifespans, social chao, are in revolutions, wars and civil wars and have contempt of women. They also come to see children as having the worth of cannon fodder - often literally.

Europe attempted to solve the problem of mass numbers of orphans by declaring it was God's will they go fight a crusade - the Children's Crusade - marching orphans in mass to - of course - being murdered or enslaved - 100%.

Even now, populations with mass numbers of parentless children or just mass numbers of children, often face genocidal starvation, readily use their children as suicide bombers, are fully tolerant of abuse and violence against children. Even in the USA, MILLIONS already rage against the poor and immigrants having so many children - and how much they cost society. Increase the federal budget by trillions and then trillions more for abandoned, unwanted children???

I don't see ANYONE agreeing to that. Not ONE pro-lifer.

Tens of thousands of adolescent teenage girls forced to have the babies of their rapist relatives each year. "Life begins at conception" per se outlaws birth control pills/patches and MAPs for rape victims. MILLIONS of unwanted children added each year. Year after year after year after decade after decade. And, unlike the past, modern medicine will keep them alive to have their 10 children too. Starving, homeless, impoverished or stuck in massive hellacious orphanages the size of military bases.

NOTABLY, not ONE pro-lifer - EVER even hints at how they are going to pay for dramatic increases in unwanted and abandoned children. Yet, generally elsewhere on the forum, they are raging "fiscal conservatives" demanding a pay-as-you-go government and that the MONEY has to be found (without tax increases) for any new government program.

So, pro-lifers - how are you going to pay for your goal?

After 20 or 30 years of all women who become pregnant forced to have the baby, plus declaring "life begins at conception" - thus outlawing how 90% of women avoid becoming pregnant - and the government would likely be selling hunting licenses for stray/feral children.

I also suspect that it wouldn't be long before there were far more girls deciding they are gay rather than straight. The only chance she would have really if she didn't want to just become a babymaking machine - with or without her consent.

As I said before the end of the first trimester is an acceptable line to draw IMO. And since the majority of abortions happen within that time frame it wouldn't cause the economic upheaval that you are forecasting. It would also change the 'abortion on demand whenever I see fit' mentality since it would restrict the parameters of a legal abortion.
 
Right, which is why R v W should be overturned in order to preserve the liberty of the developing human in the womb. That's what the discussion involves not whether it is currently legal since that much is obvious.


You really do have no answer as to how to pay for what you want, do you? It's all just pointless moralizing about and trashing women who have abortions and nothing more.
 
That's funny, Libertas. Sincerely, that's funny. Now, if you had said...IN MY OPINION...but, you blew it.
The word 'should' implies that it's my opinion. I believe that there is reasonable evidence to conclude that after the first trimester the fetus has developed enough and possesses enough human characteristics to have its liberty preserved.
 
You really do have no answer as to how to pay for what you want, do you? It's all just pointless moralizing about and trashing women who have abortions and nothing more.

See above your post.
 
Back
Top Bottom