Fund Your Utopia Without Me.™

29 April 2013

When It Comes To Abortion, Progressives Can Be Counted On To Fully Reveal Their Racism And Ignorance






No, this isn't another one of the posts about the 'dirty, little secret' of Progressivism and its ugly history of eugenics, the racist, despicable Woodrow Wilson, Margaret Sanger, black 'weeds,' and the war on the weak,  the Progressive that wrote New Jersey's eugenics laws and went on to become the Jewish 'Butcher of Buchenwald,' or even Carrie Buck and the other 70,000, at minimum, Americans, who were forcibly sterilised as a result of being determined 'unfit' by Progressive 'breeding' panels (But don't worry!  We'll NEVER have death panels!  Promise!).  I've written a lot about each of them  

Neither is this post about well-known, current eugenicists like Peter Singer, whose grandparents died in and parents survived the Holocaust and believe that parents should be able to kill their children up until the age of 2 and sex with animals is beneficial to both man and beast, pro-aborts, who state squarely 'I Love Abortion: Implying Otherwise Accomplishes Nothing for Womens’ Rights' and believe that ADOPTION - not abortion - should be banned, or those 'experts' that argue 'Killing Babies No Is Different From Abortion, Experts Say' (Alternative Title: Leftists Demand The Resurrection of the Nazi Aktion T4 Programme).'  I've covered those, too, and will again in the future.  Also, it's not about Kermit Gosnell and those abortionists that are just like him.

No, rather than rehashing the past or even talking about abortionists & their lobbyists today, I'd rather look at the indifference to human life, racism, and sickening callousness of those that call US racists and extremists.  If the moral implications of their beliefs were not disturbing enough, their indoctrination, gross ignorance, and sheer stupidity about the 'over-population' fraud is frightening.

(Spelling, punctuation, and grammar as they appeared in the original except for the use of ellipsis)


http://halfwaytoconcord.worldview.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/onceyouvoteblackyounevergoback.jpg

 Political buttons sold at the DNC in 2012.  All blacks are equal, evidently, but some are more equal than others...
 

'also, a large portion of abortions are done by poor minorities...these babies if born would likely be on welfare...'

nonpartisan on April 26, 2013 at 5:46 PM


I think that I know who nonpartisan is…






http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-O86ER6xbrC8/UD_VfWvioWI/AAAAAAAAyPE/UpAAik_ZysQ/s1600/obama+once+you+go+black+rooftop.jpg 
West Hollywood, 2012


These aren't the only examples either.  I've also 'featured' Allidunce from Townhall. com frequently here, who once said this:


'Homicide rates are down since the 90's due almost in total to abortion.  20 yrs after abortion is legalized, homicides fall and keep falling. Because so many potential killers were never born, especially in urban areas.'


- Allidunce, Blacks Should Embrace NRA Gun Proposal, 31 December 2012


Just don’t say such opinions are racist…because THAT WOULD BE RAAAAAAAAAAACIST and you'll probably be called a right-wing, Teabagging extremist! 

From Blackgenocide.org, 'minority women constitute only about 13% of the female population (age 15-44) in the United States, but undergo approximately 36% of the abortions.  According to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, black women are more than 5 times as likely as white women to have an abortion.  On average, 1,876 black babies are aborted every day in the United States.




This incidence of abortion has resulted in a tremendous loss of life. It has been estimated that since 1973 Black women have had about 16 million abortions. Michael Novak had calculated "Since the number of current living Blacks (in the U.S.) is 36 million, the missing 16 million represents an enormous loss, for without abortion, America's Black community would now number 52 million persons. It would be 36 percent larger than it is. Abortion has swept through the Black community like a scythe, cutting down every fourth member.'

No better illustration of the prevalence of abortion in the black community can be found than in New York City.    According to 2011 statistics, 41% of all pregnancies were terminated in 2011, which was higher than the abortion rate in China - 29.3% - where forced abortions are commonplace.  New York City's abortion rate is double the national average.  In The Bronx, 48% of pregnancies are aborted. Among African-Americans, the rate is 57%.  Mayor Bloomberg, along with Governor Cuomo, are doing everything that they can to ensure that NYC's abortion rate goes even higher.



 http://erasetheneed.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/ny_blood-red1.jpg
 


This is one pro-abortion Democrat, who would have certainly approved!




 

'...so abortion is actually economically beneficial as it reduces the welfare society in a sense...also, given the state of unemployment, our country can’t afford to have more and more people...abortion is the right of the woman...but I am saying there is a societal benefit to aborting unwanted pregnancies as opposed to having more unwanted babies sucking up welfare and entitlements from taxpayers'

nonpartisan on April 26, 2013 at 5:46 PM 



Fact: There were 159.4 workers for each Social Security recipient in 1940.

Fact: There were 16.5 workers for each Social Security recipient in 1950.

Fact: There were 5.1 workers for each Social Security recipient in 1960.

Fact: There were 3.7 workers for each Social Security recipient in 1970.

Fact: There were 3.2 workers for each Social Security recipient in 1980.

Fact:  There were 3.4 workers for each Social Security recipient in 1990.

Fact: There were 3.4 workers for each Social Security recipient in 2000.

Fact: There were 3.3 workers for each Social Security recipient in 2005.

Fact: There were only 1.75 full-time private-sector workers in the United States in 2011 for each person receiving benefits from Social Security, according to data from the Bureau of Labour Statistics and the Social Security board of trustees.

How has this decline impacted Americans?

Fact: The average senior receives in Social Security about a third of what the average worker makes and gets back 3 times as much in benefits as he contributed.

Fact: In 1940, the average worker had to pay only 0.2% of his salary to sustain the seniors of his time.

Fact:  In 1950, the average worker had to pay only 2% of his salary to sustain the seniors of his time.

Fact: In 2011, the average worker paid 11% of his salary to sustain the seniors of his time.

What will future workers pay, EVEN IF THE POPULATION REMAINS STABLE?

Projection: In 2031, the average worker will have to pay 17% of his salary to sustain the seniors of his time. This is a staggering sum, considering that it is apart from all the other taxes he pays to sustain other functions of government, such as Medicare, whose costs are exploding.

Projection: By 2020, every penny in tax revenues taken in by the US Treasury will be consumed by Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and debt service, the latter of which will amount to $1 trillion alone.

Projection: When today’s college students reach retirement (about 2054), Social Security alone will require a 16.6% payroll tax, one-third greater than today’s rate, according to the non-partisan Peterson-Pew Commission on Budget Reform.

Projection: When Medicare Part A is included, the payroll tax burden will rise to 25.7% – more than one of every four dollars workers will earn that year.

Projection: If Medicare Part B (physician services) and Part D are included, the total Social Security/Medicare burden will climb to 37% of payroll by 2054 – one in three dollars of taxable payroll, and twice the size of today’s payroll tax burden, according to the non-partisan Peterson-Pew Commission on Budget Reform.

Projection: More than one-third of the wages workers earn in 2054 will need to be committed to pay benefits promised under current law. That is before any bridges or highways are built and before any teachers’ or police officers’ salaries are paid.

Projection: By 2030, about the midpoint of the baby boomer retirement years, the Medicare will require nearly half of all income tax dollars, according to the non-partisan Peterson-Pew Commission on Budget Reform.

Projection: By 2060, Social Security and Medicare will require nearly three out of four income tax dollars.

Projection: When Medicare Part A is included, the payroll tax burden will rise to 25.7% - more than one of every four dollars workers will earn that year.

Projection:  If Medicare Part B (physician services) and Part D are included, the total Social Security/Medicare burden will climb to 37% of payroll by 2054 - one in three dollars of taxable payroll, and twice the size of today's payroll tax burden, according to the non-partisan Peterson-Pew Commission on Budget Reform.

Projection: More than one-third of the wages workers earn in 2054 will need to be committed to pay benefits promised under current law. That is before any bridges or highways are built and before any teachers' or police officers' salaries are paid.

Projection: By 2030, about the midpoint of the baby boomer retirement years, the Medicare will require nearly half of all income tax dollars, according to the non-partisan Peterson-Pew Commission on Budget Reform.

Projection: By 2060, Social Security and Medicare will require nearly three out of four income tax dollars.

The links for the government and actual 'nonpartisan' sources can be found in my post, "'Lies' About Social Security and Medicare Pandering Politicians Never Told You."

Obviously, this is unsustainable…and we know where it leads. Four decades ago, white Europeans began to decide that they just couldn’t be bothered to have children. Of course, someone was going to be needed to pay the taxes that support the luxurious safety net to which those white Europeans believed they were entitled. So, they “imported” their “children” from the Middle East, Africa, and Asia. Unfortunately, this entire “solution” blew up in their faces when they realised that their “children” found that they much preferred to join them in the welfare hammock. As a result, the welfare state expanded greatly…and the tax base continued to lag behind. I call this 'suicide by demographics.'


'thats why china is doing well by limiting population growth…or else they would be phucked'

nonpartisan on April 26, 2013 at 5:46 PM'


Two points, simpleton…

First, THIS is what China’s One Child Policy looks like, luv…


Secondly, my sweet, sweet, simple child…

A. China has 119 men for every 100 women. Any student of history knows where that leads.

B. China is in the midst of a demographic crisis with a declining workforce that may take a century to resolve.


Seriously, you are one of the most naive, ignorant, least-informed person or a combination thereof people that I have ever had the misfortune of debating. I say ‘misfortune’ because I feel terribly bad for you. It is though you are living in the early 1990s or something.


'hey, its not underpopulation thats the problem.  its lack of jobs. having more people would just mean higher unemployment and more people on welfare'

nonpartisan on April 26, 2013 at 7:11 PM


Spoken by someone who thinks Barack Obama's 'intentions are noble.'  Neither you nor Obama know the first thing about creating jobs, but both of you know a hell of a lot about creating higher unemployment and more welfare dependency.

As I said, I've been through this.  I've witnessed it up close and personal, as well as making it an area of study for many years.  The US is following the UK and Europe down the same dead-end road and committing suicide by demographics.

Do you realise that not a single country in all of Europe has a fertility rate of 2.1, which is considered the replacement rate, ie, the rate necessary for the population to remain stable?  Even before the financial meltdown, Spain and Greece, in particular, had fertility rates so low that their populations would halve themselves with successive generations. 

Russia?  FR = 1.54.  It has a population around 141 million now.  By 2040, its population is expected to be 110 million. 

Japan?  FR = 1.3.  Last year, for the first time, more adult diapers were sold in Japan than baby diapers.

China?  FR = 1.6

The US?  FR = 1.93 in 2010.  The lowest it has been since it last lowest ever: 1973, which was, coincidentally, the year Roe v Wade was handed down.  More depressingly, middle class and educated women have a FR of only 1.6.  To put that into context, the EU has an overall FR of 1.5, although much of it is driven by Muslim immigrants, who have larger families.

And, before anyone says 'Well, Mexican-Americans will replace disappearing white taxpayers!,' hold on a minute.  In just three years - between 2007 and 2010 - the birthrate for Mexican-Americans dropped an astonishing 23%.

Why do we need people?  Well, apart from needing a tax base so that the entire country doesn't become Detroit, you have to have enough young workers to pay for the ever-increasing aging population. 

Several decades ago, white Europeans decided that they just couldn't be bothered to have children.  Of course, this presented a huge problem given the fact that they not only loved their luxurious welfare hammocks, they believed they were entitled to them.  Konstantinos in Athens thought he was entitled to retire to his Speedos at 50 at 97% of his highest annual salary and it was up to the government to figure out how to pay for it.  And, while Marina and the rest of the bamboccioni in Italy find it perfectly acceptable to be sleeping in their childhood bedrooms when they are in their late 30s and have absolutely no problem with suing their elderly parents for allowances, they aren't having children, which is probably a good thing, nor is anyone hiring them, which is likewise understandable.  Soooo, there aren't enough workers paying taxes to support the retirees, which brings us to...

THE USA! USA! USA!  Beginning on 1 January 2010 and continuing through 2020, at least, 10,000 Americans will become eligible for Social Security and Medicare EVERY. SINGLE. DAY.  Now, if 20% of American households are already on food stamps, our labour force participation rate is at the level it was in 1979, and we aren't birthin' no babies, just who exactly do you think is going to pay for all of the Big Government that you love so much?

In 2010, John Kitchen of the US Treasury and Menzie Chinn of the University of Wisconsin published a study entitled:




By 2020, Kitchen and Chinn project the amount of US Treasury debt that foreign governments will have to buy in order to finance our spending and debt will have to rise to about 19 percent of the rest of the world’s GDP, which they say is . . . do-able . . . BUT TOTALLY NEVER GONNA HAPPEN UNREALISTIC. 




Whether the rest of the world will want to do it is another matter. A future that presumes the rest of the planet will sink a fifth of its GDP into U.S. Treasuries is no future at all. 

Progs always say that we are 5% of the world’s population, but use 25% of the planet’s resources, which, according to them, is a very bad, racist, oppressive, selfish, and mean thing to do.

Evidently, being 5% of the world’s population and expecting the equivalent of the Coolies to build our modern-day railroads, which are known as Obamacare, Social Security, Medicare, free college, subsidised housing, cradle-to-grave welfare, etc., by demanding that the rest of the world spend 19% OF THE GLOBAL GDP EVERY YEAR ON US TREASURIES beginning in 2020 while we sit on our couches eating Twinkies watching American Idol while our solar-panel-generated air conditioners are blasting away because “we are so trying to save the planet, man” is perfectly acceptable.

To argue otherwise would be racist...


1 comment:

JTGA said...

Too bad Ann Dunham wasn't a more loyal lib, following the party line of abortion.....she could have spared us all a LOT of heartache and pain...........