Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Pelosi: Fewer Babies = Stronger Economy  
User currently offlineStarbuk7 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 599 posts, RR: 5
Posted (5 years 10 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 1726 times:

Now they want to tell us how to live our lives and if we can have children, sounds like China.

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/Default.aspx?id=398956

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi stirred up a hornet's nest by promoting the idea of spending of millions of dollars on birth control and abortion as part of the economic stimulus package.

54 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAGM100 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 5407 posts, RR: 17
Reply 1, posted (5 years 10 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 1722 times:

Man can you imagine if a white republican would have suggested this .. ouch. I am not surprised about this at all.. She is a left wing socialists ... social engineering is a mandate for them.


You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
User currently offlineMt99 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 6651 posts, RR: 6
Reply 2, posted (5 years 10 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 1714 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Starbuk7 (Thread starter):
Now they want to tell us how to live our lives and if we can have children, sounds like China

I certainly am not in a postion to defend abortion as a family planning method. but the fact of the matter is that there is a balance somewhere in terms on how many persons a particular are can sustain.

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 1):
Man can you imagine if a white republican would have suggested this ..

He would never. What is your point?



Step into my office, baby
User currently offlineStarbuk7 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 599 posts, RR: 5
Reply 3, posted (5 years 10 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 1698 times:



Quoting Mt99 (Reply 2):
I certainly am not in a position to defend abortion as a family planning method. but the fact of the matter is that there is a balance somewhere in terms on how many persons a particular are can sustain.

IMHO if you can afford the amount of children you have without handouts from the government you should be allowed to have as many as you want, again, as long as you can afford all the costs of raising them WITHOUT help from anyone else or the government.


User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8710 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (5 years 10 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 1698 times:

It's funny because of how wrong she is. Rich well educated women need to have more kids.

The USA does not have any population problems. If anything, we need more population to support our real estate market over time. The baby boomer generation is going to die off. Many kids will be needed to work in the USA when they are gone.

So she's just wrong, period. There are some groups who have too many kids. Kids they can't afford to care for. Kids who end up in our 2+ million prison population. But from nice families, we need all the kids we can get. Other countries are in full blown crisis b/c they don't have enough babies. Japan, Russia, Italy. They are desperate for more kids.

It's also worth pointing out that we have 10+ million illegal visitors in the USA. Of course, if we have too many people here (say the schools are full), they would be the first to go.

China is never shy about kicking out illegal visitors. Mexico kicks out illegal visitors also, IIRC.


User currently offlineMt99 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 6651 posts, RR: 6
Reply 5, posted (5 years 10 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 1689 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Starbuk7 (Reply 3):
without handouts from the government you should be allowed to have as many as you want,

WHoa.. easy there tiger.. How would you determine if Sue and Bob should have 3 or 4 children? How would can you quantify the quality of life 3 children would have compared with 4?

Are you suggesting only rich people should have children? Who is sounding like China now?



Step into my office, baby
User currently offlineFr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5603 posts, RR: 15
Reply 6, posted (5 years 10 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 1691 times:

I wonder where she, and her ilk, expect to get future workers to pay into the massive entitlement kitty that Obama and gang are putting together? Not that the kitty is small now, by any stretch of the imagination.


When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlineMt99 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 6651 posts, RR: 6
Reply 7, posted (5 years 10 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1674 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Flighty (Reply 4):
. There are some groups who have too many kids. Kids they can't afford to care for. Kids who end up in our 2+ million prison population.

That is what she is referring too. Sounds like you agree with her.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 4):
But from nice families, we need all the kids we can get.

Absolutely. Go ahead and define a "nice family" for me please? Once you have settled on this defination, how about a law allowing children to only families that fit your description



Step into my office, baby
User currently offlineStarbuk7 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 599 posts, RR: 5
Reply 8, posted (5 years 10 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1674 times:



Quoting Mt99 (Reply 5):
WHoa.. easy there tiger.. How would you determine if Sue and Bob should have 3 or 4 children? How would can you quantify the quality of life 3 children would have compared with 4?

Sue and Bob need to sit down with their budget and decide if they can have 3 or 4 children. If they financially can't then they should think about waiting and using birth control (not abortion) until their finical status improve.

Now if something should happen like losing a job or getting a disability that is a different case.

Besides, in China you can only have one no matter what.


User currently offlineMt99 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 6651 posts, RR: 6
Reply 9, posted (5 years 10 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1666 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Starbuk7 (Reply 8):
If they financially can't then they should think about waiting and using birth control (not abortion) until their finical status improve.

So let me get this straight. You are agreeing with Nancy here..

Quote from your link

"It's quite shocking, actually, that the Speaker of the House -- who claims to be Catholic -- would go on national television and claim that contraception would reduce the cost to the government, " exclaims Fani. "It's just beyond words, really.

You are agreeing with her.



Step into my office, baby
User currently offlineTugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5742 posts, RR: 10
Reply 10, posted (5 years 10 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1654 times:

Gee, talk about a flame-bait article! So much for the hope of differing sides being willing to seek what they have in common and work together.

And of course on its face, the title of the article is wrong:

Quoting Starbuk7 (Thread starter):
Pelosi: Fewer Babies = Stronger Economy

First Pelosi did not say that, this is what she is doing:

Quoting Starbuk7 (Thread starter):
promoting the idea of spending of millions of dollars on birth control and abortion as part of the economic stimulus package.

, second it has been proven many times over that a stagnant and even shrinking population base are, in general, not good for national economies.

Quoting Starbuk7 (Thread starter):
Now they want to tell us how to live our lives and if we can have children, sounds like China.

Wrong! Flat out, 100% wrong. This is nothing like China, giving more people the OPTION of using family planning services is a good idea. This is not FORCING people to use the services or to not have kids. That she, as a Catholic, is able to put forth ideas that can be good for the nation and not bring her religious view point into it is exactly what the people of this nation and Congress need. Less religion in politics, more freedom for people to live their lives as they deem proper.

Of course there is no stopping weak media types from exploiting stuff and throwing sensationalized headlines for others to use to the detriment of the discussion. All "sides" do it, it happened in the last administration and will in the future.

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlinePPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8971 posts, RR: 39
Reply 11, posted (5 years 10 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1642 times:



Quoting Mt99 (Reply 2):
but the fact of the matter is that there is a balance somewhere in terms on how many persons a particular are can sustain.

Populations don't seem to naturally grow to unsustainable levels. Famines tend to be extraneous events that catches us (and all other animals) off guard. Even less so in humans, since the wealthier we become the lower the birth rate seems to get. We want to expand our well-being and rationally choose to have fewer children when we don't need them. The equation seems to work the other way around for low-income farmers in the third world, since they need the manpower to help out.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 4):
It's funny because of how wrong she is.

More evidently, to support retiring baby boomers with all the welfare promised, we need more kids. She seems to forget that Social Security is basically a Pyramid/Ponzi Scheme depending on people paying into it to support its activities. A shrinking base will eventually implode the system.



"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
User currently offlineMt99 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 6651 posts, RR: 6
Reply 12, posted (5 years 10 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1636 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting PPVRA (Reply 11):
Populations don't seem to naturally grow to unsustainable levels. Famines tend to be extraneous events that catches us (and all other animals) off guard.

Yea. I am sure all those tons of happy children in Somalia are testament to that.



Step into my office, baby
User currently offlineTugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5742 posts, RR: 10
Reply 13, posted (5 years 10 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1621 times:



Quoting Mt99 (Reply 12):
Quoting PPVRA (Reply 11):
Populations don't seem to naturally grow to unsustainable levels. Famines tend to be extraneous events that catches us (and all other animals) off guard.

Yea. I am sure all those tons of happy children in Somalia are testament to that.

Unfortunately, much of that is due to the international aid that flows in and supports a level that the nation of Somalia (if you can actually still call it that) can not "naturally" or on it owns support.

But then what do you do, watch people by the thousands starve? Same thing could be said for Welfare, WIC, and Food Stamps in the USA.

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlineMt99 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 6651 posts, RR: 6
Reply 14, posted (5 years 10 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1615 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Tugger (Reply 13):
But then what do you do, watch people by the thousands starve? Same thing could be said for Welfare, WIC, and Food Stamps in the USA.

Sound like a great solution. I am sure Starbuk would much rather cut off any government assistance to under privileged kids. I am sure that after a few cycles parents will understand that they should only have the number of kids that they can afford. Teach them the hard way i say! No free handouts!



Step into my office, baby
User currently offlineJBo From Sweden, joined Jan 2005, 2374 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (5 years 10 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1614 times:



Quoting Mt99 (Reply 7):
Absolutely. Go ahead and define a "nice family" for me please? Once you have settled on this defination, how about a law allowing children to only families that fit your description

I'll throw a definition out: a "nice family" being one that is responsible for their own welfare by living within their own means throughout all areas of life, and if they cannot maintain a healthy living within their means, they take the responsibility to do so without relying on government aid.

I think they key word here is "responsible" ... and regardless however you want to spin Pelosi's words, the promotion of birth control is, in turn, a promotion of responsiblity.

I would like any of you to give me a good reason why the government encouraging its citizens to be responsible with their life decisions is a bad thing.



I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance any day.
User currently offlineDragon6172 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 1203 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (5 years 10 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1593 times:



Quoting Starbuk7 (Reply 3):
IMHO if you can afford the amount of children you have without handouts from the government you should be allowed to have as many as you want, again, as long as you can afford all the costs of raising them WITHOUT help from anyone else or the government

Where do you draw the line for what is considered help from the government? For example, if everyone had more kids, that would require more schools. Communities can get grants and other forms of government money to build these schools. Is that considered getting help from the government to raise your kids?



Phrogs Phorever
User currently offlineCharles79 From Puerto Rico, joined Mar 2007, 1331 posts, RR: 6
Reply 17, posted (5 years 10 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 1574 times:



Quoting Starbuk7 (Thread starter):
Now they want to tell us how to live our lives and if we can have children, sounds like China.



Quoting Tugger (Reply 10):
Wrong! Flat out, 100% wrong. This is nothing like China, giving more people the OPTION of using family planning services is a good idea. This is not FORCING people to use the services or to not have kids. That she, as a Catholic, is able to put forth ideas that can be good for the nation and not bring her religious view point into it is exactly what the people of this nation and Congress need. Less religion in politics, more freedom for people to live their lives as they deem proper.

Well said Tugger!

To add to this don't forget which party IS the one who likes to tell you how to run your life, like who you can marry and who you can sleep with.

Quoting JBo (Reply 15):
I would like any of you to give me a good reason why the government encouraging its citizens to be responsible with their life decisions is a bad thing.

I doubt you'll get a meaningful response to that question, but it'll be fun to watch them try.


User currently offlineCairo From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (5 years 10 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 1558 times:



Quoting AGM100 (Reply 1):
She is a left wing socialists

I'm not sure advocating increased birth control availability is part of socialism, or, get ready for it...even communism.

Quoting Starbuk7 (Reply 3):
as long as you can afford all the costs of raising them WITHOUT help from anyone else or the government

Agree. Government imposed licenses to fly, to drive, to catch fish; tests to get into college, to drive, to get jobs....yet no effort is made to encourage education and responsible creation of young humans?

Quoting Mt99 (Reply 5):
Are you suggesting only rich people should have children?

No, but those in poverty should definitely not have children. What's wrong with the government helping them not have children?

Quoting Fr8mech (Reply 6):
I wonder where she, and her ilk, expect to get future workers to pay into the massive entitlement kitty

hello? It sounds to me she's trying to reduce the numbers of those who need the "massive entitlement kitty" by encouraging only those who can afford to reproduce.

Cairo


User currently offlineMt99 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 6651 posts, RR: 6
Reply 19, posted (5 years 10 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 1527 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Charles79 (Reply 17):
I doubt you'll get a meaningful response to that question, but it'll be fun to watch them try.

I guess A.net servers cant keep up with all of their intelligent responses...



Step into my office, baby
User currently offlineSlider From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6912 posts, RR: 34
Reply 20, posted (5 years 10 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 1527 times:



Quoting Mt99 (Reply 2):
but the fact of the matter is that there is a balance somewhere in terms on how many persons a particular are can sustain.



Quoting Flighty (Reply 4):
Rich well educated women need to have more kids.

The USA does not have any population problems. If anything, we need more population to support our real estate market over time. The baby boomer generation is going to die off. Many kids will be needed to work in the USA when they are gone.

Right now, most of the Western world's population growth rate is at levels that are unsustainable for continuation. Japan just enacted the "go home and procreate" time off because they realize Japan is on a demographic path to disaster.

The math is quote simple really. Yet it gets ignored.

Again, it's not the government's job to even suggest this. Stay the hell out of MY life!! Just like typical creeping incrementalism and social engineering, it's going to start simple and innocent like this, and then it'll grow into much more.

Pelosi simply is an idiot. She is a total moron.

If anything, we need MORE kids to eventually grow our economy, contribute to society, have families of their own, etc.


User currently offlineN867DA From United States of America, joined May 2008, 1012 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (5 years 10 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 1521 times:

Some parts of the world could do with fewer people.

Quoting Cairo (Reply 18):

No, but those in poverty should definitely not have children.

 checkmark  It shouldn't be anyone's duty to determine who can procreate and who cannot, but there is an unmistakable truth to this statement.



A nation turns its lonely eyes to you
User currently offlineMt99 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 6651 posts, RR: 6
Reply 22, posted (5 years 10 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 1512 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Slider (Reply 20):
Stay the hell out of MY life!!

There is a cabin in Montana for you...

Quoting Slider (Reply 20):
Right now, most of the Western world's population growth rate is at levels that are unsustainable for continuation. Japan just enacted the "go home and procreate" time off because they realize Japan is on a demographic path to disaster.

So have everyone get pregnant everytime they have have sex? Simple. But then dont come crying that the state is paying for schooling and health care for them.

The Japanese Government will pay for those new children. Which is fine by me, but i thought you did not like governmental intervention. Isnt the Japanese Government telling these people what to do? How do you say "stay the Hell out of my MY life" in Japanese?


Quoting Slider (Reply 20):
If anything, we need MORE kids to eventually grow our economy, contribute to society, have families of their own, etc.

Is that why Somalia is doing so well?

[Edited 2009-01-27 15:01:18]


Step into my office, baby
User currently offlineAGM100 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 5407 posts, RR: 17
Reply 23, posted (5 years 10 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1481 times:



Quoting Cairo (Reply 18):
I'm not sure advocating increased birth control availability is part of socialism, or, get ready for it...even communism.

Its not birth control .. its abortion. they are not spending billions handing out coloring books and condoms. They are paying for medical procedures. And ,Pelosi needs to pay back political donors like Planned PH , and other activist groups who pour lots of money into campaigns to protect abortion rights . Its all about the cash ,

For her to lump this in as a economic issue is what is scary , since the majority of unwanted pregnancies are among poor minorities. Is she is targeting demographics ???



You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
User currently offlineCairo From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (5 years 10 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1470 times:



Quoting AGM100 (Reply 23):
For her to lump this in as a economic issue is what is scary , since the majority of unwanted pregnancies are among poor minorities. Is she is targeting demographics ???

I would never deny that like most everything that comes out of Washington, this is motivated by lobbyists and special interests, but again, your theory doesn't really make sense to me.

If she is targeting poor minorities - she's helping the Republicans, who would easily win every election if there were a lot fewer urban minorities. In fact, one of the reasons the future looks a bit rosier for the Democrats is because minorities are growing rapidly in number...why would she want to stop this?

Also, distasteful as it may be in methodology, it seems she is making a valid economic argument in that reducing the numbers of poor people through birth control reduces welfare roles and helps the economy.

I presume it is mainly abortion you are against?

Cairo


25 AGM100 : I personally don't like it , but I am not a women so it is not my issue. I just don't want my tax dollars paying for abortions .. That's awful ,
26 Aaron747 : True enough - they realized it 10 years too late and the government is too xenophobic to even consider allowing more immigration. I wish BOTH parties
27 Flighty : True. Of course, it is not easy. The fact remains that the USA is a mix of demographics. Some people in the USA have too many kids. Kids who cost soc
28 WunalaYann : What about a real estate market that actually meets the needs of the population, and not the other way around?
29 Flighty : Maybe we could bomb another country to fix our real estate market.
30 Rara : Incorrect. But I'm to lazy to type, look it up on Wikipedia or something..
31 Alien : Talk about hypocrisy. This is the same Nancy Pelosi with five children and seven grandchildren. I just love people who say the answer to the world's p
32 Yellowstone : But the Pelosi family has the material resources to support the raising of five children, and more importantly they were willing to raise five childr
33 PPVRA : African poverty exists because of their corrupt and highly controlling governments. Somalia is a country run by warlords, overrun by terrorists and m
34 Cairo : Someday we may have the right "given" to us by our elected officials to vote directly on how our tax dollars are spent, which programs we want to fun
35 PPVRA : You don't have a right to breach someone else's rights. A woman may have the right to choose to abort a child, but that's the extent of it. You can a
36 Mt99 : Exactly. But what has given power to these militias? essentially the control of scare resources. Its a vicious circle. See it not just people facing
37 Mham001 : It always interests me how the same people who have been telling us since the 70's to have fewer children are the same ones telling us we need more il
38 Doona : Didn't the French start showing porn on state TV in order to boost nativity? IIRC, it worked... And it certainly made the lives of every teenager wit
39 Beaucaire : Poverty in many thirdworld countries (but not only ..) can be scientifically tied to excessive number of children to feed.While tribal populations do
40 Starbuk7 : OK, so it seems that several of you here are telling me that we are to stupid (yourselves included) to know how to raise a family, how many children w
41 Beaucaire : To put down a blunt answer -yes ! Many families are to damm stupid to anticipate the strain on available resources tied to a huge number of kids.Birt
42 IAirAllie : He's not suggesting anything of the sort. He is suggesting that people should take personal accountablitiy and not have more children than they are c
43 Aaron747 : The amazing thing about it all is that it receives more direct attention in foreign press than it does in Japanese media. The local media here treat
44 Starbuk7 : I have spent time in lesser developed countries, all over Asia and Africa during my 20 years in the navy, and I have seen just about everything. I am
45 Mt99 : So you agree with Nancy once more. What is your point again? From the alarmist thread title seems like you opposed her view, but the more you post th
46 Post contains links Beaucaire : If the globe can support about 7 Billion population but with an ever growing desire to consume more fossile energy,pullute water,air and soil- there
47 Windy95 : Then let her donate it out of her own rich pockets if she believes in it so much. But do not use tax dollars to support her position on the subject.
48 AGM100 : Please ... are you in favor of our federal government promoting and paying for abortions ? I mean imagine the implications of the Federal government
49 Mt99 : Its not just her position. It is also the position of many millions of individual citizens. Stop using the slippery slope argument. It only useful if
50 KiwiRob : Not true there are exceptions, including rural couples, ethnic minorities, and parents who are only children themselves And look at the problems immi
51 Windy95 : Is it the majority?? Let them donate to planned abortionhood if they want. I am all for helping in the case of life endangerment but not for social e
52 Mt99 : So.. do the majority of the population want weapons?
53 Post contains links Yellowstone : If you want to insult a group, at least be factually accurate. Abortions comprised just 3 percent of the services provided by Planned Parenthood in 2
54 DocLightning : Please find a single quote in which anyone has proposed anything remotely like China. Specifically: *Please find any proposal to place limits on how
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Obama Says Aiding Economy Trumps Budget Deficit posted Sun Nov 16 2008 19:37:05 by PPVRA
Sour Economy Hits Home posted Fri Nov 14 2008 04:21:44 by Sacamojus
"Obama Babies" Nine Months After Election Night? posted Fri Nov 7 2008 05:59:19 by Planespotting
Irish Economy Sinks Into Recession 'official' posted Thu Sep 25 2008 08:24:28 by OA260
"The People's House, Not Pelosi's Politburo!" posted Fri Aug 1 2008 23:46:38 by JCS17
FOX Trying To Blame Media, Obama For Economy? posted Sat Jul 26 2008 08:11:13 by Falcon84
Ms. Pelosi Calls Bush A Failure posted Thu Jul 17 2008 15:55:46 by Starbuk7
Where's The Fairness Doctrine Now Ms. Pelosi? posted Thu Jul 17 2008 11:07:25 by Pope
If You Are Worried About The Economy... posted Thu Jan 31 2008 11:08:37 by Cfalk
Listen To The Idiots Ruining Our Economy... posted Wed Jan 30 2008 13:52:30 by NWA742