jump to navigation

Actually, Chelsea Clinton, Abortion Has Cost the United States At Least a Trillion Dollars in the Last 45 Years August 15, 2018

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Abortion, contraception, cultural marxism, disaster, General Catholic, horror, Revolution, secularism, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
trackback

Chelsea Clinton, demonstrating all the charm, logic, and morality of her corrupt mother and hideous father, emoted the other day an obvious scripted talking point claiming that abortion had given women freedom to enter the workforce, and that addition of female workers, freed from the tyranny of motherhood and at truly meaningful and happy life, had added some $3.5 trillion to the economy:

At the event promoting opposition to President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, the former First Daughter of President Bill Clinton credited legalized abortion for helping add trillions of dollars to the U.S economy because women who had abortions were more inclined to enter the labor force:

“Whether you fundamentally care about reproductive rights and access right, because these are not the same thing, if you care about social justice or economic justice, agency — you have to care about this.

“It is not a disconnected fact — to address this t-shirt of 1973 –that American women entering the labor force from 1973 to 2009 added three and a half trillion dollars to our economy. Right?

“The net, new entrance of women — that is not disconnected from the fact that Roe became the law of the land in January of 1973.”

Thus, this little bit of foolishness was part of a fundraising effort to help the demonrats win in the 2018 midterms.  It reveals once again that abortion has been and remains the most sacred shibboleth of the post-60s American Left, and the most important rallying cry to get their troops out to stuff ballot boxes and flood polling stations this November.  Normally, demonrats don’t turn out very well for mid-terms, but we shall see whether their total mental breakdown since Trump’s election will give them the wherewithal to vote this fall.

Not mentioned, of course, was the great wage depression that has occurred since the economic and cultural powers that be managed to convinced women that the drudgery or work and actually represented freedom and empowerment, and thus unleashed tens of millions of new workers into the economy – which just happened to create probably the primary cause of the overall wage stagnation most people have experienced over the past 40 years.  After all, if you flood the economy with tens of millions of new workers – not to mention illegal aliens willing to work off the books and with no benefits – you’re going to produce a a serious downward pressure on income.  A downward pressure sufficient so that it is now extremely difficult, it not impossible, for many families to survive on the single income of the father as they did for decades.  Clinton’s flawed calculus also fails to take into account the vast sums spent, often at taxpayer expense, to raise and care for children who have no parent at home to care for them.  Then there is the terrible pressure both parents working has put on millions of marriages, helping to exacerbate the crisis of divorce in this nation and around the world.

But above and beyond the above factors – and there are far more – left out of this incredibly simplistic calculation is the massive net LOSS to the economy from the unnatural deaths of some 55 million Americans since Roe v. Wade was implemented.  Even assuming those children only earned, on average, $15,000 annually since 1991 (substantially below the average per capita income since then), that would still mean that $4.5 TRILLION has been lost due to this ongoing policy of legalized mass murder.  In fact the number is probably far higher.  Some have calculated the negative economic impact of abortion at $9 trillion (I think this number is off, but I’m going into that right now).

So even assuming that Clinton’s “positive” numbers are right due to women entering the workforce, if abortion be a substantial cause of that entrance, then it has still caused at least a net deficit of $1 trillion, and again, probably much higher than that.

This leaves out, of course, the probable hundred million-plus Americans never born due to contraception.  Those never-happened births represent an economic loss ranging into the tens of trillions.  If the US had maintained the same degree of total female fertility it had in 1960 – 3.7 live births per woman – the US would not have “needed” mass importation of low-wage, low-skill, culturally incompatible people in their tens of millions, and we would have a much, much larger and more robust economy.

But the Left has sold about 30-70% of the population, depending on how you look at it, on a grand bargain – economic, cultural, and political enslavement in exchange for unlimited sexual license (for now – the Soviet communists, and the Maoists and others, were really big on granting sexual liberation, for a time, in order to destroy the latent Christian culture in their respective countries, but once that goal was achieved, they generally imposed a moral regime more severe than anything seen in formerly Christian countries in centuries, if ever).  It’s very much a have fun now, pay me later kind of deal.  Only the “fun” is oversold, and the psychological, physical, economic, and cultural ramifications are always much worse, and much greater, than anyone could imagine.

Diabolical narcissism, and all that.  And, oh yes, a democratic socialist (for that is what the party is, at this point, by their own proud declarations) lied, or radically twisted and simplified a complex situation down to a narrow and utterly false point to serve their interest in gaining power for themselves and stealing it from others.  Big surprise.  Film at 11.

Comments

1. Baseballmomof8 - August 15, 2018

I was hoping I’d see a response to Ms. Clinton’s insanity. Thanks for this! Hope you and the family are doing well 🙂

2. Michele Kerby - August 16, 2018

I’m pro-life but either this is way off or I’m missing something. I can see how more workers could drive down wages, especially with so many greedy ceo’s and stock owners. But how is it that taking some 55 million potential workers out of the workforce is also bad for the economy? Where are the statistics saying that abortion has cost the country a trillion dollars?

c matt - August 20, 2018

I think the key to the economic argument (which, to me is largely irrelevant as abortion is wrong full stop) is that the 55 million would not be “off the books” employment, as much of illegal immigrant employment must be. That illegal immigrant employment disproportionately does not pay tax to the host government while also sending much of their earnings out of the country – you can view that as either a foreign subsidy or a foreign tax – but the net result being it goes out of our economy into another country’s. As well as further depressing wages because, being “off the books” minimum wage laws are irrelevant.

Thus, abortion, by artificially creating (or at least increasing) the demand for illegal immigrant labor hurts our own economy.

Michele Kerby - August 20, 2018

You made some very good points. Undocumented workers often accept jobs which Americans won’t because of low pay or safety concerns. If employers had only Americans in the labor pool, perhaps they would be forced to pay fair wages and keep the workplace reasonably safe. And those would be very good things.

Camper - August 21, 2018

Hi Michele. The correct term is “illegal immigrants.” They are criminals. There are laws to protect the character of this country, which would be ruined by the invasion, or importation, if you like, of many millions of people from dysfunctional countries where bribery, lawlessness, and big government are rampant. They are invaders and they do not belong here.

Michele Kerby - August 21, 2018

To be completely honest, there is no agreed-upon correct term. The correct terms is whatever the writer wishes it to be. I don’t know what you mean by “ruining the character of the country”. Would you kindly clarify that? As for being invaders from “dysfunctional countries where bribery, lawlessness, and big government are rampant”, that’s what most of our ancestors did. Incidentally, they also did a thorough job of changing the physical character of the country as well.

Camper - August 22, 2018

Illegal immigrant is a much more accurate term, and unlike “undocumented worker”, it is not used by demagogues. An American tax dodger is also an
“undocumented worker”, but of course, you meant an illegal foreigner – an illegal immigrant. I will clarify. Most immigrants do not attach importance to things that made America great – no government interference in the media, very small government in general, firearms rights for law abiding citizens, no bribery, the rule of law. Mexico, for example, has terrible records on all of those things. Despite their secularism, Americans are still probably the most religious people among the industrialized countries with the exception of Korea and the United Arab Emirates. That religiosity deserves to be protected. There are governments that have advantages over us, but probably no country has all of America’s advantages to the degree that we do.

Camper - August 22, 2018

And no, our ancestors did not engage in bribery and lawlessness. Until the left began to wreak havoc on the country, this was one of the world’s most law abiding countries. If you are referring to Indians, the Indians attacked us for occupying land that they were not using.

3. Mary Anne - August 16, 2018

Why can’t Chelsea Dawn shut up and be ladylike as Caroline Kennedy is. I’m old enough to remember seeing Chelsea as a little girl holding her Mothers hand as Mom spoke to the future deplorables. Remember the controversy caused when little Chelsea called the cops ‘pigs’? And doesn’t she realize that she was fortunate to have been born at all?

4. The Lord's Blog - August 16, 2018

Reblogged this on Jean'sBistro2010's Blog and commented:
Excellent commentary.

5. Camper - August 16, 2018

Everybody says that we are supposed to avoid comparing our political opponents to the Nazis, but when children are disposable so that the economy can purportedly be strong, why should the category be off limits? This is Gattica, the Brave New World, and the Third Reich all rolled into one.

c matt - August 20, 2018

Avengers Infinity Wars SPOILER ALERT

Having just watched Infinity Wars, it is beyond ironic that the evil Thanos is pushing exactly the same arguments/plan – reduce the universe’s population by 50% because sustainability. At least I give Thanos credit – under his plan the reduction is completely random – rich or poor, smart or dumb, weak or strong – it just hits like a plague and is no respecter of persons. In that sense, his plans are less evil than those of Agenda 21 and similar efforts of our “elites.” How is it that:

1. When Thanos does it, it is evil, but when the US/EU/UN do it, it is progress
2. When Thanos’s plan is to administer death and destruction randomly it is more evil than the US/EU/UN targeted genocides of the poorer and weaker, and
3. How did this ever get past the progressive Hollywood gatekeepers?

Granted, this is Part I. Maybe in Part II, Thanos repents, and redeems himself by only killing approved groups under the direction of the white and the blue helmets. Or maybe he re-brands his plan as implementing really really late term abortions, and all is forgiven.

6. dthy - August 17, 2018

For every woman who has taken a job formerly considered mostly for men, there’s one man sitting around doing nothing–probably collecting welfare.


Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: