Home > Uncategorized > Abortion, welfare and mandatory health insurance

Abortion, welfare and mandatory health insurance

With the liberal crowd always shouting for more social programs I can’t see why they support abortion.

If we need to ‘keep our laws off woman’s bodies’ than how can they tell me what to do with mine in the form of getting health insurance to take care of that body? After all, if I either don’t want medical care or choose to pay for it myself than that’s my choice. My choice of how to handle my own body. But I digress…

If the idea behind mandatory coverage for healthy people is to be able to finance the medical expenses of those who are less healthy, than it seems like abortion is taking a large share of future financing from the program. The same could be said for other forms of welfare. We could do more if we didn’t abort babies, their future taxes should amount to quite a sum.

The statistical average yearly tax bill for an American is 25,000$ (remember those at the top pay the vast majority of taxes. 1 person paying 1 million in tax and 20 paying 10 thousand would show an average of over 57 thousand each. ). Since 1973 they estimate 45 million legal abortions in the US. Lets assume that once all is said and done that those people who were never born would end up spread, financially, like the rest of us.

The yearly ‘cost’ of those abortions since 1973 would therefore be above 1 trillion dollars. 1,125,000,000,000 to be exact.

To be fair it’s not likely that the unborn would end up spread out like the general population. What, with most abortions being performed on people at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder. But, even if you were to assume an average tax bill of only 1,000$ over that whole group of 45 million people, we are still talking about 45 billion dollars a year. At 10,000$, which is likely the most reasonable figure, it jumps up to 450 billion a year in ‘lost’ tax revenue.

I don’t subscribe to the idea of a ‘cost’ for any of this. All I have heard recently is what the ‘cost’ of extending the current levels of taxation for the richer people as well as for the ‘middle class’. It follows that those people who went unborn due to the laws in place in this country should also count as a ‘cost’

If you do subscribe to that thinking than you must ask yourself if abortion truly only effect the one getting the abortion or if it has a greater overall affect on society. Think of all those roads that have gone unpaved, all those who have gone hungry because the welfare benefits were not good enough and finally think about how much higher your taxes are because of 45 million fewer people being in the tax pool with you.

It’s not all as simple as this of course. Higher population would mean a greater demand for government services that cost money. There are also those people who would not live to the ripe old age of 16 or so where most people start working.

So when you say other people getting abortions is their business and theirs alone, it’s really not. At least if you want a giant government supporting most of the population, that makes it everyone’s business. Lets try to do something about that shall we? Cut government down to size or stop aborting the fetus’s that eventually become taxpayers.

Advertisements
Categories: Uncategorized
  1. 2010/12/22 at 10:51

    There’s a few things I have to ask about. First, you are doing “static forcasting” where the totals you get assume that changing abortion rates would not impact the pregnancy rates. I imagine without legal abortions, or with the funding system changed, people would be more likely to use birth control and less pregnancies would occur.

    I would also expect the people who are aborted to be more poorer and more likely to commit crimes. It’s possible that these people would have been a net drain on society.

  2. 2010/12/22 at 15:22

    I’m sure you’re right, like I said its more complex.

    A mere hypothetical using only what Google tells me for statistics and assuming a best case scenario.

    It was more the staggering number that got me. There’s also the fact that many abortions are performed on “repeat offenders” They may have more than one abortion within the time it would take to carry one child to term, thus ruining my numbers in one more way.

    Lets not forget that it’s possible that one of those persons that have been aborted could have cured cancer by now or perhaps figured out an easier way to spread peanut butter without ripping the bread.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: