What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

The 112th Congress - A Congress divided shall not cry!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: The 112th Congress - A Congress divided shall not cry!

unofan said:
Yeah, but reliance upon charity isn't exactly proper governance for a 1st world country. Charity should be a back-up to government support, not a solution in lieu of such.
Click to expand...

Sure. You have to understand we're talking in hypotheticals here though. I'm saying, if abortion was banned (which it will never be), there would be a variety of solutions that arise as opposed to soaking the taxpayers. That's all.
 
Re: The 112th Congress - A Congress divided shall not cry!

Bob Gray said:
Charity works far better when it is not from the government. But, we've gotten so used to the government doing everything that we assume that the government takes care of whatever charity there needs to be. But the end product isn't nearly as good as when it comes from private organizations, IMHO.
Click to expand...

Yeah, my dad was just thinking the other day that he'd much rather be relying on charity than those Social Security checks he's been getting.
 
Re: The 112th Congress - A Congress divided shall not cry!

Bob Gray said:
You ducked my question of what do you say?
Click to expand...

What question? I didn't mean to duck anything (I tend to opine pretty freely if you haven't noticed...)

If you're asking what I think about abortion: I think calling a cluster of cells one second after conception a human life is like calling abstinence murder -- I supposed one could make an "argument from potentiality" but it doesn't convince me. Viability at least is convincing, and it has the advantage of corresponding closely with "the quickening" which before Highlander actually meant the standard after which you shouldn't have an abortion and before which you could just get back on your normal cycle.

My strongest instinct is a bunch of creepy old men in a Star Chamber deciding what a young woman should do when she gets pregnant is very Sharia and I want no part of it. Absent a Council of Wise Fertile Women, the best standard we have is a matter of individual choice for the woman, which she has the right to anyway since there is a basic standard of dignity of the individual that is offended when the state decides to police someone's body.
 
Last edited:
Re: The 112th Congress - A Congress divided shall not cry!

unofan said:
Yeah, but reliance upon charity isn't exactly proper governance for a 1st world country. Charity should be a back-up to government support, not a solution in lieu of such.
Click to expand...

You may want to check with the Father of the Constitution on that one.

"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents."
 
Re: The 112th Congress - A Congress divided shall not cry!

MinnFan said:
You may want to check with the Father of the Constitution on that one.

"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents."
Click to expand...

Ah...pardon me if I dont take the word of the second biggest hypocrit (Jefferson being by far #1) amongst the founders...
 
Re: The 112th Congress - A Congress divided shall not cry!

ScoobyDoo said:
Yeah, my dad was just thinking the other day that he'd much rather be relying on charity than those Social Security checks he's been getting.
Click to expand...

yah, Social Security is pretty much charity from future generations to past generations, given the massive transfer of wealth from one generation to the other. But I don't think most people would consider Social Security as falling under what would typically be considered a charity.

Quite frankly, I have more expectation for charity to be there when I'd be eligible for Social Security than expectation that there'll be anything left of Social Security by then.
 
Re: The 112th Congress - A Congress divided shall not cry!

Bob Gray said:
yah, Social Security is pretty much charity from future generations to past generations, given the massive transfer of wealth from one generation to the other. But I don't think most people would consider Social Security as falling under what would typically be considered a charity.

Quite frankly, I have more expectation for charity to be there when I'd be eligible for Social Security than expectation that there'll be anything left of Social Security by then.
Click to expand...

Blame the feds. If they hadn't borrowed all your Social Security money and had just left it in a trust for you then it would be there. Instead they lied to us about how much government costs and took all that money and spent it on other things.
 
Re: The 112th Congress - A Congress divided shall not cry!

ScoobyDoo said:
Blame the feds. If they hadn't borrowed all your Social Security money and had just left it in a trust for you then it would be there. Instead they lied to us about how much government costs and took all that money and spent it on other things.
Click to expand...

It still would run out in 2037. Ponzi schemes are always unsustainable.
 
Re: The 112th Congress - A Congress divided shall not cry!

MinnFan said:
It still would run out in 2037. Ponzi schemes are always unsustainable.
Click to expand...

Yeah, insurance is a ponzi scheme. I've always known that. They make me buy it anyway though or I can't drive and thus can't work.
 
Re: The 112th Congress - A Congress divided shall not cry!

Bakunin said:
Costs: http://www.revolutionhealth.com/hea...inancial-planning/cost-prenatal-care-delivery

Depending on the type of delivery, the cost range is anywhere from $7000-17000 for prenatal care + birth + hospital stay.

Compare that to $400 for an abortion, or whatever it costs per year for a birth control prescription. End abortions? We're looking at more money having to be spent - either by insurance, by government, or by both. With the fiscal problems we have, do we really want to go this route?
Click to expand...

Assuming you're serious...even using your own logic, you're probably mistaken. The average value add to society by just about any segment of the population is net positive.

So even by a strictly financial point of view, at the end of an abortion you have a net cost of $400. At the end of a birth and prenatal care, you have - $7000-$17000 plus a positive net present value of an average person...which likely for each segment of the population, averages somewhere in the hundreds of thousands.
 
Re: The 112th Congress - A Congress divided shall not cry!

MinnFan said:
It still would run out in 2037. Ponzi schemes are always unsustainable.
Click to expand...

I remember when Social Security "had to run out" in 1997. This is like the Seventh-day Adventists. The Eschaton is always just around the corner.
 
Re: The 112th Congress - A Congress divided shall not cry!

Kepler said:
I remember when Social Security "had to run out" in 1997. This is like the Seventh-day Adventists. The Eschaton is always just around the corner.
Click to expand...

SS also used to only be a 1% tax
 
Re: The 112th Congress - A Congress divided shall not cry!

ScoobyDoo said:
Yeah, insurance is a ponzi scheme. I've always known that. They make me buy it anyway though or I can't drive and thus can't work.
Click to expand...
Move to NH. Auto insurance is not required in this state.
 
Re: The 112th Congress - A Congress divided shall not cry!

MinnFan said:
SS also used to only be a 1% tax
Click to expand...

And it used to be charity. It was not the idea of state charity that undermined it, it was selling it as an entitlement that everybody collects on, and that was done to ward off pressure of claims of TEH SOCIALISM!!!11! by guess who?

Re-purpose social security as a safety net that's there for you only if you lose (insurance) and there is no problem.
 
Re: The 112th Congress - A Congress divided shall not cry!

MinnFan said:
You may want to check with the Father of the Constitution on that one.

"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents."
Click to expand...

Taxing and spending power for the general welfare. There's really not any question of that one, even by conservative jurists.
 
Re: The 112th Congress - A Congress divided shall not cry!

MinnFan said:
It still would run out in 2037. Ponzi schemes are always unsustainable.
Click to expand...

Not a ponzi scheme, no matter how often you call it that. Though it will appear similar for the next 30 years due to the demographic bubble that is the selfish generation, when properly run it does not rely on an ever increasing contribution base.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top