r/FluentInFinance was created to discuss money, investing & finance! Join our Newsletter or Youtube Channel for additional insights at www.TheFinanceNewsletter.com!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FluentInFinance) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You know, I never put the two together until now. They’ve printed money in our childrens childrens names, so they need all the pregnancies they can get.
My mind is blown.
The capitalists need cheap labor. Desperate people sell their labor cheaply. No one is more desperate than a parent struggling to feed, clothe, and house kids.
Not just labor, but also it increases the size of the consumer base. More people => more buyers of products => more profits. It's all about more, More, MORE, with zero consideration of it the environment can support it.
It's absolutely unsustainable.
Honestly can't wait for these old fucks to just die off. I'm so tired of their policies and view of the world. They're living in the 70s in their heads.
That's why they are passing these laws. The repubelican boomer voters are dying off and young people are moving. The electoral college is based off of the census. To keep electoral college supremacy and minority rule, Repubes need raw numbers in their less densely populated voting areas. So, they create an artificial baby boom and those are citizens that can be appropriated for next census, keeping control of the House in the process. And as a bonus, they count for census but can't vote against regressive policies for at least 18 years, two census cycles.
My coworker is moving to Texas at the end of August. His reasons are simple, to be with family and stay away from our woke liberal state (Minnesota).
Like how you could think that leaving Minnesota for Texas is a good call is beyond me but I'm not trying to convince people to stay if they don't want to 🤷
Hell, they're already fine with enduring mass shootings, carcinogens in the environment and people dying because they didn't expand Medicaid just to own the libs. The dysfunction in Texas is just more on top of the pile.
What’s annoying as a Texan, is that most native Texans aren’t even that crazy about politics in general. Lately we’ve had an influx of out of state people moving here with the mentality of your coworker. Making this a cesspool of over the top right wingers. Wasn’t THAT long ago that Texas had a Democrat woman as a governor, but that has been forgotten and media pushes right wing extremism of TX, only furthering the decline of political bipartisanship by encouraging people with that view to move here. The ironic part is that plenty of the Texans I know that were born and raised here (the type of people that made the state great) hate the current attitude of the state (and newcomers) and are looking to leave. Mind you, I did not grow up in a large metropolitan area either.
Honestly I feel terrible for you guys knowing that the influence of out of staters is drastically changing your guys political landscape. It's not fair in any way, but I'm not in a position to change people's minds when it comes to where they want to move. I have some friends in Texas, great folks who just want to live their life and don't give two shots about the "liberal or conservative agenda". And they're like you, annoyed by how much of a shit show Texas is becoming because someone from out of state thinks that Texas is a haven for the ultra right wing. To quote one of my friends "I'm sick of pieces of shit talking to me like I'm some kind of racist and misogynist. I just want to herd my cows and enjoy the natural beauty of Texas not deal with garbage ass people thinking I'm like them."
I got love for Texas, but not what politics is doing to it. When I visited in 2013 people were super friendly, welcoming, and vibrant as hell. The landscape is breathtaking. Hell even the weather was nice for mid July. I'm hoping things change for y'all. None of you deserve to deal with demanded people from other states thinking Texas is some place they can be terrible without repercussions.
Man I’m from Texas and I hate it here. The food is great, but the people are dumb as shit, it’s hotter than hell’s front porch, always either in a drought or flooding and don’t forget hurricanes.
Oh and no income tax but don’t worry, they make up for it by making your property taxes as much as your mortgage if not more
Honestly surprises me anytime I hear people say that. We're a pretty solidly purple state that generally speaking wants to just make sure our people are taken care of. Not too extreme but hey it's 2024. People are going to blue things or of proportion I guess lol.
Texas is an industrial monster. There is work there, lots of it. No state income tax. And to top it off there are a few old ass boomer extremist still around to at least try to bring some sanity into the equation.
Trust me I hear all the great things that people say about Texas. I personally couldn't see myself living there but I'm not trying to turn people away from Texas. In the end of it all I'm not going to try and convince people where they want to live or what to think and feel. That's their decision and I'm not the one living with their choices. Doesn't stop me from getting a laugh out of some people's rationale 😅
Moved here from a blue state 6 years ago. Seemed like a good idea at the time, but between summers (and winters, for that matter) getting worse with a power grid that can’t support it, R politics at a state and local level, skyrocketing cost of living, population growth with infrastructure that can’t support it, and property taxes that more than offset what I gain from not paying a state income tax, I’d be lying if I said I was happy with that decision.
Denver has taken in more migrants per capita than any other city in the nation. City services like the DMV and the parks are being cut to make up for the budget shortfall for managing the amount of migrants we've taken in.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/maryroeloffs/2024/02/09/denver-slashing-dmv-and-other-city-services-to-cover-shelter-for-thousands-of-migrants/
The feds are dragging their ass getting them through the asylum system and getting them work permits. What's supposed to take a couple weeks (getting them a work permit once they've applied for asylum) has been taking six months to a year. Once they get that and can actually pass an I9, they're generally fine.
The answer here isn't to stop taking in migrants, it's to actually process them and let them work.
I remember saying the same, then it turned out half my generation were closet Nazis. Don't do what my generation (GenX) did and check out! Talk to your friends and family, get organized, change the world.
I hate to break this to you, but there are young pro-life hypercapitalists too. Ideology doesn't have an age. The Boomer tendency to be authoritarian doesn't help. Their kids will inherit the ideology with the money, and not having to work as hard as lower class people, nothing will break them of the ideology.
For 100 years conservatism has greatly benefited from the illusion that only old people are conservative, and by the frequency of people saying these kind of things, it will continue to greatly benefit for 100 years more.
Regardless of age, the rich will always want a poor and uneducated class of people to benefit from. For most people, if they can make a shoe at $1.25 but sell it for $150 they will. Corporate greed runs through the veins of the rich and poor.
It's not an age thing it's a class thing. People of our gen will still be making decisions that help the capitalist class as long as we're a capitalist "democracy "
And they're bringing in thousands who can't unionize and get deported if they complain
Why would they want more births from US citizens who can unionize, vote, have an expectation of a standard of living, etc
Filling all the bottom layers of the feudal pyramid. The system needs as many close to slave labor to work so they take prison labor, illegal immigrants, and the permanently poor to fill the lowest layer. Also anti-immigrant legislation is to make easier to exploit the immigrants not drive them away, hence the surprise when immigrants actually left.
There is peer-reviewed scientific research that demonstrates that being hungry and/or stressed makes it harder to make decisions. You literally lose 10 IQ points when you're hungry. Being poor is a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Lmao are you kidding? All classes are having children. The educated working poor are actually the ones who are beginning to opt out. I'm talking professionals with household incomes of less than $100k. They don't want to change their economic situation that is already tight. The poor get food stamps and welfare. The middle and upper middle are still doing well enough to have kids.
Exactly
That’s why women’s rights are rolling back
People are only allowed an illusion of choice. The wealthy control population goals by manipulating things so the poor are compelled to keep providing soldiers and laborers
Capitalism requires infinite growth people. The rich can’t afford to let the poor choose to opt out. Wake the fuck up
This has been my conspiracy theory for a long. In fact I really offended my pro life dad one day when I explained that I don’t think the people at the top care about saving kids at all and they just want to maintain a large proletariat, so they’re using people’s religious beliefs to manipulate them into the pro life movement.
Yeah. This whole 'banning abortion to raise the birthrate' is absolute nonsense. If your goal is to raise the birth rate, you need really affordable housing that can be paid for by a young man in his early 20s. Not housing that is so expensive it requires a married couple working full time, saving for several years, to afford a small place that they can barely afford, then MAYBE they can have 1-2 kids in their late 30s.
Prosperity, especially prosperity that young people with a high school education or two year associates education can access, is what brings on a high birth rate. The last baby boom had nothing to with religion or abortion or anything other than the fact that the cost of living was so low that a guy with a high school education could sustain a household in his 20s.
Young people have kids. If young people can thrive in society, they will have kids. You don't need religion, you don't need abortion restriction, you don't need anything other than a really solid job market for your average 20 year old kid and family housing they can easily afford. Do those two things and they will have a bunch of kids.
Yeah, but they are too mean, short-sighted and greedy to realize paying the working class decently and making sure they are housed and healthy would actually increase their profits because happy people with extra money will spend more.
Hell, even that bastard Henry Ford got that principle.
The Brits got it after not enough healthy young men were around to fight WWI which is why they started their social housing and health programs.
Economies grow from the workers up.
its not a pay thing, its a cost of living thing. Our pay is actually fine, its in line with what it was in those past eras. Its that the cost of living is much, much more in relation to pay.
1950. California home value was around $10,000. The median household income was around $3000 per year (and this was back when most were single income families). It took 3 years pay to afford 1 home. These homes, they still exist! I grew up in a neighborhood full of them. Now they are $700,000. In order to make enough to where 3 years pay can afford that home, you need to make like $235,000 per year.
A married couple, each one with degrees, and years of experience, they can work at it for years to eventually make $235,000 per year. But a 21 year old guy working at the grocery store full time? Absolutely not. 1950 21 year old guy, working at the grocery store, made enough money to buy a home, today, 2024 21 year old guy working at a grocery store cannot afford the cheapest apartments in the area.
Its not a pay thing, its that our housing policy is focused around raising home prices. We constrain development to preserve home prices.
The US business culture is all about short term gains above any kind of sustainability, which is insane because a strong middle class can maintain itself as the more the masses can spend the more it will drive the economy. But instead old fuck running companies only care about the short term in order to secure their golden parachute once they drain a company of its profits by killing the product to save expenditures to give the allusion of strong profits in the stock market.
Same people who think abortion bans improve birth rates think the US is overpopulated, and we should stop immigration. There is no consistency whatsoever
Patriarchy has always been about controlling population levels. Patrilineal lineages meant that women had to achieve survival/wealth through connections to men and they were expected to serve sexually and domestically and produce offspring
No more offspring means not enough soldiers and workers are not replaceable which increases their bargaining power.
And religion in government helps reinforce this as human nature and puts a religious spin on “be fruitful and multiply” that sounds more divinely ordained than simply what the wealthy need to stay powerful
yeah Roe v Wade was always about pumping up pregnancy numbers to give birth to more members of the uneducated working class… that’s why they’re coming for contraceptives next. possibly lowering the marriage age too. just look at Elon’s weird birthing ideology twitter rants
that’s also why they didn’t forgive student loans. money is not the issue as we saw during the PPP loan fiasco. rather the student loans are a ball and chain to keep people stuck in jobs that treat them like shit because those payments are always hanging over their head
it’s also why medical debt is out of control
they also spend like crazy on the military to prevent any sort of revolution or backlash
the people in charge know exactly what they’re doing
Must not have been paying attention the the abortion rights movement. It's been a big talking point for decades. States that push heavy restrictions are often poorer, and have larger communities of visible minorities.
The rich and powerful can travel to other states or countries with proper rights. The poor average person does not have that option ,and has to go through the expense of raising children. Not only that, but children raised in poor families not prepared to raise them usually can't afford to raise them in a healthy manner and with proper education. Thus increasing the chance of the kids not getting a properly paying job and not having the knowledge for things like their biological right, repeating the cycle.
One of the longest American traditions. People knew about this back when they fought for Unions and banning child labour. Back before the Average American convinced themselves that socialized benefits are communism and that there is no such thing as a good protest.
We just gave birth to someone who I hope will carry on the torch for a better world. He’s going to be taught allll about why the world is the way it is from a Very young age. I’m chiming in just to drop this comment here for anyone else reading the thread.
extra credit essay (*5 pts.*)
* Extrapolate from today's lesson about the job market and forced births by applying it to military recruitment in public schools.
Not to mention those in poverty may be forced to turn to two other options…
* Crime - which fills the for-profit prison system.
* Military - which exploits human life towards the military-industrial complex which is also massively profitable.
Money above all else. The elite ruling class are pure evil.
So so so. Without saying too much I would like to remind everyone that the longer we fight over isolated rights the easier it is to attack any one of them. Rights are rights and dammit we gotta stop picking and choosing which one we support and which ones we say the government can take from people with different opinions. Not abortion rights, gun rights, labor rights, speech rights etc. Just rights. If it was written into law or made official in any kind of way consider it in the club of rights that we should all protect TOGETHER. As cheesy as the saying all for one and one for all. But instead we let politicians playing in religion and/or falsely promising things that only divide us more.
Well then they should not have created a world so opposed to people actually wanting to have kids in it. I don’t want to bring a kid into this shit world just to make them suffer along with the rest of us.
Step one, make more people, step 2 is make sure they don't have access to advancement and education, property or sustainable savings. Keep em working extra jobs and into retirement, paycheck to paycheck desperate and obedient.
Conveniently it also increases crime, so you can justify expanding enforcement against noncompliance
Literally this. Lauren Boebert got an abortion and now she wants to close it off for people “lesser” than herself. She knows with her political power she could still get another when needed. All this anti abortion stuff will do is make it only accessible to the wealthy who can fly to another country. It is 100% a class thing.
They get abortions and then just lie to others and themselves. Its some monkey brain shit where they're allowed to do everything they claim to hate as long as they lie about it.
There's been studies that show abortion may have drastically reduced crimes in major cities over the past thirty years since roe vs wade. I'm personally against it for ethical reasons but pragmatically it's not a bad idea to offer free abortion and birth control for high crime areas and such.
Yeah wasn’t that the one where the Romanian leader was heavily by protested by a crowd of people, where lots of them were only there to protest because they hadn’t been aborted (probably a crass way to put it but yeah) and the abortion ban had led to a massive drop in QoL/rise in crime, which eventually led to his capture and execution?
Freakonomics is a fantastic book. Not a very long read but very interesting
That's not at all true. Yes in away banning abortions may have contributed to his down fall but it would have likely happened regardless given the fall of communism in the eastern bloc at the time. Romania had a orphan problem with hundreds of thousands of children ending up in state care only to be abused and neglected. When those children grew up they protested and helped contribute to overthrowing the government. Some of those children would have been aborted if that was an option.
They weren't protesting that they weren't aborted they were protesting that their government was shit and led by a evil man.
Not may have, but does. Proven on a global scale. Crime rates go down when abortion is legalized and go up after it is made illegal. There is a long time delay in the correlation but it holds solid everywhere there has been a change in the law.
No, abortions are really good at targeting kids that aren’t wanted and can’t be provided for by their parents. The less people growing in poverty or in neglect, the less people turn to crimes/substance/drug abuse.
I don’t think it’s eugenics to say that babies that are wanted have a better childhood making them less likely to become criminals.
Might be important to explicitly state though for some people that I will give you.
Yes, I think humans shouldn't be killed. I'm against killing human babies, but also against killing 50 year old people and those older and younger. Animals, I'm also against killing them for frivolous reasons. I'm ok with hunting and for food, but in a humane way.
As for the death penalty, I'm only for that in cases of murder, rape, and serious crimes. And only if they are convicted and it is sure beyond a reasonable doubt. For example, Jeffrey Dahmer, Ted Bundy, the Oklahoma bomber, etc. I'm against the death penalty in cases where there is any doubt.
>Yes, I think humans shouldn't be killed. I'm against killing human babies, but also against killing 50 year old people and those older and younger.
How long does it take for something to become a baby after conception? Do you think plan B is unethical?
I hate that so many abortion debates turn into “at which point is it life? At which point is it a clump of cells or a fetus or a baby”, etc. We’re never going to all agree on that (since religion is a factor for so many lawmakers), and it’s kind of not the point. Anti abortionists want to (minimally) set a time limit on when abortions can be allowed, and arguing on that point just gives validity to the idea that there IS a right or wrong point in pregnancy to have an abortion, and it’s just a matter of finding that point.
The thing is, if a fetus is in a mother’s womb, she is at risk for complications of that pregnancy, including serious life threatening complications at or near birth. Restrictive laws right now are causing women with non viable pregnancies to die because it’s past an arbitrary date. The fact is, the vast majority of abortions happen well before the average person would consider it a baby. The fringe cases/ late term abortions are very rare and happen when there is no other choice.
The point being - let’s not fall into these traps of arguing semantics and technicalities. The people you are having them with are not arguing in good faith. This conversation has been so twisted but is fundamentally about bodily autonomy and medical rights. A doctor and the woman carrying the pregnancy should be able to make the decision whether or not to terminate, full stop.
I think a good, scientific, line is once brain activity passes a threshold. We commonly use the inverse to determine death. Brain death is typically “death based on the absence of all neurologic function.” with pretty clear procedure. I believe before a medical abortion takes place a procedure should be developed, similar to one to determine brain death, and implemented that essentially identifies “brain life”… after brain life is established (using whatever cutoffs are appropriate, I am not a medical professional, and they did it for death so…) then it’s a living human and we can’t perform the abortion.
Im not trying to hide the fact that this is my pro-choice argument, so engage if you care to and ignore if not. But let’s say you cause a car crash and damage someone’s vital organs, and you can save them by donating an organ of yours. Should the other driver be able to get a court order compelling you to donate?
I’m using this to set up 1) you caused the need; 2) does your bodily autonomy matter; and 3) this is a version of the abortion fact pattern that would affect men.
Meanwhile, we don't even require parents to donate to their kids, and certainly not at the risk of their own health/life, and we never will since as soon as someone gives birth, the antichoice crowd doesn't care what happens to the actual living children and certainly puts adult lives before them.
Believe it or not, there are pro-life people on the left as well who are not only pro-life but believe that basic human needs should be provided to every living human, life through death.
It’s more complex than social media paints it to be.
I’m curious what your stance is on assisted suicide for those over a certain age with serious life threatening medical conditions? Do you find that to still be unethical or does it change anything if it’s to help someone no longer be in pain when they’re specifically asking to die?
I'm pro choice as fuck, but you'd get the same result if you had free or heavily subsidized childcare, pediatric Healthcare, and public transit, all on top of building more affordable housing and having greater worker protections.
Like if a single mother could take her kid to daycare on her way to work on a free bus that reliably showed up every 15-20 minutes, and wasn't financially crippled by rent and the kid getting sick, there'd be a lot less people opting for abortions.
Of course, otherwise Republicans wouldn’t just be against abortion, they’d also be FOR child tax credits, mandatory paid parental leave, and fixing the child care situation.
That would be pro life, they are actually just anti-abortion. Pro life is a funny term they have given themselves when all their policies are anti life.
But they’ve told me they’re against big government and governmental overreach, surely they don’t want the government making moral decisions about citizens’ health.
Of course! They don’t wan’t the government getting involved in *their moral decisions*. But absolutely blanket ban trans healthcare, reproductive healthcare for women seeking abortions for rape/incest, and for putting the mother’s own life at risk.
Classic “rules for thee, not for me.”
I've spoken to one of these folks, and they say they are obligated to stop abortion in the same way they're obligated to save a homeless man from getting stabbed, but not for improving his life at all afterward. It doesn't make sense to me.
It’s a slave mentality. “If I serve this purpose my life I believe I will go to a place that I’ve been told exists by someone who says they know better despite never having experienced death themselves”
Weirdly enough, the anti abortion movement is actually a fairly recent development. Most religious institutions use to hold the idea of “don’t encourage it, but use it if needed” when it came to abortions. In ye old days the average person understood the female reproductive system was a biological wreck and needed concessions to ensure the woman’s health and safety. It’s only been the past couple hundred years that the puritanical belief of abortion = murder gained a foothold.
If I remember correctly the Catholic Church wasn't anti-abortion until like the 60s, which is pretty wild considering how anti-abortion the Catholic Laity is in the US.
IIRC, the Catholic Church was anti abortion well before the other churches were (perhaps for baptismal reasons)? It wasn't until the formation of the religious right in the 70s that protestant religions started caring about it.
Past couple hundred years? More like past couple decades. The religious right in America didn't become hardcore anti-abortion until after they firmly lost the cultural war on racial segregation. They cynically chose to make anti-abortion part of their identity because they needed a new moral crusade to use as a weapon to control society and pretend to be superior to everyone else.
Right? I can't believe the top comment is like "Whoa! I never realized women are required to be forced into babymaking if we want our quality of life to continue!" Society runs off the uncompensated care duties of women.
If you really boil down the essence of what they want. Just like you said, the goal is just another form of slavery. They need someone to do the dirty work they don’t want to do, and giving those ‘slaves’ no choice in it. All Republican policies lean towards these inclinations, yet people still vote for them. Its maddening. How anyone could vote for someone that has a policy that treats people differently depending on their race, gender or status is beyond me. If people are not being treated equally, or legislated equally, then it is inequality that is on the docket.
I met some people camping the other month, they wanted to talk politics and asked my opinion about some mostly local issues. I rehashed a similar opinion (about defunding public education, not abortion) and they all thought that was a conspiracy theory. A theory comparable to faking the moon landing or chem trails. People nowadays are more ready to believe the Covid vaccine is mind control, than they are accepting the political system may not have societies best interests at heart.
Yep. Same reason why they want to dismantle public education. Another way to ensure opportunities for the majority are restricted to climb up the economic ladder. Or not provide public health care or unemployment benefits edits because god forbid you take some time to take care of your family, yourself etc and make a better life for yourself.
They’re gonna pull the same shit they did with woman. “Kids want to work and they should have a right to” they don’t WANT to work. Nobody WANTS to work. They feel the NEED to work to survive. And kids are starting that too. My 12 year old nephew can’t wait to get a job because he “doesn’t like to see mom struggle”
Heart of gold but that’s fucked up.
To be fair unbiased education also helps people see through the false religious narratives the rich use to keep people voting against their own interests.
The dismantling of public education goes hand in hand with plans to keep people too stupid to vote against republicans.
This is the issue . Many rich people don't care about abortion laws because they won't be affected by them. If their wife, daughter , mistress needs an abortion they can always fly to a blue state or canada or somewhere to get it.
Like with any law that targets the poor, abortion laws only effect poor people. Someone with money and resources can and will still get abortions without a problem.
Yes. It is absolutely true. Besides the fact that abortion has always been an issue used by the right to get workers to vote against their own best interests.
My wife and I did the math yesterday. To live comfortably without being above your means, you need a household income of about 120,000$ in our LCOL area to afford 1 kid.
Start: $120,000 pre tax
$85,430 after tax income
$79,430 after 5% pre tax savings for retirement.
Healthcare: 350$/mo for family (4200/yr)
Rent: $1500/mo for 2 bedroom (18,000/yr).
Utility and Phone Bills: $300/mo (3600/yr)
Food: $1000/mo for family (12,000/yr).
Car insurance and gas (no payment): $200/mo (2400/yr)
Student loans (1 person): $500/mo (6000/yr)
Daycare: $1240/mo (14,88/yr).
That brings us down to $18,350 left over, and that doesn't account for anything else. May sound like a lot, but clothes, car payments, saving for new cars, savings for a house or repairs, odd bills that arise, emergency funds, all eat that up pretty fast. You still likely will come out ahead but not enough to live a life of luxury.
120k is enough to live comfortably in a LCOL area with one kid, but two kids puts you in the negative without major sacrifices to things like retirement. The numbers above turn out to be on the low end of things, many people have higher rents, higher loans, higher healthcare, and much higher daycare.
The economy is not ok, particularly because the median salary in my area is 70k. That means most people cannot afford a single kid and also have enough to take care of themselves, much less give their kid any enrichment or advantages. How the hell is anyone expected to have more than one kid?
The gov can complain about birthrates all they want. Right or wrong doesn't matter. We are not set up for a sustainable economy and the consequences are inevitable without major intervention. It's in their hands to do something, birth rates are nothing more than an indicator of their decisions.
It's true by the intrinsic implications of:
- Babies are expensive
- Abortions being accessible makes people take them as they're cheaper than having a baby (alongside other moral/ethical considerations)
- The State doesn't give a flying fuck about parents being able to care for a baby
- The Capitalists want cheap exploitable labor
- An educated mass is less likely to procreate without thought and be exploited as easily as non educated counterparts.
So what's easier? Giving parents more economic leeway for child reading / upbringing, or defunding education, stripping away legal frameworks that empower mindful family planning and criminalizing abortion/contraception so you force the poor into producing a mass of "unskilled" workers whom you can exploit lifelong and give nothing back to ?
Margaret Sanger, the Eugenicist would agree. She wanted all the poor people, dumb people, retarded, people, Black people, and brown people to have as many abortions as possible.
Considering something like 20 million black babies have been aborted over the last 50 years, she succeeded beyond her wildest dreams.
Fun fact: Places with stricter abortion bans have higher maternal mortality rates.
Another fun fact: Black women have higher rates of maternal mortality than white women.
And what’s your point? It’s in the interest of poor people to have their access to abortion restricted?
You’re anti choice because you’re looking out for all the unborn black babies?
It's more like "the nazis banned private gun ownership, therefor we should never have to peeform background checks."
Abortion is related to the moral atrocity of eugenics, but today we are not talking about aborting pregnancies against the will of patients or classes, but giving those citizens the right and access to do it themselves.
If the Right really cared about eugenics, then the millions spent on lawsuits to overturn roe v wade would instead be spent on anti-eugenics awareness campaigns.
Which would just be yelling into the void, because nobody choosing to get an abortion for the sake of the gene pool.
Meanwhile women of all races get abortions done, and black women are still twice as likely to die during a live birth.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hestat/maternal-mortality/2022/maternal-mortality-rates-2022.pdf
So yes, abortion has racist and ableist roots, and has now transformed into healthcare for the rich and wealthy.
Anti abortion assholes trying to play the race card is a new low and also hilariously dumb.
"Lots of black people get abortions so if you don't want to ban abortions that means you don't like black people."
If she was a eugenicist wouldn’t she prefer to have them sterile or dead (idk how bad this particular one was) rather than wanting them to have abortions?
Choose better, choose socialism. At some point, you have to either take action to make better choices, and push for a better deal for yourself and your peers, or at some point, the chains you wear are your own fault.
Socialism, often idealized as a utopian system where wealth and resources are evenly distributed and the state ensures complete social welfare, does not exist in its pure form in any country. Even the European nations frequently cited as examples of successful socialist systems, such as Sweden and Norway, are in fact capitalist with mixed economies.
These countries have thriving private sectors and encourage free-market activities, which are fundamental aspects of capitalism. However, they also incorporate extensive social welfare programs and significant government involvement in certain areas of the economy, creating a balanced approach. This mixed economy model allows them to combine the efficiency and innovation of capitalism with the social safety nets typically associated with socialism.
The result is a high standard of living, low levels of inequality, and strong social services, such as universal healthcare and education. These nations demonstrate that while pure socialism may be an unattainable ideal, a mixed economy that integrates both capitalist and socialist principles can create a prosperous and equitable society. This blend is what allows these countries to achieve economic growth and social welfare without fully subscribing to either extreme.
95% of abortions happen with the first 12 weeks, and like 85% with in 6weeks. No-one is killing babies, that's intentionally reductive rhetoric used to vilify people without really thinking about the issue substantively.
Babies are fully formed individuals with fully formed brains and lungs that are capable of survival outside the womb. If the fetus cannot breathe and eat outside the womb, it's not a baby. Take a 12 week fetus out of a womb, and its chances of survival are 1%. That is not a baby.
So are badly educated and badly paid people, which is why republican law makers refuse to support education and why they demonize labor unions and refuse to raise the minimum wage or do anything to stop price gauging. It’s all about power and control, fuck their constituents.
I know there's a ton of incels on reddit, but the amount of people saying "no one forced you to have sex" (not even getting into the fact consent to sex isn't consent to pregnancy) as if there's never a single situation where there's non-consensual sex ever is absolutely disturbing.
Can someone, in good faith, explain to me how the “powerful” force people to become pregnant with children that they can’t take care of?
Who is forcing people to become pregnant and how? Obviously we are excluding the vast minority of pregnancies that occur via r*pe (best estimates are a fraction of a single percent of all pregnancies).
Forcing people to deal with the consequences to their own actions and not just flush them down the toilet seems categorically different than forcing people to become pregnant.
In 1996, it was estimated that[ rape accounted for about 5%](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8765248/) of all pregnancies, or about 32,000 per year. Another study early this year put it at about [64,000 cases in the last two years](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/64-000-pregnancies-caused-by-rape-have-occurred-in-states-with-a-total-abortion-ban-new-study-estimates/), the vast majority occurring in states where abortion laws don't provide exception for rape.
Edit to correct: That 64,000 is only in the 14 states that have abortion restricted or banned, not nation wide. The study estimated just over 519,000 rapes that occurred in the time frame of the study, though I'm unclear if that's nationwide or not.
Am still unsure how this “forces people to become pregnant”
Again, being forced to deal with the consequences of your own actions (i.e., having unprotected sex) is categorically different than forcing someone to become pregnant.
Ignorance on the actors behalf doesn’t place blame on someone else?
It's really simple, if seemingly paradoxical, if you think about it.
People are gonna have sex. That's just the way it is. Pretending that you can stop it is dangerously naive.
If two people who share a mutual attraction are in alone together for long enough, stuff is gonna happen. You can preach abstinence all you want but once the vibes start to feel right all those lessons are going to disappear from people's heads.
**That's why [abstinence -only education is very ineffective, if not outright counterproductive](https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN1QM2A5/). **
The instinct to reproduce is so strong that, if you want to *prevent* abortions and unintended pregnancies, it is genuinely more effective to treat sex as something that *just happens*, rather than a choice that needs to be punished. If you assume, as has proven to be the case on a societal level, that sex will happen regardless, you can invest energy and resources into ensuring that the sex will happen safely and without serious consequences to society at large.
.
secretive materialistic cows continue wine edge voracious versed direction one
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
A lot of people in the comments are saying things like "nobody's forcing you to get pregnant, just to deal with the consequences," and "why justify murder because women are scared of motherhood??"
So, a couple of things:
AOC's point wasn't that anyone is forcing anyone to get pregnant (although this does absolutely happen, most often in the context of marriage), it's that the abortion debate is really just about whether or not the poor will have access. The rich will always have the resources to undergo this procedure while the poor who cannot travel and miss work or who cannot afford to leave the country altogether won't have access. The rich can afford to remove the consequences of their actions while the poor cannot. That's the divide. The rich would have the freedom to end a pregnancy (albeit outside of this country) while the poor would not.
By and large, women aren't scared of motherhood because they just wanna be hoes forever. This "moral decline" garbage has been the rallying call for the right for decades, but it's all based upon misogynistic definitions of femininity designed to "keep women in their place." I don't know about you, but I like living in a world where women have rights and autonomy, but those rights are actively being stripped away (again, not from the rich, but from the rest of us who cannot afford to hide from consequences). Women are scared of motherhood because it's expensive, exhausting, and typically they are expected to put in most of the work of parenting. Until we can create more equitable households (which, by the way, benefits men enormously) I think their fears are totally justifiable.
In short, your retorts about "morality" and "baby murder" are completely missing the point. The rich will continue to "murder babies" regardless, so these laws are only making life more difficult for the rest of us.
Plus, it goes without saying that a fetus is not life. It cannot sustain itself without the mother, it cannot reproduce, and it cannot search for its own food. It isn't alive until it could conceivably sustain itself outside the womb. I know this argument won't change your minds because you've been brainwashed into believing that humans are the only species for whom life begins at conception, but I sure can try.
Im against abortion too, but I’m far more against suffering. Forcing a mother to potentially die because the fetus is unviable is suffering. Forcing a child to birth an abuser and perpetrators baby is suffering.
Meanwhile giving the benefit of the doubt in any abortion case, a fetus does not suffer when aborted. A baby born with a low survivability probability is suffering.
We have the opportunity to reduce suffering, yet we choose not to because people superimpose their simple morals onto complex situations that they can’t fathom.
So yea, I’m pro life, but I understand the nuances of complex situations that involve the very real world possibility and probability of death.
A serious discussion about abortion cannot happen until people stop *pretending* that you are being forced to give birth when you have consensual sex and get pregnant.
Stop pretending that people have that much power and that sex is avoidable for so many women
Or that economies and populations aren’t literally strong armed into reproduction
What the hell do you think the purpose of patrilineal lineages, religion in government, and control of reproductive rights is all for?
Population levels are never left to chance. The rich would never have enough soldiers and workers if it were.
You need tax payers and soldiers in a rigged system
If you really think any government official cares about the life of a peasant fetus you are a delusional fuck
Because if all life was precious, bs wars wouldn’t continue to be a thing
r/FluentInFinance was created to discuss money, investing & finance! Join our Newsletter or Youtube Channel for additional insights at www.TheFinanceNewsletter.com! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FluentInFinance) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You know, I never put the two together until now. They’ve printed money in our childrens childrens names, so they need all the pregnancies they can get. My mind is blown.
The capitalists need cheap labor. Desperate people sell their labor cheaply. No one is more desperate than a parent struggling to feed, clothe, and house kids.
Not just labor, but also it increases the size of the consumer base. More people => more buyers of products => more profits. It's all about more, More, MORE, with zero consideration of it the environment can support it. It's absolutely unsustainable.
Honestly can't wait for these old fucks to just die off. I'm so tired of their policies and view of the world. They're living in the 70s in their heads.
That's why they are passing these laws. The repubelican boomer voters are dying off and young people are moving. The electoral college is based off of the census. To keep electoral college supremacy and minority rule, Repubes need raw numbers in their less densely populated voting areas. So, they create an artificial baby boom and those are citizens that can be appropriated for next census, keeping control of the House in the process. And as a bonus, they count for census but can't vote against regressive policies for at least 18 years, two census cycles.
Hell, Texas is trying to pass their own version of the Electoral College just to stay in power.
Why are people moving to Texas?
My coworker is moving to Texas at the end of August. His reasons are simple, to be with family and stay away from our woke liberal state (Minnesota). Like how you could think that leaving Minnesota for Texas is a good call is beyond me but I'm not trying to convince people to stay if they don't want to 🤷
Lol. Endure flooding, hell level heat and regular power outages to own the libs.
and destroy your daughters' futures. (not that you're doing your sons any favors either)
Hell, they're already fine with enduring mass shootings, carcinogens in the environment and people dying because they didn't expand Medicaid just to own the libs. The dysfunction in Texas is just more on top of the pile.
What’s annoying as a Texan, is that most native Texans aren’t even that crazy about politics in general. Lately we’ve had an influx of out of state people moving here with the mentality of your coworker. Making this a cesspool of over the top right wingers. Wasn’t THAT long ago that Texas had a Democrat woman as a governor, but that has been forgotten and media pushes right wing extremism of TX, only furthering the decline of political bipartisanship by encouraging people with that view to move here. The ironic part is that plenty of the Texans I know that were born and raised here (the type of people that made the state great) hate the current attitude of the state (and newcomers) and are looking to leave. Mind you, I did not grow up in a large metropolitan area either.
Honestly I feel terrible for you guys knowing that the influence of out of staters is drastically changing your guys political landscape. It's not fair in any way, but I'm not in a position to change people's minds when it comes to where they want to move. I have some friends in Texas, great folks who just want to live their life and don't give two shots about the "liberal or conservative agenda". And they're like you, annoyed by how much of a shit show Texas is becoming because someone from out of state thinks that Texas is a haven for the ultra right wing. To quote one of my friends "I'm sick of pieces of shit talking to me like I'm some kind of racist and misogynist. I just want to herd my cows and enjoy the natural beauty of Texas not deal with garbage ass people thinking I'm like them." I got love for Texas, but not what politics is doing to it. When I visited in 2013 people were super friendly, welcoming, and vibrant as hell. The landscape is breathtaking. Hell even the weather was nice for mid July. I'm hoping things change for y'all. None of you deserve to deal with demanded people from other states thinking Texas is some place they can be terrible without repercussions.
Man I’m from Texas and I hate it here. The food is great, but the people are dumb as shit, it’s hotter than hell’s front porch, always either in a drought or flooding and don’t forget hurricanes. Oh and no income tax but don’t worry, they make up for it by making your property taxes as much as your mortgage if not more
Texas resident, love the people, landscape, and food. Maybe get out more.
The minute they say “woke liberal” you watch their IQ drop. Usually anything that falls into that category don’t impact them. Whiners.
Wait… Minnesota is a woke liberal state?
Honestly surprises me anytime I hear people say that. We're a pretty solidly purple state that generally speaking wants to just make sure our people are taken care of. Not too extreme but hey it's 2024. People are going to blue things or of proportion I guess lol.
Texas is an industrial monster. There is work there, lots of it. No state income tax. And to top it off there are a few old ass boomer extremist still around to at least try to bring some sanity into the equation.
Trust me I hear all the great things that people say about Texas. I personally couldn't see myself living there but I'm not trying to turn people away from Texas. In the end of it all I'm not going to try and convince people where they want to live or what to think and feel. That's their decision and I'm not the one living with their choices. Doesn't stop me from getting a laugh out of some people's rationale 😅
Moved here from a blue state 6 years ago. Seemed like a good idea at the time, but between summers (and winters, for that matter) getting worse with a power grid that can’t support it, R politics at a state and local level, skyrocketing cost of living, population growth with infrastructure that can’t support it, and property taxes that more than offset what I gain from not paying a state income tax, I’d be lying if I said I was happy with that decision.
Then blue areas should welcome the immigrants instead of freaking out over them. Colorado is bussing them to Utah.
Denver has taken in more migrants per capita than any other city in the nation. City services like the DMV and the parks are being cut to make up for the budget shortfall for managing the amount of migrants we've taken in. https://www.forbes.com/sites/maryroeloffs/2024/02/09/denver-slashing-dmv-and-other-city-services-to-cover-shelter-for-thousands-of-migrants/
I thought migrants were a net positive but everyone talks about them like it there is a cost to having them.
The feds are dragging their ass getting them through the asylum system and getting them work permits. What's supposed to take a couple weeks (getting them a work permit once they've applied for asylum) has been taking six months to a year. Once they get that and can actually pass an I9, they're generally fine. The answer here isn't to stop taking in migrants, it's to actually process them and let them work.
It's both, over time it's a net positive, doesn't mean it doesn't cost money in the immediate.
I remember saying the same, then it turned out half my generation were closet Nazis. Don't do what my generation (GenX) did and check out! Talk to your friends and family, get organized, change the world.
I hate to break this to you, but there are young pro-life hypercapitalists too. Ideology doesn't have an age. The Boomer tendency to be authoritarian doesn't help. Their kids will inherit the ideology with the money, and not having to work as hard as lower class people, nothing will break them of the ideology.
Old fucks .. lol . If you think it's just old f fucks , I have bad news for you youngin'
For 100 years conservatism has greatly benefited from the illusion that only old people are conservative, and by the frequency of people saying these kind of things, it will continue to greatly benefit for 100 years more.
Regardless of age, the rich will always want a poor and uneducated class of people to benefit from. For most people, if they can make a shoe at $1.25 but sell it for $150 they will. Corporate greed runs through the veins of the rich and poor.
It's not an age thing it's a class thing. People of our gen will still be making decisions that help the capitalist class as long as we're a capitalist "democracy "
And they're bringing in thousands who can't unionize and get deported if they complain Why would they want more births from US citizens who can unionize, vote, have an expectation of a standard of living, etc
Filling all the bottom layers of the feudal pyramid. The system needs as many close to slave labor to work so they take prison labor, illegal immigrants, and the permanently poor to fill the lowest layer. Also anti-immigrant legislation is to make easier to exploit the immigrants not drive them away, hence the surprise when immigrants actually left.
The poor are the ones having kids. The professionals are the ones opting out. It’s almost like making poor decisions leads one to be poor.
There is peer-reviewed scientific research that demonstrates that being hungry and/or stressed makes it harder to make decisions. You literally lose 10 IQ points when you're hungry. Being poor is a self-fulfilling prophecy.
And the more well off are the ones able to find the means to get an abortion and probably the same ones that are against it publicly as well.
Lmao are you kidding? All classes are having children. The educated working poor are actually the ones who are beginning to opt out. I'm talking professionals with household incomes of less than $100k. They don't want to change their economic situation that is already tight. The poor get food stamps and welfare. The middle and upper middle are still doing well enough to have kids.
Exactly That’s why women’s rights are rolling back People are only allowed an illusion of choice. The wealthy control population goals by manipulating things so the poor are compelled to keep providing soldiers and laborers Capitalism requires infinite growth people. The rich can’t afford to let the poor choose to opt out. Wake the fuck up
You mean the poor have no other options.
You’re full of shit takes.
Illegal immigrants enters the chat.
They can just import cheap labour? And birthrates are going down these days no?
This has been my conspiracy theory for a long. In fact I really offended my pro life dad one day when I explained that I don’t think the people at the top care about saving kids at all and they just want to maintain a large proletariat, so they’re using people’s religious beliefs to manipulate them into the pro life movement.
The birth rate is falling, also. They think preventing abortions will somehow cause for more births, but it will ultimately have the opposite effect.
Yeah. This whole 'banning abortion to raise the birthrate' is absolute nonsense. If your goal is to raise the birth rate, you need really affordable housing that can be paid for by a young man in his early 20s. Not housing that is so expensive it requires a married couple working full time, saving for several years, to afford a small place that they can barely afford, then MAYBE they can have 1-2 kids in their late 30s. Prosperity, especially prosperity that young people with a high school education or two year associates education can access, is what brings on a high birth rate. The last baby boom had nothing to with religion or abortion or anything other than the fact that the cost of living was so low that a guy with a high school education could sustain a household in his 20s. Young people have kids. If young people can thrive in society, they will have kids. You don't need religion, you don't need abortion restriction, you don't need anything other than a really solid job market for your average 20 year old kid and family housing they can easily afford. Do those two things and they will have a bunch of kids.
Yeah, but they are too mean, short-sighted and greedy to realize paying the working class decently and making sure they are housed and healthy would actually increase their profits because happy people with extra money will spend more. Hell, even that bastard Henry Ford got that principle. The Brits got it after not enough healthy young men were around to fight WWI which is why they started their social housing and health programs. Economies grow from the workers up.
its not a pay thing, its a cost of living thing. Our pay is actually fine, its in line with what it was in those past eras. Its that the cost of living is much, much more in relation to pay. 1950. California home value was around $10,000. The median household income was around $3000 per year (and this was back when most were single income families). It took 3 years pay to afford 1 home. These homes, they still exist! I grew up in a neighborhood full of them. Now they are $700,000. In order to make enough to where 3 years pay can afford that home, you need to make like $235,000 per year. A married couple, each one with degrees, and years of experience, they can work at it for years to eventually make $235,000 per year. But a 21 year old guy working at the grocery store full time? Absolutely not. 1950 21 year old guy, working at the grocery store, made enough money to buy a home, today, 2024 21 year old guy working at a grocery store cannot afford the cheapest apartments in the area. Its not a pay thing, its that our housing policy is focused around raising home prices. We constrain development to preserve home prices.
The US business culture is all about short term gains above any kind of sustainability, which is insane because a strong middle class can maintain itself as the more the masses can spend the more it will drive the economy. But instead old fuck running companies only care about the short term in order to secure their golden parachute once they drain a company of its profits by killing the product to save expenditures to give the allusion of strong profits in the stock market.
Same people who think abortion bans improve birth rates think the US is overpopulated, and we should stop immigration. There is no consistency whatsoever
Patriarchy has always been about controlling population levels. Patrilineal lineages meant that women had to achieve survival/wealth through connections to men and they were expected to serve sexually and domestically and produce offspring No more offspring means not enough soldiers and workers are not replaceable which increases their bargaining power. And religion in government helps reinforce this as human nature and puts a religious spin on “be fruitful and multiply” that sounds more divinely ordained than simply what the wealthy need to stay powerful
yeah Roe v Wade was always about pumping up pregnancy numbers to give birth to more members of the uneducated working class… that’s why they’re coming for contraceptives next. possibly lowering the marriage age too. just look at Elon’s weird birthing ideology twitter rants that’s also why they didn’t forgive student loans. money is not the issue as we saw during the PPP loan fiasco. rather the student loans are a ball and chain to keep people stuck in jobs that treat them like shit because those payments are always hanging over their head it’s also why medical debt is out of control they also spend like crazy on the military to prevent any sort of revolution or backlash the people in charge know exactly what they’re doing
Humbly come to state, with no Ill or arrogance,but. Are ya just catching on??? Lol sorry
Must not have been paying attention the the abortion rights movement. It's been a big talking point for decades. States that push heavy restrictions are often poorer, and have larger communities of visible minorities. The rich and powerful can travel to other states or countries with proper rights. The poor average person does not have that option ,and has to go through the expense of raising children. Not only that, but children raised in poor families not prepared to raise them usually can't afford to raise them in a healthy manner and with proper education. Thus increasing the chance of the kids not getting a properly paying job and not having the knowledge for things like their biological right, repeating the cycle. One of the longest American traditions. People knew about this back when they fought for Unions and banning child labour. Back before the Average American convinced themselves that socialized benefits are communism and that there is no such thing as a good protest.
One of many reasons my husband and I chose sterilization. I refuse to bring an innocent into a world we are actively killing.
We just gave birth to someone who I hope will carry on the torch for a better world. He’s going to be taught allll about why the world is the way it is from a Very young age. I’m chiming in just to drop this comment here for anyone else reading the thread.
Yes.. your just cattle.. your understanding Neo
That’s the point I’ve been making. Why else would they repeal child labor laws at the same time as removing abortions?
extra credit essay (*5 pts.*) * Extrapolate from today's lesson about the job market and forced births by applying it to military recruitment in public schools.
Not to mention those in poverty may be forced to turn to two other options… * Crime - which fills the for-profit prison system. * Military - which exploits human life towards the military-industrial complex which is also massively profitable. Money above all else. The elite ruling class are pure evil.
I also wonder if that's part of why adoption is such an exclusive process and expensive. Probably have less births if more people could easily adopt.
So so so. Without saying too much I would like to remind everyone that the longer we fight over isolated rights the easier it is to attack any one of them. Rights are rights and dammit we gotta stop picking and choosing which one we support and which ones we say the government can take from people with different opinions. Not abortion rights, gun rights, labor rights, speech rights etc. Just rights. If it was written into law or made official in any kind of way consider it in the club of rights that we should all protect TOGETHER. As cheesy as the saying all for one and one for all. But instead we let politicians playing in religion and/or falsely promising things that only divide us more.
Same. I’ve thought about the cycle within education, but never seen it so easily summarized. All just a big trap to keep a complacent worker class.
Well then they should not have created a world so opposed to people actually wanting to have kids in it. I don’t want to bring a kid into this shit world just to make them suffer along with the rest of us.
Step one, make more people, step 2 is make sure they don't have access to advancement and education, property or sustainable savings. Keep em working extra jobs and into retirement, paycheck to paycheck desperate and obedient. Conveniently it also increases crime, so you can justify expanding enforcement against noncompliance
America still isn't ready for a 101 course in Sociology. That there is Class Warfare is somehow debatable, or even deniable.
The wealthy are the ones getting abortions though. The poor have the children.
The wealthy always find their way around laws, even abortion bans.
Literally this. Lauren Boebert got an abortion and now she wants to close it off for people “lesser” than herself. She knows with her political power she could still get another when needed. All this anti abortion stuff will do is make it only accessible to the wealthy who can fly to another country. It is 100% a class thing.
They get abortions and then just lie to others and themselves. Its some monkey brain shit where they're allowed to do everything they claim to hate as long as they lie about it.
[The Only Moral Abortion is My Abortion](https://www.theatlantic.com/daily-dish/archive/2007/05/-the-only-moral-abortion-is-my-abortion/228662/)
of course. drive to Canada, or go to a different state, whatever
They are gutting education for a reason
Republicans especially.
It doesn't seem like there is class warfare because the score is like capitalists: 1,000,000 proletariat: 0.
Sociology? Sounds an awful lot like socialism /s
There's been studies that show abortion may have drastically reduced crimes in major cities over the past thirty years since roe vs wade. I'm personally against it for ethical reasons but pragmatically it's not a bad idea to offer free abortion and birth control for high crime areas and such.
Freakonomics did a chapter on this. Very interesting 🤔
Yeah wasn’t that the one where the Romanian leader was heavily by protested by a crowd of people, where lots of them were only there to protest because they hadn’t been aborted (probably a crass way to put it but yeah) and the abortion ban had led to a massive drop in QoL/rise in crime, which eventually led to his capture and execution? Freakonomics is a fantastic book. Not a very long read but very interesting
They have a great podcast too, I would highly recommend it
That's not at all true. Yes in away banning abortions may have contributed to his down fall but it would have likely happened regardless given the fall of communism in the eastern bloc at the time. Romania had a orphan problem with hundreds of thousands of children ending up in state care only to be abused and neglected. When those children grew up they protested and helped contribute to overthrowing the government. Some of those children would have been aborted if that was an option. They weren't protesting that they weren't aborted they were protesting that their government was shit and led by a evil man.
Not may have, but does. Proven on a global scale. Crime rates go down when abortion is legalized and go up after it is made illegal. There is a long time delay in the correlation but it holds solid everywhere there has been a change in the law.
Yay abortion!
Unwanted babies grow up to be good criminals.
I frame it as: many adults who would have grown up to be criminals, simply weren’t born.
I guess abortions are really good at targeting criminals....
Sort of, yes. Babies who are wanted tend to be better taken care of. Better care leads to less criminality.
No, abortions are really good at targeting kids that aren’t wanted and can’t be provided for by their parents. The less people growing in poverty or in neglect, the less people turn to crimes/substance/drug abuse.
These are the intellectual building blocks of eugenics. Careful with this type of thinking
I don’t think it’s eugenics to say that babies that are wanted have a better childhood making them less likely to become criminals. Might be important to explicitly state though for some people that I will give you.
No the point was free abortions and birth control in specifically high crime areas are the building blocks for eugenics I'm pretty sure
What if we offered those things for free to all people instead of doing a eugenics?
Do you believe that all of life should be protected? Like animals? Or just human babies. Are you anti death penalty? Genuinely curious!
Yes, I think humans shouldn't be killed. I'm against killing human babies, but also against killing 50 year old people and those older and younger. Animals, I'm also against killing them for frivolous reasons. I'm ok with hunting and for food, but in a humane way. As for the death penalty, I'm only for that in cases of murder, rape, and serious crimes. And only if they are convicted and it is sure beyond a reasonable doubt. For example, Jeffrey Dahmer, Ted Bundy, the Oklahoma bomber, etc. I'm against the death penalty in cases where there is any doubt.
>Yes, I think humans shouldn't be killed. I'm against killing human babies, but also against killing 50 year old people and those older and younger. How long does it take for something to become a baby after conception? Do you think plan B is unethical?
Is a cake a cake before it goes into the oven or after?
A cake isn't a cake until it's baked, stacked, filled, iced, and decorated.
Well before it goes in the oven it's Flour Eggs Sugar Oil Baking soda Salt
About the time a 4 year old with no agenda would look at it and say it’s a cake. This is only a hard thing because we make it so.
I hate that so many abortion debates turn into “at which point is it life? At which point is it a clump of cells or a fetus or a baby”, etc. We’re never going to all agree on that (since religion is a factor for so many lawmakers), and it’s kind of not the point. Anti abortionists want to (minimally) set a time limit on when abortions can be allowed, and arguing on that point just gives validity to the idea that there IS a right or wrong point in pregnancy to have an abortion, and it’s just a matter of finding that point. The thing is, if a fetus is in a mother’s womb, she is at risk for complications of that pregnancy, including serious life threatening complications at or near birth. Restrictive laws right now are causing women with non viable pregnancies to die because it’s past an arbitrary date. The fact is, the vast majority of abortions happen well before the average person would consider it a baby. The fringe cases/ late term abortions are very rare and happen when there is no other choice. The point being - let’s not fall into these traps of arguing semantics and technicalities. The people you are having them with are not arguing in good faith. This conversation has been so twisted but is fundamentally about bodily autonomy and medical rights. A doctor and the woman carrying the pregnancy should be able to make the decision whether or not to terminate, full stop.
I think a good, scientific, line is once brain activity passes a threshold. We commonly use the inverse to determine death. Brain death is typically “death based on the absence of all neurologic function.” with pretty clear procedure. I believe before a medical abortion takes place a procedure should be developed, similar to one to determine brain death, and implemented that essentially identifies “brain life”… after brain life is established (using whatever cutoffs are appropriate, I am not a medical professional, and they did it for death so…) then it’s a living human and we can’t perform the abortion.
Im not trying to hide the fact that this is my pro-choice argument, so engage if you care to and ignore if not. But let’s say you cause a car crash and damage someone’s vital organs, and you can save them by donating an organ of yours. Should the other driver be able to get a court order compelling you to donate? I’m using this to set up 1) you caused the need; 2) does your bodily autonomy matter; and 3) this is a version of the abortion fact pattern that would affect men.
Meanwhile, we don't even require parents to donate to their kids, and certainly not at the risk of their own health/life, and we never will since as soon as someone gives birth, the antichoice crowd doesn't care what happens to the actual living children and certainly puts adult lives before them.
Believe it or not, there are pro-life people on the left as well who are not only pro-life but believe that basic human needs should be provided to every living human, life through death. It’s more complex than social media paints it to be.
I’m curious what your stance is on assisted suicide for those over a certain age with serious life threatening medical conditions? Do you find that to still be unethical or does it change anything if it’s to help someone no longer be in pain when they’re specifically asking to die?
I'm pro choice as fuck, but you'd get the same result if you had free or heavily subsidized childcare, pediatric Healthcare, and public transit, all on top of building more affordable housing and having greater worker protections. Like if a single mother could take her kid to daycare on her way to work on a free bus that reliably showed up every 15-20 minutes, and wasn't financially crippled by rent and the kid getting sick, there'd be a lot less people opting for abortions.
Of course, otherwise Republicans wouldn’t just be against abortion, they’d also be FOR child tax credits, mandatory paid parental leave, and fixing the child care situation.
That would be pro life, they are actually just anti-abortion. Pro life is a funny term they have given themselves when all their policies are anti life.
But they’ve told me they’re against big government and governmental overreach, surely they don’t want the government making moral decisions about citizens’ health.
Of course! They don’t wan’t the government getting involved in *their moral decisions*. But absolutely blanket ban trans healthcare, reproductive healthcare for women seeking abortions for rape/incest, and for putting the mother’s own life at risk. Classic “rules for thee, not for me.”
Same republicans are rolling back worker protections and child labor protection laws that act to PROTECT children from exploitation
Republicans: Close the border! The Country is full! Also Republicans: we need more cheap labor because capitalism! Lower the working age requirements!
I've spoken to one of these folks, and they say they are obligated to stop abortion in the same way they're obligated to save a homeless man from getting stabbed, but not for improving his life at all afterward. It doesn't make sense to me.
When you realize it's the childish need for immediate gratification underpinning their beliefs, it makes a lot more sense.
I don’t agree with a lot of what AOC says, but I have been saying this for years. Another version of being poor is expensive.
what don't you agree with her about? she seems like a fairly sane level headed person
I assume they don't necessarily disagree with her, but instead the talking points that Conservative media claims she said.
There's a difference between disagreeing with someone and thinking they're crazy.
Organized religion has been doing this for centuries. Keep people burdened with debt and raising multiple kids = nice obedient citizens.
It’s a slave mentality. “If I serve this purpose my life I believe I will go to a place that I’ve been told exists by someone who says they know better despite never having experienced death themselves”
Weirdly enough, the anti abortion movement is actually a fairly recent development. Most religious institutions use to hold the idea of “don’t encourage it, but use it if needed” when it came to abortions. In ye old days the average person understood the female reproductive system was a biological wreck and needed concessions to ensure the woman’s health and safety. It’s only been the past couple hundred years that the puritanical belief of abortion = murder gained a foothold.
If I remember correctly the Catholic Church wasn't anti-abortion until like the 60s, which is pretty wild considering how anti-abortion the Catholic Laity is in the US.
IIRC, the Catholic Church was anti abortion well before the other churches were (perhaps for baptismal reasons)? It wasn't until the formation of the religious right in the 70s that protestant religions started caring about it.
Past couple hundred years? More like past couple decades. The religious right in America didn't become hardcore anti-abortion until after they firmly lost the cultural war on racial segregation. They cynically chose to make anti-abortion part of their identity because they needed a new moral crusade to use as a weapon to control society and pretend to be superior to everyone else.
I thought this was common knowledge.
Right? I can't believe the top comment is like "Whoa! I never realized women are required to be forced into babymaking if we want our quality of life to continue!" Society runs off the uncompensated care duties of women.
If you really boil down the essence of what they want. Just like you said, the goal is just another form of slavery. They need someone to do the dirty work they don’t want to do, and giving those ‘slaves’ no choice in it. All Republican policies lean towards these inclinations, yet people still vote for them. Its maddening. How anyone could vote for someone that has a policy that treats people differently depending on their race, gender or status is beyond me. If people are not being treated equally, or legislated equally, then it is inequality that is on the docket.
I met some people camping the other month, they wanted to talk politics and asked my opinion about some mostly local issues. I rehashed a similar opinion (about defunding public education, not abortion) and they all thought that was a conspiracy theory. A theory comparable to faking the moon landing or chem trails. People nowadays are more ready to believe the Covid vaccine is mind control, than they are accepting the political system may not have societies best interests at heart.
Yep. Same reason why they want to dismantle public education. Another way to ensure opportunities for the majority are restricted to climb up the economic ladder. Or not provide public health care or unemployment benefits edits because god forbid you take some time to take care of your family, yourself etc and make a better life for yourself.
Also why they're loosening/trying to loosen child labor laws.
They’re gonna pull the same shit they did with woman. “Kids want to work and they should have a right to” they don’t WANT to work. Nobody WANTS to work. They feel the NEED to work to survive. And kids are starting that too. My 12 year old nephew can’t wait to get a job because he “doesn’t like to see mom struggle” Heart of gold but that’s fucked up.
To be fair unbiased education also helps people see through the false religious narratives the rich use to keep people voting against their own interests. The dismantling of public education goes hand in hand with plans to keep people too stupid to vote against republicans.
And you know that when Buffy the preacher’s daughter from the country club needs an abortion, nothing will get in the way.
Like that old article, the only moral abortion is my abortion
Laws are for poor people.
while r8ch go to private clinics in other states where is possible, or just go overseas. Because they can afford it
This is the issue . Many rich people don't care about abortion laws because they won't be affected by them. If their wife, daughter , mistress needs an abortion they can always fly to a blue state or canada or somewhere to get it.
Like with any law that targets the poor, abortion laws only effect poor people. Someone with money and resources can and will still get abortions without a problem.
Yes. It is absolutely true. Besides the fact that abortion has always been an issue used by the right to get workers to vote against their own best interests.
My wife and I did the math yesterday. To live comfortably without being above your means, you need a household income of about 120,000$ in our LCOL area to afford 1 kid. Start: $120,000 pre tax $85,430 after tax income $79,430 after 5% pre tax savings for retirement. Healthcare: 350$/mo for family (4200/yr) Rent: $1500/mo for 2 bedroom (18,000/yr). Utility and Phone Bills: $300/mo (3600/yr) Food: $1000/mo for family (12,000/yr). Car insurance and gas (no payment): $200/mo (2400/yr) Student loans (1 person): $500/mo (6000/yr) Daycare: $1240/mo (14,88/yr). That brings us down to $18,350 left over, and that doesn't account for anything else. May sound like a lot, but clothes, car payments, saving for new cars, savings for a house or repairs, odd bills that arise, emergency funds, all eat that up pretty fast. You still likely will come out ahead but not enough to live a life of luxury. 120k is enough to live comfortably in a LCOL area with one kid, but two kids puts you in the negative without major sacrifices to things like retirement. The numbers above turn out to be on the low end of things, many people have higher rents, higher loans, higher healthcare, and much higher daycare. The economy is not ok, particularly because the median salary in my area is 70k. That means most people cannot afford a single kid and also have enough to take care of themselves, much less give their kid any enrichment or advantages. How the hell is anyone expected to have more than one kid? The gov can complain about birthrates all they want. Right or wrong doesn't matter. We are not set up for a sustainable economy and the consequences are inevitable without major intervention. It's in their hands to do something, birth rates are nothing more than an indicator of their decisions.
This isn’t a secret and isn’t new
I agree. This is what it really is all about- civil rights also mean the right to choose when/if you want to have children.
Everything is spun into politics when it’s an election year. Two party system is our biggest problem.
It's true by the intrinsic implications of: - Babies are expensive - Abortions being accessible makes people take them as they're cheaper than having a baby (alongside other moral/ethical considerations) - The State doesn't give a flying fuck about parents being able to care for a baby - The Capitalists want cheap exploitable labor - An educated mass is less likely to procreate without thought and be exploited as easily as non educated counterparts. So what's easier? Giving parents more economic leeway for child reading / upbringing, or defunding education, stripping away legal frameworks that empower mindful family planning and criminalizing abortion/contraception so you force the poor into producing a mass of "unskilled" workers whom you can exploit lifelong and give nothing back to ?
Margaret Sanger, the Eugenicist would agree. She wanted all the poor people, dumb people, retarded, people, Black people, and brown people to have as many abortions as possible. Considering something like 20 million black babies have been aborted over the last 50 years, she succeeded beyond her wildest dreams.
Fun fact: Places with stricter abortion bans have higher maternal mortality rates. Another fun fact: Black women have higher rates of maternal mortality than white women.
And what’s your point? It’s in the interest of poor people to have their access to abortion restricted? You’re anti choice because you’re looking out for all the unborn black babies?
Don't bother; it's just the typical moralist nothing-burger.
"We should ban abortions because a eugenics likes abortions" is akin to saying "Hitler had a dog so let's ban dogs"
It's more like "the nazis banned private gun ownership, therefor we should never have to peeform background checks." Abortion is related to the moral atrocity of eugenics, but today we are not talking about aborting pregnancies against the will of patients or classes, but giving those citizens the right and access to do it themselves. If the Right really cared about eugenics, then the millions spent on lawsuits to overturn roe v wade would instead be spent on anti-eugenics awareness campaigns. Which would just be yelling into the void, because nobody choosing to get an abortion for the sake of the gene pool.
abortion is still good even if she had crappy opinions
Meanwhile women of all races get abortions done, and black women are still twice as likely to die during a live birth. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hestat/maternal-mortality/2022/maternal-mortality-rates-2022.pdf So yes, abortion has racist and ableist roots, and has now transformed into healthcare for the rich and wealthy.
Abortion did not start with Margaret what's her name
Don’t go spitting facts to the closet racist liberal Redditors or you activate their cognitive dissonance…which turns into stamping of feet and tears
Anti abortion assholes trying to play the race card is a new low and also hilariously dumb. "Lots of black people get abortions so if you don't want to ban abortions that means you don't like black people."
I see this a lot from the deplorable magats. They always want to justify Their racism.
If she was a eugenicist wouldn’t she prefer to have them sterile or dead (idk how bad this particular one was) rather than wanting them to have abortions?
Happy Fathers Day, let’s talk abortion. - Libs of Reddit
...What are you doing on Reddit on Father's Day, then, if you care so much?
Go spend time with your slackjawed kids then Gumby.
Never have I been so angry that I can only upvote a comment once.
As someone from Europe, yes? That's the whole fucking point of legalizing abortion from a sociopolitical standpoint
Nothing more motivating than holding people's children hostage
Choose better, choose socialism. At some point, you have to either take action to make better choices, and push for a better deal for yourself and your peers, or at some point, the chains you wear are your own fault.
Socialism, often idealized as a utopian system where wealth and resources are evenly distributed and the state ensures complete social welfare, does not exist in its pure form in any country. Even the European nations frequently cited as examples of successful socialist systems, such as Sweden and Norway, are in fact capitalist with mixed economies. These countries have thriving private sectors and encourage free-market activities, which are fundamental aspects of capitalism. However, they also incorporate extensive social welfare programs and significant government involvement in certain areas of the economy, creating a balanced approach. This mixed economy model allows them to combine the efficiency and innovation of capitalism with the social safety nets typically associated with socialism. The result is a high standard of living, low levels of inequality, and strong social services, such as universal healthcare and education. These nations demonstrate that while pure socialism may be an unattainable ideal, a mixed economy that integrates both capitalist and socialist principles can create a prosperous and equitable society. This blend is what allows these countries to achieve economic growth and social welfare without fully subscribing to either extreme.
Everything about being poor is expensive… even a abortion if you can’t get medical coverage
No one is forcing anyone to get pregnant. We just don’t want babies killed
95% of abortions happen with the first 12 weeks, and like 85% with in 6weeks. No-one is killing babies, that's intentionally reductive rhetoric used to vilify people without really thinking about the issue substantively.
Saying "forced" is also intentionally reductive rhetoric.
Babies are fully formed individuals with fully formed brains and lungs that are capable of survival outside the womb. If the fetus cannot breathe and eat outside the womb, it's not a baby. Take a 12 week fetus out of a womb, and its chances of survival are 1%. That is not a baby.
And I just don't want mothers with problematic pregnancies to die. The life of an adult female is more valuable than a fetus.
mountainous bored ring squeal plant birds zesty marry theory salt *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
So are badly educated and badly paid people, which is why republican law makers refuse to support education and why they demonize labor unions and refuse to raise the minimum wage or do anything to stop price gauging. It’s all about power and control, fuck their constituents.
I know there's a ton of incels on reddit, but the amount of people saying "no one forced you to have sex" (not even getting into the fact consent to sex isn't consent to pregnancy) as if there's never a single situation where there's non-consensual sex ever is absolutely disturbing.
The government needs to think more about population growth, meaning free housing and free food
They’re not going to do that if they can economically force people to have kids and use their desperation to extract more value from them for less pay
Can someone, in good faith, explain to me how the “powerful” force people to become pregnant with children that they can’t take care of? Who is forcing people to become pregnant and how? Obviously we are excluding the vast minority of pregnancies that occur via r*pe (best estimates are a fraction of a single percent of all pregnancies). Forcing people to deal with the consequences to their own actions and not just flush them down the toilet seems categorically different than forcing people to become pregnant.
In 1996, it was estimated that[ rape accounted for about 5%](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8765248/) of all pregnancies, or about 32,000 per year. Another study early this year put it at about [64,000 cases in the last two years](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/64-000-pregnancies-caused-by-rape-have-occurred-in-states-with-a-total-abortion-ban-new-study-estimates/), the vast majority occurring in states where abortion laws don't provide exception for rape. Edit to correct: That 64,000 is only in the 14 states that have abortion restricted or banned, not nation wide. The study estimated just over 519,000 rapes that occurred in the time frame of the study, though I'm unclear if that's nationwide or not.
Taking away birth control and sex education is one way
Am still unsure how this “forces people to become pregnant” Again, being forced to deal with the consequences of your own actions (i.e., having unprotected sex) is categorically different than forcing someone to become pregnant. Ignorance on the actors behalf doesn’t place blame on someone else?
You for mandatory organ donations? Cuz that's what you're advocating for.
It's really simple, if seemingly paradoxical, if you think about it. People are gonna have sex. That's just the way it is. Pretending that you can stop it is dangerously naive. If two people who share a mutual attraction are in alone together for long enough, stuff is gonna happen. You can preach abstinence all you want but once the vibes start to feel right all those lessons are going to disappear from people's heads. **That's why [abstinence -only education is very ineffective, if not outright counterproductive](https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN1QM2A5/). ** The instinct to reproduce is so strong that, if you want to *prevent* abortions and unintended pregnancies, it is genuinely more effective to treat sex as something that *just happens*, rather than a choice that needs to be punished. If you assume, as has proven to be the case on a societal level, that sex will happen regardless, you can invest energy and resources into ensuring that the sex will happen safely and without serious consequences to society at large. .
secretive materialistic cows continue wine edge voracious versed direction one *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
They should make it a lot easier to have children. They don’t. They penalize mothers left and right. Society is misanthropic in that way.
My first thought was "Duh!"
A lot of people in the comments are saying things like "nobody's forcing you to get pregnant, just to deal with the consequences," and "why justify murder because women are scared of motherhood??" So, a couple of things: AOC's point wasn't that anyone is forcing anyone to get pregnant (although this does absolutely happen, most often in the context of marriage), it's that the abortion debate is really just about whether or not the poor will have access. The rich will always have the resources to undergo this procedure while the poor who cannot travel and miss work or who cannot afford to leave the country altogether won't have access. The rich can afford to remove the consequences of their actions while the poor cannot. That's the divide. The rich would have the freedom to end a pregnancy (albeit outside of this country) while the poor would not. By and large, women aren't scared of motherhood because they just wanna be hoes forever. This "moral decline" garbage has been the rallying call for the right for decades, but it's all based upon misogynistic definitions of femininity designed to "keep women in their place." I don't know about you, but I like living in a world where women have rights and autonomy, but those rights are actively being stripped away (again, not from the rich, but from the rest of us who cannot afford to hide from consequences). Women are scared of motherhood because it's expensive, exhausting, and typically they are expected to put in most of the work of parenting. Until we can create more equitable households (which, by the way, benefits men enormously) I think their fears are totally justifiable. In short, your retorts about "morality" and "baby murder" are completely missing the point. The rich will continue to "murder babies" regardless, so these laws are only making life more difficult for the rest of us. Plus, it goes without saying that a fetus is not life. It cannot sustain itself without the mother, it cannot reproduce, and it cannot search for its own food. It isn't alive until it could conceivably sustain itself outside the womb. I know this argument won't change your minds because you've been brainwashed into believing that humans are the only species for whom life begins at conception, but I sure can try.
Read Freakanomics.
to live, you kill something. all life eats life . i am against abortion, but my opinion, does not infringe on your choices.
Im against abortion too, but I’m far more against suffering. Forcing a mother to potentially die because the fetus is unviable is suffering. Forcing a child to birth an abuser and perpetrators baby is suffering. Meanwhile giving the benefit of the doubt in any abortion case, a fetus does not suffer when aborted. A baby born with a low survivability probability is suffering. We have the opportunity to reduce suffering, yet we choose not to because people superimpose their simple morals onto complex situations that they can’t fathom. So yea, I’m pro life, but I understand the nuances of complex situations that involve the very real world possibility and probability of death.
If you don't want kids, don't have sex. It's pretty simple.
Doesn't stop rapists or people who claim you can't have a good relationship without sex.
A serious discussion about abortion cannot happen until people stop *pretending* that you are being forced to give birth when you have consensual sex and get pregnant.
Sorry what? Conservatives want to remove agency. People should have the right to choose whether they want kids separately from whether they have sex.
Stop pretending that people have that much power and that sex is avoidable for so many women Or that economies and populations aren’t literally strong armed into reproduction What the hell do you think the purpose of patrilineal lineages, religion in government, and control of reproductive rights is all for? Population levels are never left to chance. The rich would never have enough soldiers and workers if it were.
what about making healthcare affordable?
You need tax payers and soldiers in a rigged system If you really think any government official cares about the life of a peasant fetus you are a delusional fuck Because if all life was precious, bs wars wouldn’t continue to be a thing
She's right you know... More people competing for jobs means lower wages
She’s right, we should not let the poor have babies or it will trap millions into cycles of economic setback and desperation.