Earlier this year, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called for the government's economic stimulus package to include a healthy increase in spending for what she called “family planning.” (If you didn't already know, “family planning” is generally code for abortion.) Pelosi said that this would save state and federal governments the cost of having to pay for the health care and education of poor children. Of course, it's pretty hard to argue with that sort of logic. After all, dead children are less expensive to care for than live children.
In any event, Pelosi's remarks came on the heels of Barak Obama signing an executive order allowing money taken out of the paychecks of American workers to be used for abortions in foreign countries! In other words, the Obama administration’s position is that we are running out of money to take care of our own children but we have enough to pay for the executions of other people's children. Meanwhile, Planned Parenthood (America's number one abortion profiteer) continues to be given approximately one million dollars a day in taxpayer funding and there are calls within our government for that amount to be doubled.
So let's recap. In last year's presidential campaign, Obama labels babies a “punishment” and, now, one of his co-degenerates is claiming that babies contribute to our country’s financial woes. In this environment, it is probably no coincidence that the abortion lobby is ratcheting up its rhetoric that the faltering economy is a justification for abortion. The sense of evil is palpable when you hear them almost gleefully predict that the abortion rate is going to increase as women rely on it to compensate for bad economic conditions.
But the question is, are babies really to blame for our economic collapse? And the answer is that they are.
Let me explain. It has long been known that as consumers approach retirement they spend less money. The two areas where this is felt the most is in the sales of cars and houses – the two industries that form the backbone of the American economy. The good news has always been that, as older people began to buy less they were replaced by younger consumers who bought more. It was a cycle that was repeated from one generation to the next. But here’s the problem we face today. The American baby-boomer is the wealthiest generation of people in the history of the world and they spent money like there was no tomorrow. In that process, they created an economy that was (a) the envy of the world and (b) completely dependant on that level of spending in order to survive.
While doing this, however, they aborted more than one-fourth of the next generation of consumers. This guaranteed that, once the baby-boomers started reaching retirement, the spending frenzy of the last forty years would be over. And now, that is precisely what has happened. In 2008, baby-boomers began reaching retirement age, the sales of cars and houses plummeted and that put the entire economy into a tailspin. Further, we are just at the very beginning of this phenomenon. By any realistic measure, there is a financial tsunami rolling toward the United States that will make our current environment seem like “the good ole’ days.” From now until 2026, baby-boomers are going to reach retirement age at the rate of 10,000 a day! And even if we learn how to live with less consumer spending, the effect of that is going to bankrupt our social services infrastructure.
One obvious place you can see this is in the area of Social Security. In the 2000 presidential election, Al Gore bored us to near suicide with his incessant droning about the need for a "lock box" to protect the funds being held by the Social Security system. Of course, he was lying. He knew good and well that there is no need for such a lock box because Congress was running a Ponzi scheme with Social Security and there is no money left to lock up. Over the years, Congress grabbed it, left an IOU in its place, and then squandered it to buy votes. While Bernie Madoff rightly deserves to spend the rest of his life in prison, the only differences between Madoff and Congress are that his crimes were on a far smaller scale and he got caught.
Now we’ve reached the day of reckoning. The money to fulfill the government’s social obligations to the baby-boomers is long-gone. The result is that we will soon be at a point where younger taxpayers will be forced to send in boxcars full of their money to pay for the services that were promised to them. The fact that this money has already been collected once is irrelevant. The children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren of the baby boomers are going to be taxed into oblivion replacing money that was stolen by Congress. What most Americans don’t realize is that this problem has been made exponentially worse by abortion.
The designers of Social Security based it on an assumption of an ever-growing, or at least stabile, workforce. They could not have foreseen that America would one day legalize the wholesale slaughter of its own children. But on January 22, 1973, that’s what happened. The result has been that, over the last 36 years, over 25 percent of the taxpayers needed to replace the money baby-boomers paid into the system were executed. To appreciate the impact of this, consider that since abortion has been legal, birth rates in the United States have often been below replacement levels. In fact, if one removes immigration from the census figures, America's population has been at best flat or, by most reliable estimates, in decline. For the Social Security system, that has been a disaster waiting to happen and the wait ended in 2008. Like nations all over the world, America is beginning to discover why the shrinking populations they wanted are a barometer of economic disaster.
This reality is also going to have a devastating effect on the Medicare and Medicaid systems. I think this is probably the main reason why there is this sudden panic in Congress to implement socialized medicine. They know that the money to take care of the baby-boomers was stolen. After all, they are the ones who stole it. But they certainly can’t afford for the voters to find that out, and a perfect way to make sure they don’t is to dump the boomers into to a government run universal healthcare system.
Another way abortion affects the economy is seen in the immigration issue. Today, there is a vigorous national debate about whether illegal immigrants are only taking jobs American workers don't want anyway. While that may or may not be true, what is undeniable is that illegal immigrants are replacing the millions of workers who were killed through abortion. The problem is, beyond the financial burdens that illegal immigration imposes on the U.S. economy, it also contributes to the diminished demand for American consumer goods – including cars and houses. That’s because a very high percentage of America’s illegal immigrants live in poverty conditions so they can send money back to their families in Mexico. Over the years, this amount has grown to the point that it is now consistently one of the largest sources of income for the entire Mexican economy. And any way you look at it, this is money that, without abortion, would have been earned by Americans and spent in America. But those Americans don’t exist so it ends up being earned by Mexicans and spent in Mexico.
Sadly, this has also eliminated any chance for the Mexican economy to become as strong as it should be. It is time for someone to point out that there is no reason for Mexico to be a poor country. It has a wealth of natural resources, a good climate and a population made up of decent hard-working people. However, it is not possible for any nation to have a vibrant economy while sending millions of its youngest and most productive workers out of the country.
In the final analysis, this is a system that costs the American taxpayer trillions of dollars, threatens the stability of the U.S. economy, keeps Mexico poor, and cynically exploits the illegal immigrant. But it will continue because every