The human race
Nov.09, 2007 5:55 pm |
Population |
Violations will be deleted and you may be banned.
Threats will be immediately reported to authorities.
Following these rules will make everyone's experience visiting JillStanek.com better.
Our volunteer moderators make prudent judgment calls to provide an open forum to discuss these issues. They reserve the right to remove any comment for any reason. Jill's decisions on such moderations are final.
Go to gravatar.com to create your avatar.
“save the human race?” That’s just crazy. the human race isn’t in any danger from abortion. Abortion can be wrong or it can be right, but it’s not wrong because we’re running out of humans….
OK, I’ll do the math:
Births outnumber abortions 4:1.
Looks like the human race is doing just fine.
In that case, Hal, let’s please euthanize the homeless people. They’re really not contributing to anything, and it’s not like we’d suffer a population crisis if we did…
Nathan —
In that case, Hal, let’s please euthanize the homeless people.
Jeez, you pro-lifers are heartless.
“In that case, Hal, let’s please euthanize the homeless people. They’re really not contributing to anything, and it’s not like we’d suffer a population crisis if we did…”
Nathan, we would certainly not suffer a population crisis if we did that. However, it would still be a horrible idea. That was my point, regardless of your view on abortion, the future of the human race has nothing to do with it.
you’re free to think abortion is a horrible idea, but if you give for your reason that we’re running out of humans, you will be ridiculed.
I don’t anyone is saying that we are running out of human beings. I think the point of “Save the Human Race” was more esoteric. As in save it from itself. We’re destroying ourselves in more ways than physically when we allow abortion.
MK, that could be. I didn’t see it that way, but now that you point it out, perhaps that’s the point.
Definately a powerful clip…how pathetic are we Americans to let so many needlessly die each year. It is truly disgusting to me.
Hal,
Actually, Germany and other European countries who’ve made abortion a staple of their societies, are now stating they will not have a large enough to replenish the work force w/in 10-20 years.
China doesn’t have enough girls for their men and it’s causing major societial problems.
Hidee Ho, Tara!
Hi PL Laura,
Sorry didn’t respond to your question earlier. My girls are sick. They have fevers of 101.2 and 101.9 respectively, so I have been busy. Will I see you at the Rally on Nov. 17th?
I am so sorry…if there’s anything I can do to help you out, let me know!
Not sure if I’ll be there on the 17th….probably not, though.
PL Laura,
Yeah – They didn’t sleep well and I feel so bad for them. Although, they are cute. They liked that I let them have pajama day. My son has so far escaped getting sick. So I
PL Laura,
Sorry, my computer just hit send by itself. What I was saying was, so I hope he doesn’t get it. They are so cranky.
I hope he doesn’t either…guys are the worst when they get sick…such babies!!! (No offense, guys…it’s true, though!)
tp,
You wrote:
“OK, I’ll do the math:
Births outnumber abortions 4:1.
Looks like the human race is doing just fine.”
Posted by: tp at November 9, 2007 6:23 PM
OK, now let’s do the real math.
The ratio of births to abortions is totally irrelevant to population growth or decline.
The number of births per woman is the relevant ratio.
A birth rate of 2.3 children per woman is required for a stable population.
Lower than 2.3 is decrease. Higher yields an increase.
Even if abortions outnumbered births yet each woman had more than 2.3 kids, the population would increase.
hippie —
The US birth rate is pretty close to replacement level. And don’t forget the thousands of immigrants who flow in every year. The US population is not in decline.
*OFF-TOPIC*
Jill —
What happened to Jacqueline’s guest post on adoption? I thought it was fascinating. But when I went to reply, it had disappeared.
OK, I’ll admit it…not very good at math. However, if the US will give birth to 4M/year, and our Population growth rate is: 0.92% (2005 est.)
(http://education.yahoo.com/reference/factbook/us/popula.html)and our Total fertility rate:
2.08 children born/woman (2005 est.)(same source)…seems to me that we’re declining, here!
Not to mention the fact that the economy will continue to decline as the (I am soooo sorry, guys) baby boomers will….
0.92% is a positive number.
If the population were in decline, wouldn’t the population growth rate be a negative number, like -1.23%?
If you watch this US population clock, the number always goes up, not down. And this census projection seems to indicate that the population is growing and will continue to grow.
Yes of course 0.92% is positive because the population is increasing.
The point of the birth rate per woman vs. births per deaths is that the graph of the age of our population is skewing to the right. That is we are aging. So in the future we will see deaths outpace births. The older folks just aren’t old enough yet. Each year that passes, the death rate will increase due to increasing age as the birth rate decreases also due to increasing age.
So that 0.92% will decrease and will go negative if current trends prevail.
I hope you’re not doing the same “math” when you’re at the casinos! Let me explain…For every 100 dollars you spend, you will get back 92 dollars….now, after you “spin” for a while (or whatever floats your boat), what happens to your $$$?
hippie,
yeah, you got it, girl! Don’t loose track of the baby boomers & their offspring, though…this has not been accounted for, yet, on the US population clock…
I just want to add that it isn’t so much that a decrease in population that is such a problem. I don’t think it is. The problem is a decrease in workers and an increase in dependent elderly. For one thing, we can’t all work in nursing homes. Some of us will have to work at other jobs to pay the taxes to pay those working in the nursing homes. I say this half joking but realistically there is no way for the younger generations to support all of the elderly in the style to which they have become accustomed.
PL Laura,
you wrote,
2.08 children born/woman (2005 est.)(same source)…seems to me that we’re declining, here!
Posted by: PL Laura at November 9, 2007 8:16 PM
Although the birthrate of 2.08 is below replacement rate, we do have significant immigration as tp pointed out and are growing slowly, just under 1% a year.
As for 92 cents on the dollar at casinos, I think you refer to the percent the casinos post that their slots pay for example, 95% which means they only earn 5% and they want you to think you have decent odds of winning.
hippie,
No worries…I’m sure PP has a way of capitalizing on Euthanasia, if they haven’t already….Maybe they’ll just use a pseudonym like, “Planned Irreversible Cessation of Life”…wait…I think they’ve already done that!!!
oops…sorry…delayed posting…repeat….my bad!
PL Laura – LOL I like the name. Hey how’s your dog? I posted on another thread that if your dog isn’t feeling better soon, you should take him/her to the vet. Chocolate is poisonous to dogs.
hippie said,
“Although the birthrate of 2.08 is below replacement rate, we do have significant immigration as tp pointed out and are growing slowly, just under 1% a year.”
The net migration rate was included in that #:
3.31 migrant(s) / 1,000 population (2005 est.) (same source)
hippie also said “As for 92 cents on the dollar at casinos, I think you refer to the percent the casinos post that their slots pay for example, 95% which means they only earn 5% and they want you to think you have decent odds of winning.”
Exactly…which is why believing 0.92% is an “increase” this is Casino math, Aurora math, PP math, etc…doesn’t make any sense to the “sensible” :)
Anonymous at November 9, 2007 9:13 PM
(that was me…again…my bad!)
Hey Tara! My dog is much better now! Laura was right! The vommiting she did (projectile…never saw that before by a dog!) put her in the “safe zone”! My dog is so dumb…but I LOVE HER!!!
Heather picked out my name…I didn’t want it confused with the “other Laura”…so, when I asked for the consensus on an new one, this is what she came up with…& I liked it, too!
Anon,
“…believing 0.92% is an “increase” this is Casino math, Aurora math, PP math, etc…doesn’t make any sense to the “sensible” :)”
Posted by: Anonymous at November 9, 2007 9:13 PM
It is not “believing”. 0.92% is an actual increase, even though it is very small. I don’t understand why it is not sensible. If you invest $100 at 0.92% simple interest, at the end of the year you will have $100.92.
If you mean it is very small, I have to agree, it is very small.
ok, let me explain it another way…back to the casino (I can hear the “dinging” from here)…If I put $100 into a slot machine and got back $95, It would pay out a 95% return…Now, if I put the $95 that I had into the slot machine, I would now get back $90.25..then, I would put back $90.25 into the machine and get back $85.74 (ok, probably $85.75!)then, 81.45, 77.38, 73.50, so forth & so on until I was broke! Yes, the casino always paid their 95% return!
Now, if you were adding on to a stable figure, as interest, yes…you would be adding on to your wealth….If you’re talking about population, that number starts @ 100%! If you only have a 92% return on that 100%, you have to use casino math!
I just thought I would qualify that “very small”
At 300,000,000 people in the US, 0.92% growth is 2,760,000 more people per year.
I don’t know about you, but I would consider a city of 2,760,000 to be a large city.
There is nothing inherently wrong with slow population growth.
There is something inherently wrong with killing babies to achieve it.
Laura,
Yes, 95% of 100 is 95 which is less than 100. Yes that is a loss. They specify that payouts are 95 cents on the dollar so you know on average you will lose a little but the odds are not ridiculous. So you have a reasonable chance to win even though on average you lose 5%. They figure you will get your money’s worth in entertainment value.
However a growth rate of 0.92% means that you add it to the base number. That is why they specify growth, so you will know to add it on.
You can use percentages many ways. That is why they specify what the percentage is added to or taken from so they aren’t just throwing numbers around.
Amen to that, hippie! Now, it doesn’t seem so bad…100 years from now, when the great-grand children of the abortion surviors are around, I think that notion will change! :)
I just want to add that it isn’t so much that a decrease in population that is such a problem. I don’t think it is. The problem is a decrease in workers and an increase in dependent elderly. For one thing, we can’t all work in nursing homes. Some of us will have to work at other jobs to pay the taxes to pay those working in the nursing homes. I say this half joking but realistically there is no way for the younger generations to support all of the elderly in the style to which they have become accustomed.
Posted by: hippie at November 9, 2007 8:51 PM
………………………………..
I wonder if you realize that not every elderly person in nursing homes is being provided for by the government. The elderly person’s holdings must be exhausted first. I also assure you that nursing home workers do not work tax free. Also, Social Security beneficiaries pay taxes on their benefits. Even the retired are still paying taxes. Have you considered this?
I just thought I would qualify that “very small”
At 300,000,000 people in the US, 0.92% growth is 2,760,000 more people per year.
I don’t know about you, but I would consider a city of 2,760,000 to be a large city.
There is nothing inherently wrong with slow population growth.
There is something inherently wrong with killing babies to achieve it.
Posted by: hippie at November 9, 2007 9:59 PM
…………………………..
There is something wrong with your belief that worker bees must be born to support you in your old age if you should achieve such. Why not simply plan for your own retirement? I have my shopping cart and underpass all picked out. : )
Hey, I have no fear of nursing homes…I mean, how bad can it be? Bingo, movies, if I don’t want to get up to “go” I don’t have to…I am lazy by nature, so it’s kindof “happy haven” to me! (Plus, I get a real kick out of old people! they make me giggle!)
Sally,
Yes, I have considered it and so have many economists. The US treasury commissioned a study in 2002 using the actual population data from the SS administration and the Medicare/Medicaid board and they found a $44 trillion dollar deficit. If the deficit is not addressed it will grow to $76 trillion by 2040.
I think $76 trillion is 11 times the annual US GDP.
Anyway it is more money than we will have even if every dime from every worker is taxable.
About a month ago I posted the Gokhale Smetters report which has 100 pages of details and was to be included in the 2003 US budget appendix but was yanked at the last minute by the Bush Administration.
Sally,
you wrote,
There is something wrong with your belief that worker bees must be born to support you in your old age if you should achieve such.
Posted by: Sally at November 9, 2007 10:18 PM
I don’t believe anyone needs to be born just to support me in my old age. I save like everyone else and like many of them am not depending on gov’t benefits.
A few problems persist nonetheless. We don’t know what effect constant and sustained selling of stocks and bonds will have on the stock market. If the younger folks who should be investing can’t buy at the rate older folks sell, stocks could fall a lot and many would have to sell even more stocks to get the same $ which could cause a downward spiral and dangerous devaluing of securties assets. Also money saved in banks can lose value due to inflation and Bernanke has already publicly stated that he will literally print money to avoid deflation of the dollar.
Regardless of the money, life is symbiotic, we all need one another. Killing others is wrong whether to our benefit or detriment.
I have to go,
Take care everyone.
Sally,
Yes, I have considered it and so have many economists. The US treasury commissioned a study in 2002 using the actual population data from the SS administration and the Medicare/Medicaid board and they found a $44 trillion dollar deficit. If the deficit is not addressed it will grow to $76 trillion by 2040.
I think $76 trillion is 11 times the annual US GDP.
Anyway it is more money than we will have even if every dime from every worker is taxable.
About a month ago I posted the Gokhale Smetters report which has 100 pages of details and was to be included in the 2003 US budget appendix but was yanked at the last minute by the Bush Administration.
Posted by: hippie at November 9, 2007 10:26 PM
……………………….
Hippie,
Why was it yanked in your opinion?
A few problems persist nonetheless. We don’t know what effect constant and sustained selling of stocks and bonds will have on the stock market. If the younger folks who should be investing can’t buy at the rate older folks sell, stocks could fall a lot and many would have to sell even more stocks to get the same $ which could cause a downward spiral and dangerous devaluing of securties assets. Also money saved in banks can lose value due to inflation and Bernanke has already publicly stated that he will literally print money to avoid deflation of the dollar.
Regardless of the money, life is symbiotic, we all need one another. Killing others is wrong whether to our benefit or detriment.
I have to go,
Take care everyone.
Posted by: hippie at November 9, 2007 10:38 PM
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The stock market has consisted of the constant selling stocks and bonds since it began……That’s what it is, a MARKET! And there are always new investments selling at a lower rate to get into. Some succeed and some don’t. It isn’t just GE selling at an ever increasing rate.
Sally,
About a month ago I posted the Gokhale Smetters report which has 100 pages of details and was to be included in the 2003 US budget appendix but was yanked at the last minute by the Bush Administration.
Posted by: hippie at November 9, 2007 10:26 PM
……………………….
Hippie,
Why was it yanked in your opinion?
Posted by: Sally at November 10, 2007 1:20 AM
I have no opinion, however one economist, Laurence Kotlikoff, who contributed to it felt that the Bush administration didn’t like the fact the report explained exactly how much the deficits are. At the time Bush was pushing tax cuts and perhaps the admimistration felt that although buried in the budget appendix, the report could be found and if publicized would Bush’s tax cuts would be in jeopardy. None of this is my opinion.
Tim,
Of course you are right about the stock market. I just used the stock market as an example. In a shrinking economy, the stock market will shrink as well. If investors are spread out in the market and it declines overall many of their investments may fall enough to get them into real trouble. Even in todays market, you can lose a lot. No one knows what will happen. I sure don’t. I just point to the risk of the stock market. Just because you invest in the market does not mean you will be okay. Every investment advisor makes that caveat.
About the “Human Race” video…
I would have preferred to have seen someone other than a white male running for his life.
Perhaps an African-American female would have been more relevant.
Maybe even Native-American. Or Hispanic.
But after reading the whole Asian gender implosion on Jill’s Saturday post, an Asian gal running FASTER could have hit the message home!
I am not in the least surprised that this entire string of comments took until the very last one this morning to address the issue of hegemony which is the over aching reason for the great concern about the effects of abortion on a population.
When a single race of people has dominated a nation in all aspects svae for culturally as white Protestants have I as a journalist find it not the least bit surpirsing that they would create a short showing their very existence being threatened by young white women choosing to abort their fetuses rather than create another white voter who can potentially be indoctrinated into the fold as an anti-immigrant, anti-liberal anti-abortion rights cog in a gossamer but great machine.
Cavalor EE, why do you have all of those nude lady pictures on your blog?
Esquire,
Come again?
Ah the glass half full or half empty. There are those who enjoy seeing the human form and their are those offended by it it seems to us that we get a wide swath of both who like the readers of Playboy™ enjoy the excellent journalism as much as the jeunes filles.
As for the title I have been a solicitor for the better part of my life in my native land.
For the record I must say that I too am pro life but really have no farthing in this shilling since as a male of my species I will never be required by law to carry a child to term. On a perfect planet there would be no abortion however, Terra is not a perfect planet.
Qu’ul cuda praedex nihil!
CCE,I didn’t say that I was offended, I was just asking.
Heather,
I truly did not mean to connote that you were offended and merely wanted to make water of claret by answering your question directly.
Qu’ul cuda praedex nihil!
PL Laura,
Now, it doesn’t seem so bad…100 years from now, when the great-grand children of the abortion surviors are around, I think that notion will change! :)
Posted by: PL Laura at November 9, 2007 10:11 PM
Absolutely, I hope that humanity will abandon its love affair with polluting chemicals, abortion, government corruption etc. The unchecked cummulative effects on society and human life will make life miserable for our grandkids.
tp: The US birth rate is pretty close to replacement level. And don’t forget the thousands of immigrants who flow in every year. The US population is not in decline.
The US population has darn near doubled in my lifetime alone.
Doug,
The US population has darn near doubled in my lifetime alone.
Yes, Doug, but that would be counting immigration.
Not just births.
You think it’s hard pushing a 7 pound baby out of your “clown car”? Imagine pushing a full grown Hispanic man out. And his family of nine along with him.
Doug,
The US population has darn near doubled in my lifetime alone.
Yes, Doug, but that would be counting immigration.
Not just births.
You think it’s hard pushing a 7 pound baby out of your “clown car”? Imagine pushing a full grown Hispanic man out. And his family of nine along with him.
Posted by: mk at November 11, 2007 5:33 AM
…………………………
Do you have a problem with large families MK? Or is it just large Hispanic families?
Sally,
As the mother of six the answer should be obvious. I know there was point to your question, but what it was evades me. What do large Mexican families have to do with the fact that immigrants account for the population remaining stable?
What do large Mexican families have to do with the fact that immigrants account for the population remaining stable?
Posted by: mk at November 11, 2007 8:11 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I think the point is that NOBODY needs to be forced to carry an unwanted pregnancy to help increase the population. If we open our doors we’ll do just fine.
I always find it absurd when conservatives shriek about closing the borders, all the time whining about the lack of new Americans.
Do we need more people or fewer people? Make up your minds…
Laura,
Never mentioned a word about “illegal” or “legal” immigrants. Just said immigrants. Never made a value judgment either way. Simply pointed out that our population has grown, not solely based on births.
You’re the one that assumed I wanted to close the borders to reduce the population. You have no idea how I feel about illegal immigrants.
You think it’s hard pushing a 7 pound baby out of your “clown car”? Imagine pushing a full grown Hispanic man out. And his family of nine along with him.
MK, (shudder) (shudder) (shudder)
I think I’ll pass on both.
Thank you Doug, for understanding my obviously pitiful attempt at humor…
Sally,
As the mother of six the answer should be obvious. I know there was point to your question, but what it was evades me. What do large Mexican families have to do with the fact that immigrants account for the population remaining stable?
Posted by: mk at November 11, 2007 8:11 PM
…………………………………………………
What was the remark about pushing a hispanic man and his family of 9 out of a clown car supposed to mean?
Sally,
Doug was making it sound like the fact that the population was stable, was due to births, so we didn’t need anymore births. I was pointing out that it was also due to immigration. Just teasing, that as far as I knew no one was “giving birth” to families of immigrants.
as far as I knew no one was “giving birth” to families of immigrants.
Maybe we better check on Rush Limbaugh….
Sally,
Doug was making it sound like the fact that the population was stable, was due to births, so we didn’t need anymore births. I was pointing out that it was also due to immigration. Just teasing, that as far as I knew no one was “giving birth” to families of immigrants.
Posted by: mk at November 12, 2007 7:32 PM
…………………………………………………….
Gotcha MK! Thanks for the clarification.
Sally,
No problem. It wasn’t my best effort :)
Truth is, I’m very torn on the illegal immigration issue.
I’ve known a few “Illegals” in my life, and they were ALL amazing people who greatly contributed to our country’s well being. They took care of the elderly so that the patient could remain in his own home, they taught other immigrant children in my school, they worked in a nursing home for minimum wage…they left wife and children back in their native countries and lived apart from them for as much as 17 years. It’s a horrible “Sophies Choice” situation.
I can’t imagine choosing food, school and medicine for my family, by moving 2000 miles away from them.
But at the same time, how fair is it to the hundreds of thousands of immigrants that are waiting to get into our country legally?
I have no answer as I am moved by compassion for both groups…
Sally,
No problem. It wasn’t my best effort :)
Truth is, I’m very torn on the illegal immigration issue.
I’ve known a few “Illegals” in my life, and they were ALL amazing people who greatly contributed to our country’s well being. They took care of the elderly so that the patient could remain in his own home, they taught other immigrant children in my school, they worked in a nursing home for minimum wage…they left wife and children back in their native countries and lived apart from them for as much as 17 years. It’s a horrible “Sophies Choice” situation.
I can’t imagine choosing food, school and medicine for my family, by moving 2000 miles away from them.
But at the same time, how fair is it to the hundreds of thousands of immigrants that are waiting to get into our country legally?
I have no answer as I am moved by compassion for both groups…
Posted by: mk at November 13, 2007 8:19 AM
……………………………………………………….
I’m with you on this. It’s a long story filled with evil step brothers and a jerk of a late step father but my mother has been left essentialy destitute since the death of step dad. One of my sisters has been left with the task of caring for her. Mom’s lawyer actually suggested sis hire an illegal care giver for mom. Sis won’t do so but the suggestion left me considering the plight of older women that have escaped some pretty horrific conditions from places like Croatia. Getting paid under the table doesn’t bode well for a retirement. How do they manage to afford care for their health? Where would they go if expelled? I don’t have any answers.
I know. It’s tragic whichever side you look at. I know one man who had to leave his 6 and 7 year old daughter in the Philippines. They’re 14 and 15 now and he wasn’t there for their first communion, graduation, birthdays…he also found out that the relative he left them with was abusing them. But the alternative was to go back and live in hell. They lived in a really bad part of the Philippines (where the government was goofy…I don’t know that much about the Philippines). They’re okay now, but until they turn 18 they can’t come here. And if he goes home, he’ll never be let back in here. This way they’ll go to college. Come here eventually. But he lives in fear everyday.
I even offered to adopt his daughters, but that won’t work because you’d have to “find” their parents in order to get custody…which means he’d get caught. It breaks my heart.
know. It’s tragic whichever side you look at. I know one man who had to leave his 6 and 7 year old daughter in the Philippines. They’re 14 and 15 now and he wasn’t there for their first communion, graduation, birthdays…he also found out that the relative he left them with was abusing them. But the alternative was to go back and live in hell. They lived in a really bad part of the Philippines (where the government was goofy…I don’t know that much about the Philippines). They’re okay now, but until they turn 18 they can’t come here. And if he goes home, he’ll never be let back in here. This way they’ll go to college. Come here eventually. But he lives in fear everyday.
I even offered to adopt his daughters, but that won’t work because you’d have to “find” their parents in order to get custody…which means he’d get caught. It breaks my heart.
Posted by: mk at November 13, 2007 6:52 PM
…………………………………………………………..
Oh how horrible for him! These people are not criminals in my mind. I can’t see punishing them.
Doug was making it sound like the fact that the population was stable, was due to births, so we didn’t need anymore births.
Not really true – I was just observing that the population is doing anything but shrinking.
While world population is still skyrocketing, it is indeed true that without immigration, the US, Japan, western Europe, etc, would actually have population declines.
Sure wish property values would come down enough that it’d be easier for my wife and I to buy our big dream retirement house.
Doug