7 Billionth Baby Bluster

You go down to any big city in America - where inexplicably they keep right on producing scores of children even though the family doesn't have the means to barely feed themselves, and the geography where they live - cannot sustain HALF the population.

Apologies for the edit.


Social programs like welfare and such have helped keep big cities from falling apart. And federal dollars and such have encouraged their continuing growth.

How wil big cities survive in a smaller government future? Or will they keep getting the bennies while individial assistance is reduced or cut off?

An interesting future coming up.


Poor people not having enough abortions for ya?

Naah that would weaken the gene pool since only the ones smart enough to care would get abortions.
 
Over population is a very serious issue. And it really has nothing to do with global resources.
It has everything to do with economic resources, availability of jobs in the market vs. the number of employable individuals.

Over population is a local and national problem - not a global one.



*sigh*

read the article

I scanned over most of it...it isn't a very good article..


You "scanned over" it but you know it wasn't very good? You (apparently a member of the 'Attention Span of a Goldfish' generation) couldn't even be bothered to read it but you feel qualified to dismiss it just the same?

You're not representing yourself very well.
 
You go down to any big city in America - where inexplicably they keep right on producing scores of children even though the family doesn't have the means to barely feed themselves, and the geography where they live - cannot sustain HALF the population.

Apologies for the edit.


Social programs like welfare and such have helped keep big cities from falling apart. And federal dollars and such have encouraged their continuing growth.

How wil big cities survive in a smaller government future? Or will they keep getting the bennies while individial assistance is reduced or cut off?

An interesting future coming up.

Absolutely.
We all see it. Poor families with 6 kids. Crazy.
Also encouraged by the government is unwed mothers having plural children before they even turn 20. They can secure an apartment/food/money/healthcare etc. - and get all of this - simply because they had kids they could not support. Without the children they would be homeless.
 
*sigh*

read the article

I scanned over most of it...it isn't a very good article..


You "scanned over" it but you know it wasn't very good? You (apparently a member of the 'Attention Span of a Goldfish' generation) couldn't even be bothered to read it but you feel qualified to dismiss it just the same?

You're not representing yourself very well.

No.
I don't have to read an entire article before I can see it isn't very good.
It is dismissing over population and calling folks who are concerened about it as "alarmist"

Besides - no one wants to have to read a 4-5 page article in order to discuss an issue.
 
You go down to any big city in America - where inexplicably they keep right on producing scores of children even though the family doesn't have the means to barely feed themselves, and the geography where they live - cannot sustain HALF the population.

Apologies for the edit.


Social programs like welfare and such have helped keep big cities from falling apart. And federal dollars and such have encouraged their continuing growth.

How wil big cities survive in a smaller government future? Or will they keep getting the bennies while individial assistance is reduced or cut off?

An interesting future coming up.


Poor people not having enough abortions for ya?

Naah that would weaken the gene pool since only the ones smart enough to care would get abortions.


Yes, I'm sure that's what passes for "smart" among you and the rest of the pro-death crowd.
 
I scanned over most of it...it isn't a very good article..


You "scanned over" it but you know it wasn't very good? You (apparently a member of the 'Attention Span of a Goldfish' generation) couldn't even be bothered to read it but you feel qualified to dismiss it just the same?

You're not representing yourself very well.

No.
I don't have to read an entire article before I can see it isn't very good.
It is dismissing over population and calling folks who are concerened about it as "alarmist"

Besides - no one wants to have to read a 4-5 page article in order to discuss an issue.


Swim away, little goldfish. Maybe come back when you've grown up.
 
You go down to any big city in America - where inexplicably they keep right on producing scores of children even though the family doesn't have the means to barely feed themselves, and the geography where they live - cannot sustain HALF the population.

Apologies for the edit.


Social programs like welfare and such have helped keep big cities from falling apart. And federal dollars and such have encouraged their continuing growth.

How wil big cities survive in a smaller government future? Or will they keep getting the bennies while individial assistance is reduced or cut off?

An interesting future coming up.

Absolutely.
We all see it. Poor families with 6 kids. Crazy.
Also encouraged by the government is unwed mothers having plural children before they even turn 20. They can secure an apartment/food/money/healthcare etc. - and get all of this - simply because they had kids they could not support. Without the children they would be homeless.

also encouraged by most right wingers and US religions.

Of course we all know how well abstinance only education works.
 
You go down to any big city in America - where inexplicably they keep right on producing scores of children even though the family doesn't have the means to barely feed themselves, and the geography where they live - cannot sustain HALF the population.

Apologies for the edit.


Social programs like welfare and such have helped keep big cities from falling apart. And federal dollars and such have encouraged their continuing growth.

How wil big cities survive in a smaller government future? Or will they keep getting the bennies while individial assistance is reduced or cut off?

An interesting future coming up.

Absolutely.
We all see it. Poor families with 6 kids. Crazy.
Also encouraged by the government is unwed mothers having plural children before they even turn 20. They can secure an apartment/food/money/healthcare etc. - and get all of this - simply because they had kids they could not support. Without the children they would be homeless.

also encouraged by most right wingers and US religions.

Of course we all know how well abstinance only education works.



Maybe you can lead the Red Guard into the inner cities to dole out forced abortions.
 
Absolutely.
We all see it. Poor families with 6 kids. Crazy.
Also encouraged by the government is unwed mothers having plural children before they even turn 20. They can secure an apartment/food/money/healthcare etc. - and get all of this - simply because they had kids they could not support. Without the children they would be homeless.

also encouraged by most right wingers and US religions.

Of course we all know how well abstinance only education works.



Maybe you can lead the Red Guard into the inner cities to dole out forced abortions.
Why would I want to do a thing like that?
 
You didn't read the article, did you?

This is the same Weekly Standard that insisted the Iraq War was a nifty idea long after everyone with a lick of sense realized it wasn't.


Anything to add other than logical fallacies, bigot?

Just making a point that when a seeing eye dog walks three owners out into the middle of traffic, you tend not to trust it at a certain point.

Only a complete retard would believe that the world's population tripling in a century is not something to be seriously concerned about. It's doubled within my lifetime of 49 years.
 
also encouraged by most right wingers and US religions.

Of course we all know how well abstinance only education works.



Maybe you can lead the Red Guard into the inner cities to dole out forced abortions.
Why would I want to do a thing like that?



Well, you dismiss the notion of personal responsibility, seem awfully fond of abortion, and don't seem like the sort to support welfare reform, so...
 
You go down to any big city in America - where inexplicably they keep right on producing scores of children even though the family doesn't have the means to barely feed themselves, and the geography where they live - cannot sustain HALF the population.

Apologies for the edit.


Social programs like welfare and such have helped keep big cities from falling apart. And federal dollars and such have encouraged their continuing growth.

How wil big cities survive in a smaller government future? Or will they keep getting the bennies while individial assistance is reduced or cut off?

An interesting future coming up.

Absolutely.
We all see it. Poor families with 6 kids. Crazy.
Also encouraged by the government is unwed mothers having plural children before they even turn 20. They can secure an apartment/food/money/healthcare etc. - and get all of this - simply because they had kids they could not support. Without the children they would be homeless.

also encouraged by most right wingers and US religions.

Of course we all know how well abstinance only education works.

:confused:
Show me where rightwingers encourage poor people to have more children.

As far as religions...you know...democrats go to church too.
And yes, abstinence only education is pure stupidity.
 
Absolutely.
We all see it. Poor families with 6 kids. Crazy.
Also encouraged by the government is unwed mothers having plural children before they even turn 20. They can secure an apartment/food/money/healthcare etc. - and get all of this - simply because they had kids they could not support. Without the children they would be homeless.

also encouraged by most right wingers and US religions.

Of course we all know how well abstinance only education works.

:confused:
Show me where rightwingers encourage poor people to have more children.

As far as religions...you know...democrats go to church too.
And yes, abstinence only education is pure stupidity.

Rightwingers encourage births after conception.
So they do encourage more teenage and out of wedlock births.
Just the facts.

We were talking about births and not pregnancies.
In all fairness the right wing lifestyle does discourage teen pregnancies a bit more then the left wing lifestyle does.
 
Last edited:
This is the same Weekly Standard that insisted the Iraq War was a nifty idea long after everyone with a lick of sense realized it wasn't.


Anything to add other than logical fallacies, bigot?

Just making a point that when a seeing eye dog walks three owners out into the middle of traffic, you tend not to trust it at a certain point.

Only a complete retard would believe that the world's population tripling in a century is not something to be seriously concerned about. It's doubled within my lifetime of 49 years.

Instead of indulging in logical fallacies and tortured metaphors, why not try reading the damn article?
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top