Buying jobs doesn’t work
Once again, the governing process here in Maine seems to be rather misguided. At one moment, the governor wants to provide money and tax incentives to lure a new aircraft business to Maine if it gets enough state money and tax breaks lavished upon it. That business instead went to Wisconsin and the governor was “upset.”
The governor should be more concerned about the businesses already here in Maine, struggling to pay their unemployment tax costs. Why can’t he help us? For the third year in a row Maine unemployment taxes have been repeatedly hiked up by the state, even though labor costs have actually gone down. Why?
I called the state and was told it needs to make up for the shortfalls resulting from the worldwide economic collapse caused by the federal government.
So even when long-term Maine businesses are hurting, the state puts our costs up, while at the same time offering money to a new company that has never paid one dime of taxes here in Maine.
Making up shortfalls by overtaxing business is damaging to our economic growth. Maybe if there were some tax incentive help, each of the 2,000 Maine businesses could hire one or two more workers and create 2,000 to 4,000 new jobs, vs. the 600 jobs the governor failed to buy.
Instead of raising taxes, Mr. LePage, cut expenses! Maine businesses are currently being bled dry by rising unemployment taxes. That aircraft company evidently did its homework and wisely located elsewhere.
Jim Dickinson
Surry
Population decline’s consequences
It’s hard to believe that Beedy Parker (Jan 10 letter) still believes in the overpopulation myth, while worldwide birthrates are in free-fall. World economies are also in free-fall as their workers fail to replace themselves, while being burdened with supporting aging populations. It takes 2.1 children per couple just to replace existing populations.
Because of 53 million missing Americans since Roe v. Wade, we are also missing trillions of GDP dollars, almost a trillion in tax revenue, all because of the horrible destruction of our most valuable resource of all: human beings.
Eighty countries, representing over half the world’s population, suffer from below replacement fertility. Europe’s birth rate is only 1.3; Germany’s birth dearth caused the closure of 230 schools in 2006. The UN predicts by 2050, Russia’s population will decline by 25 million, Japan’s 21 million, Italy’s 16 million and Germany’s and Spain’s 9 million each. Europe and Japan are projected to lose half their populations by 2100. By 2050, persons over 65 will be almost twice as numerous as children 15 and younger.
The economic consequences of population aging will cause closing schools, shrinking tax revenues, declining stock markets, dying economies ending up like Greece. More caskets than cradles obviously is the problem, not the answer. While Obama dedicates hundreds of millions of tax dollars to economy-destroying population reduction worldwide, poorer Americans are forced to choose among eating, medicine or freezing.
Ron J. Stauble
Unity
Ron Stauble – I’m afraid that the truth in your letter will be met with hostility from some. The truth is that the earth can handle a couple billion more residents before its resources are overtaxed. And with the current replacement deficit, a few million more would certainly help.
And you don’t believe in global climate change either, hmmm? Couple more billion people…..the earth can’t sustain many more. You are just plain wrong.
If you knew something was a hoax, would you just go along with it because it was the popular thing to do? Not me.
Keep burying your head in the sand. Your great-grandchildren will thank you for it.
EJ, I am glad to see you debunk climate change. The folks who claim that the world is getting warmer due to CO2 emissions are just like the fools who said cigarettes cause cancer, that the earth revolves around the sun, and that if you sailed west you wouldn’t fall off the end of the earth.
Since the earth is only a few thousand years old and Judgment Day is nigh, what does it matter?
The earth doesn’t revolve around the sun?
Not in EJ’s woorld.
Current replacement deficit? On what planet?
The population of the Earth reached 7 billion in 2011. That means we gained 1 billion in just 12 years (the Earth’s population hit 6 billion in 1999). If current population growth continues, the Earth will add another 2.3 billion by 2050.
CNN article at: http://articles.cnn.com/2011-07-27/us/world.population.growth_1_global-population-perils-demographic-challenges?_s=PM:US
But on your planet, (Mars apparently) there is a replacement deficit.
American’s greatest freedom was the freedom to move out in the woods and be left alone…. We’re losing that.
I don’t know what the answer to that problem is, but I do know that producing a billion more poor children isn’t it.
Your truth is disaster to our planet, we need to reduce our population worldwide, not increase its expansion.
Ron Stauble: what planet are you talking about? You sound like someone from before the English Industrial Revolution of the 18th century, when larger families were often seen as crucial to survival so that many hands could do farm work and also when so many children died young. I guess that poverty in the US and elsewhere doesn’t register on your radar screen. Unbelievable “logic.”
We are already experiencing the results of declining population. With the baby boomer generation entering retirement age, there are simply not enough workers to support their social security and medicare benefits. Population is not all about doing farm work.
Social Security is still running a surplus and eliminating the income cap for Social Security taxation (now around $106,000) would eliminate the long term funding issues. Applying the Medicare tax to capital gains income would have a similar effect on plugging any funding gap in that program. Our military budget, in contrast, has a huge deficit with no tax currently dedicated to funding it. Since Wall Street has backed the Iraq fiasco, why not fund the military with a .1% tax on all stock, derivative, bond or other financial transactions? It would raise an enormous amount of money and dampen speculation.
Tell me, why do you think there is no tax dedicated specifically to the military budget? Come now, time for our thinking caps!!
As for your other proposals are you assuming a zero sum game? If so how long do you really think your medicare proposal would last? How long would Wall Street last as a financial center? Which country would benefit most from such an ill considered policy.
Have you figured in the fica shortfall of the last two-three years? Would you kill the payroll tax cut immediately or later? How does that affect your numbers?
How about you do the work and answer your own questions.
He proposed what he/she believes is a solution to all funding ills. The onus falls to him to answer the questions. Either that or she just plain has no idea and is talking out of a body cavity.
Mature.
Immature.
Yes, that would be more accurate.
Wall Street would not collapse if they were taxed .1% on transactions. Goldman Sachs currently charges .5 cents per transaction that goes thru their computers (whichis all transactions) and Wall Street is thriving.
No one said collapse but the exchanges do compete against each other. What is the impact of that new charge.
This proposal was brought up a few years ago at least in the talking head (cnbc) world. It was discussed when there was merger talks with the European exchanges.
Exchanges compete in the fact that they control their countries stock values but no one competes with Wall Street in regards to American companies. You cannot find GM for example in any exchange other then Wall Street just like you will only find a Japanese company on the Nekkei (sp).
Exchanges… oh nvm
Actually you picked a bad example. All the Auto Companies have foreign “subsidiaries” which can list on the Nikki, DAX and Hang-sing
We had a transaction tax on all stock trades of .1% up until the mid 1970’s and Wall Street not only prospered but had steady growth. What a .1% tax on transactions would do is stop the multimillion computer transactions that cause most of the problems on Wall Street.
This is not 1970 and there are many stock exchanges willing to take up the slack that did not exist in 1970.
No other exchange but NYSE can list American companies just like Duetsche Borse (DAX) for German companies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_stock_exchanges
An American company cannot decide to delist their stock on teh NYSE and relist it on the DAX for example.
But the point is the Exchanges themselves are the issue. They become less competitive. And its just another nail in the NYSE. Maybe your problem will be solved if one of the foreign bourses buys the NYSE.
So who is the NYSE competing with? Or the DAX, or any other exchange? You cannot buy a stock listed on the NYSE on any other exchange.
Look its simple. A transaction tax effects the profit of the Exchange. There will be fewer transactions. Fewer transactions mean less money made by the exchange which in some years is barely profitable now. There has been talk of a merger of exchanges going back a decade or more. This is just another nail in the coffin of the NYSE.
(Not to mention less money in my 401k)
Every real estate transaction (read regular people transactions) has a tax on both buyer and seller. Real estate is taxed as “property” on the basis of what it may sell for on the day of assessment. “Assessments” rather than appraisals are used to discourage people from fighting these annual rises. For an instance in the years that property values in Orlando Florida decreased, the taxes on those properties increased.
Why should a person who chooses to invest in real property be taxed up the ying-yang while people who own paper property (stocks bonds and securities) be allowed to avoid those taxes?
Once they called this disparity.
A person buys and sells property rarely. I have only bought and/or sold property maybe 12 times in 40 years. I have bought and sold stocks thousand of times. So do the people that run my mutual funds. Each transaction tax reduces my gain.
….and my investments are in real estate which I buy and sell. Why should my investments have a greater tax burden than yours?
You create wealth when you buy and sell after your property appreciates over time. Is that the same manner most stock is held? (other than Buffet) I buy and sell properties and the transfer tax does not have a real effect on long term holdings.
A tax of .1% would mean you would have to buy over $10 in stock before you would pay 1 cent in tax. A dollar in tax would equate to $1000 in stock and $10,000 in stock would be a $10 tax.
As far as your mutual fund you are most likely being charged a fee to manahge that fund of 3% to 8%, much more than the .1% transaction tax, which could be taken out of the fee they use to manage the fund.
and my fees go up. return goes down.
If a tax of 0.1% or $10 per $1000 would cause a stock exchange to go out of business then it is already out of business but just doesn’t know it. The tax would be on the entity buying the stock not a tax on the exchange. This would bring stability to the markets by taxing computerized trading (individuals ould not even notice this tax) which has been linked to the stock market volatility of the past 20 years or so. All of the major Stock drops since Black Monday in 1987 has been caused by computer trading.
Maybe if the NYSE is in such bad straights then we should not allow Goldman Sachs to charge .5 cents per transaction to simply pass thru their gateway computer.
Edited for bad math
What about real people? Am I “less competitive” on the world market because of my government’s policies? Why is it that people are so concerned about the “competitiveness” of large companies and banks when small business provides over 75% of the employment in the USA?
…and there is a prohibition against non-citizen ownership of stock exchanges, not only in the USA but in most countries where those exchanges exist.
I recall several times discussions on CNBC of possible offers for the NYSE that never came up as a problem before.
There is not spelled “their.” Point to any Act of Congress dedicating a tax to military spending.
A .1% tax on financial transactions is too small to have an effect on where people trade: ideally, it would be imposed simultaneously in Bonn, London, Paris, New York, Tokyo and Hong Kong. If you read the statute re the FICA roll-back (which has lasted but one year and one month, not two to three years) you will see that there are mandated transfers from other tax dollars to the Social Security Trust Fund to make sure the tax holiday creates no shortfall.
Medicare taxes have slowly risen over the years, under both Republican and Democratic presidents until the reign of Boy George. They have caused barely a whimper. Medicare at any tax rate is still a bargain compared to what private insurance would charge for an over 65 customer.
Having you tell me to put my thinking cap on is like Newt Gingrich telling me to be loyal to my spouse.
xrx
Any reader of our posts will see that I did. Additionally, I corrected your misconceptions about the length of time FICA taxes have been lowered and the absence of a tax dedicated to support the military.
Nice dodge. Again why does the military not have a tax attached to it???
Also the FICA shortfall began before the tax holiday. Not after.
While we are at it. 4.7% of the US population is on SSDI. Not social security, disability income. Tell me how do you continue to fund that increasing number?
Social Security is still running a surplus and eliminating the income
cap for Social Security taxation (now around $106,000) would eliminate
the long term funding issues. Applying the Medicare tax to capital
gains income would have a similar effect on plugging any funding gap in
that program. Our military budget, in contrast, has a huge deficit with
no tax currently dedicated to funding it. Since Wall Street has
backed the Iraq fiasco, why not fund the military with a .1% tax on all
stock, derivative, bond or other financial transactions? It would raise
an enormous amount of money and dampen speculation. ~~~~ Chenard
Tell me, why do you think there is no tax dedicated specifically to the military budget? Come now, time for our thinking caps!!
As
for your other proposals are you assuming a zero sum game? If so how
long do you really think your medicare proposal would last? How long
would Wall Street last as a financial center? Which country would
benefit most from such an ill considered policy.
Have you
figured in the fica shortfall of the last two-three years? Would you
kill the payroll tax cut immediately or later? How does that affect your
numbers?
Do you care to address my questions?
The social security shortfall began in 2009 well before the payroll tax holiday.
Wrong again. All that happened in 2009 is that the SSA began cashing in some of the U.S. bonds that it holds in the trust fund. That is precisely what the trust fund was designed for.
Not exactly true. Social security began paying out more than it took in starting in 2009. Regardless of how they filled the gap it has worsened with the payroll tax cut. (even though I benefit from it)
Then it is our economic system that is the problem, not the birth rate. The planet has a finite number of miles. at what point do we have “enough” people to sustain the economy, or is this just another Ponzi scheme?
This is more a problem due to increasing lifespans, not declining population.
Ron Stauble; It appears you are misinterpreting the data. The world population is not in decline. It is the rate of increase which is in decline. From 1950 to 1963 the annual rate of increase in population growth varied from 1.33% to 2.19%. As of 2011 the rate of increase is estimated at 1.09%, which means it is still increasing but at a slower rate. Around 1950 the world population was approximately 2,5 billion. The estimate for 2011 is 7 billion, nearly a 3 fold increase. I believe at the current rate it is estimated to double to 15 billion by 2100 (correct me if I am wrong on the year). Just google ‘world population 1950-2050’ for my source, and of course you can search other sites.
JIM,
The bad times are a result of our turning away from God, and no Republican, or Democrat is going to fix it.
RON,
Only certain birth rates are in decline. It just happens to be the wrong ones.
White European ones? Your post reads better in the original German.
amconservative: so, only those who “turn away from God” are subject to “bad times”? Sounds rather Old Testament. And which birth rates are the “right” ones?
Rich, fat, white, and self righteous. We need more of them in AMC’s world.
Demographically like in just about everything else the Chinese are kicking our butts. Russia has a illegal alien problem on their border larger than we do. Millions of people over the last 10 years or so have moved into the eastern third of Russia. What is interesting is that the Caucasian population is being dwarfed by both legal and illegal immigration and not a word of it is hitting the media. I got my info from the Brookings institute a couple of years ago in an article i read. They are also doing that in every adjoining country with only the exception of Vietnam. In Mynamar for instance in the far north the street signs are in Chinese.
These liberals love to see the white male dominance end, it’s just there not smart enough to know that if it ends, so does civilization as we know it.
You are correct. I hope I live to see the end of white male domination and control.
Agreed!
Racist talk.
Thats your liberal take. In my wolrd it’s called, ” straight talk “, “honesty “, ” truth “, “reality “.
I’m actually a fiscal conservative. Your truth sounds more like the talk of a delusional person who hates anyone who doesn’t fit into your narrow view of what an American should be.
Yeah, white and male. Used to be you had to be white, male and rich to vote. He’s pretty ticked off that non-white non-males can vote now.
You forgot Protestant. Catholics were once the target of discrimination not 50 miles from where the Bangor Daily News offices sit today. The largest faction of the KKK north of the Mason Dixon line was in Milo Maine. Their target was French Canadians and Catholics who came here to work.
All racism has economic roots.
Too bad it did not work think how peaceful it would be without hateful christians trying to crusade us all into their fear tanks to be molested, robbed of our money and brainwashed. We need less cults in USA lets start with Catholics.
I don’t live in the wolrd, I live in the world. And in this world, your talk is racist.
If God has a sense of humor He will meet Amcon at the pearly gates as a black person, or a female, or even a homosexual. I would love to see the look on his face ; )
Watching Amcon’s face if god were a black lesbian would be priceless. !!! Oh, I do hope She is.
Never fear … there are plans being bandied about to build a base on the moon and to send man to Mars … maybe they’ll invite you to be one of the first settlers.
Because we have done so well with our civilization?
My, doesn’t that sound dramatic “so does civilization as we know it”. What makes the white male sooooo much better than other human beings?
When you say “white,” to you mean all males with white skin, or just Caucasians? I’ve never been quite sure about who is included.
You say that if “the white male dominance” ends “it’s just there [sic] not smart enough to know if it ends, so does civilization as we know it.” Okay, so you’ve demonstrated that you’re not smart enough to know when to use “they’re,” “their,” and “there.”
And that’s just about the most racist thing I’ve every read on these pages. If women are treated equally with men, and Blacks and Asians are treated equally with Europeans, civilization will end? How incredibly racist and sexist, not to mention stupid!
You’ve posted many things that suggest you are out of touch with reality, but this one takes the prize. It paints a very clear picture of a despicable racist.
I shouldn’t go on too much about “smart”, Amcon, if I were you. You’re skating on very thin ice in that department. I could reconstruct your syntax, grammar and spelling for you to give at least a semblance of “smart”. There’s not much I can do with your thinking, though.
China’s population has been growing more slowly ever since the one child policy. India will soon overtake it as the world’s most populous nation. We are all out of Africa. Our ancestors merely left at different times.
Not sure what response you want to get from me, but there are Asians in my immediate and extended family. The growth rate has slowed for the Chinese but when you start at 1.3 billion. I was commenting on The Brookings Institute report on China’s demographic takeover of their neighbors and even in little countries like Lesotho Africa and Panama Canal area for example. Their demographics are having political implications. That was all I was saying.
Let me tell you what I don’t want. A headline in today’s San-Francisco Chronicle reads” Latinos launch anti-Rubio campaign ” The article goes on to say that Rubio must choose between being a latino or Tea Partino. This and other statements in this article only confirms what I already knew, and that is that most latinos are not Americans, but American haters who put their own culture before the American culture. They don’t want to fit in they want to take over. To them and other minority groups, it’s not about building America up, it’s about tearing America down. These facts I know are hard for you liberals to swallow!
Are you feeling oppressed by another race?
He’s scared to death that white males are on the decline and that Latinos are on the rise. Poor baby.
Which God would that be?
The only thing we minorities (in my case, being gay) want to tear down are the walls of discrimination. The tea party wants to build those walls higher. How do you not get that?
Or it could be that the Tea Partiers are for just the Old White way of life and latinos and othe minorities, including white women, would like a better place.
(Sarcasm Alert))
If you could squeeze just a bit more racism and bigotry into that comment, Amcon, we could issue you a hood.
Hitler said the same thing about the Jews. Are you supporting concentration camps for all these Latinos? You should definitely stop using Latino words like California, Nevada, Arizona, and Colorado. If you don’t, the brownshirts might round you up as well.
Which God would that be?
thanks to folks like you people fear churches I heard jokes for 50+ years about people being molested there. Turns out it was no
Really, the “wrong ones” are in decline? Tell me, which are the “right ones”? Just which populations do you wish were in decline? How awful a sentiment. Jesus Christ would be ashamed of you for thinking in such a way. Unreal. A quintessential example of sheer and utter hypocrisy. You claim to be a Christian, and yet on these boards you write things that would make Jesus Christ sick to his stomach.
Your god likes some people better than others? You are a bigot!
This is what I am doing, right now:
………………………………..__…………………………………………
………………………..,-~*`¯lllllll`*~,……………………………………
…………………..,-~*`lllllllllllllllllllllllllll¯`*-,………………………………
………………,-~*llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll*-,…………………………….
……………,-*llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll……………………… …….
………….;*`lllllllllllllllllllllllllll,-~*~-,llllllllllllllllllll…………………………..
…………..lllllllllllllllllllllllllll/………;;;;llllllllllll,-`~-,……………………. ..
……………lllllllllllllllllllll,-*………..`~-~-,…(.(¯`*,`,……………………..
…………….llllllllllll,-~*…………………)_-..*`*;..)……………………..
……………..,-*`¯,*`)…………,-~*`~……………./…………………
………………|/…/…/~,……-~*,-~*`;……………./……………….
……………../…/…/…/..,-,..*~,.`*~*…………….*………………..
…………….|…/…/…/.*`…………………………)….)¯`~,………………
…………….|./…/…./…….)……,.)`*~-,…………/….|..)…`~-,………….
……………/./…/…,*`-,…..`-,…*`….,—………./…../..|………¯“`*~-,,,,
……………(……….)`*~-,….`*`.,-~*.,-*……|…/…./…/………………..
…………….*-,…….`*-,…`~,..“.,,,-*……….|.,*…,*…|………………….
……………….*,………`-,…)-,…………..,-*`…,-*….(`-,……………….
………………….f`-,………`-,/…*-,___,,-~*….,-*……|…`-,………………
PS: It’s a face-palm.
I like it.
Growing global population has dramatic, long-term negative impacts on ecosystems and economies. Overpopulation affects clean water, food availability, accelerated climate change, wildlife habitat and biodiversity, species extinction, competition (war) for energy supplies (especially fossil fuels), and human quality of life. Most people can easily understand the problem. The solution is not so easy.
Mr. Stauble, your long record as an anti-abortion fanatic has now taken a new turn. It appears that you oppose a sensible decision by couples to have fewer children. Climate change, growing food shortages, increasing demands for energy and water shortages are all the predictable consequence of the earth having more people than it can reasonably support. Germany and Greece have had roughly the same rate of population growth. The German economy is outperforming ours in terms of exports and high wage jobs; the decline of Greece has nothing to do with that small growth rate: no economist has said that; most have pointed to its being locked into the euro and unable to devalue its currency.
If you like a crowded planet, leave Unity and move to any large city. I sense you would rather live where the resources around you are not overtaxed.
Ron Stauble: how do US policies affect worldwide population trends? Also, the developed countries may be facing population decreases but the 3rd world contiues to grow beyond their (and our) means. Poorer Americans are helped (maybe) by states and local governments, not so much the Feds. Can we assume that you’re in favor of more welfare from LePage et al. rather than the proposed Draconian cuts?
You are so right, Mr. Stauble. The connection between over 54 million unborn babies being killed and the state of our union today is very clear to anyone who has common sense.
Unfortunately, the dumbing down of Americans has also been prolific for all of these 39 years.
And your living proof!
In 1973, the year Roe vs Wade was settled, the US population was 211,908,788.
In 2011, the population reached 311,800,000. Do you honestly believe an additional 54 million, plus their children, an estimate of 20 million more, would not cause serious food, water, energy demand, employment and general social problems?
Good point. It seems like there is an assumption that all these “killed babies” were “killed” by affluent white people who had all the resources in the world to otherwise care for them, and few would have been brought into the world by people ill-prepared to raise them. I’m sure they would increase their tithe to make sure those children were fed, clothed, and housed.
You two made a much more thought out arguement than I did. thanks. I don’t know how effective you will be though, using facts and logic to make your point.
I have common sense, and you are clearly letting your emotions override your judgement. If anything, access to abortion has helped our nation avoid an explosion of crime that was predicted for our century, but peaked in the early 90’s instead.
Jim Dickinson, good letter. I agree with most of what you say. The government, state and federal, needs to have more incentives for business that stay or set up shop in this country.
IMO, as it stands now, we are seeing the Fed pulling in their purse strings. Whith the result that States are pulling in thiers. With the result that the biggest and most important item in any towns budgets, the schools are being threatened. Add to that we have Governor LePage in Augusta seeming to want to hold a gun to every departments head and pitting one group against the other.
Stauble’s letter presents pure myth. The world population growth is out-stripping sustainability levels on numerous fronts: energy, water, ocean harvest and arable land. The fact that decreasing populations present economic imbalances in certain countries is hardly relevant. These countries can easily and in fact do use immigration policies to manage such imbalances. In the US the projected social security shortfall could easily be remedied by providing a path to citizenship for millions of undoumented immigrants or their offspring. Ultimately the human race is one regardless of any feelings of nationalism, cultural bias or outright racism.
….
Ron, you are under the assumption that those that are “missing” would be productive citizens as adults. Would you be willing to pay more taxes to take care of those that needed a good home and were not in one. What about having 10-20 kids in your own home. If this cause is so important to you you would find a way.
Mr. Stauble is in capable of making assumptions. He’s just swallowed some sort of poisonous anti-abortion hysteria and regurgitating it word for word.
Something like 4% of the worlds surface is arable and we live mostly in those areas. These areas are being stretched beyond sustainablity to feed the people we have now. The fish stocks in the oceans are being depleted at an alarming rate to feed the current populations and people still think we should have more people on the planet?
Well, Ron Stauble, all I can say is that your idea of banning abortion to create economic prosperity is one of the worlds top ten truly stupid ideas.
It appears that Ron Stauble’s figures are coming from a “documentary” on the Christian Broadcasting Network. It is a lecture on how we are turning away from the concept of “god’s law” and allowing people to make contrary choices. Mentioned also in this film are the criticisms of gay marriage, waiting for marriage, women working, liberal divorce laws, and yet another criticism about the selfishness of staying single. I take offense because I’m one of those selfish single folks who has raised, or helped raise over 100 children born, no doubt, to those good unselfish christian folk who failed to wait for maturity before they procreated.
Right now in Texas, New Mexico and Arizona there is a water shortage. to demonstrate how precious water is, it should be noted that fully 5% of the entire planet’s fresh water is in our great lakes. Much of that is too polluted to drink. Many countries, where water is scarce, have rising populations. Please do not believe these people will just stay where they are and die of thirst.
Finally only someone who was paid to ignore history could say that “population is decreasing. The day I was born, the Population of the USA was under 160 million. now it is over 310 million. That is almost double in 60 short years. When you look at a graph of population expansion world-wide the spike starting in the middle 20th century is remarkable.
We are going to have a problem sustaining the numbers of people already here. Sorry Ron we don’t need to increase those numbers.
Ron still thinks every sperm is sacred.
Monty Python is the best!
Ron J. Stauble, you can thank the availability of abortion for our falling crime rates as easily as you can blame them for economic woes.
In the world I live in we just crossed the 7 billion mark in population, the fastest increase of a billion population ever. That does not seem to mean we are having any crisis of reproduction at all.
Perhaps you should join us here, we call this world reality.
Ron is having trouble reproducing. For him this is a crisis of reproduction.
My question; why is this garbage by Ron J. Stauble published in this paper when it so obviously flawed? There must have been other letters to choose from on subjects of more interest, more significance, more intelligent, better researched and more truthful.
It was a slow day?
In the PC world of newspapers it is “wrong” to “censor” ignorant folks…. Maybe this attitude accounts for the free-fall in Newspaper sales?
If you could not find a job for a long time it is time to change your career guys.. The time is now. Be on your way to earning an accredited degree. Check out High Speed Universities and they sure find suitable career based on your interests.
Lets put all republicans in a can and kick it to the moon with Newt on the cover and words in god we hide.
Conservatives should be for abortion, according to them it is only libs doing it and this could help thin the herd for future voters. If Obama was aborted GOP might of had a chance in 2008 and 2012. Two sides to every coin and you righteous persons can always go to confession if your accepted by a congregation, some don’t even care if your gay, etc.
Ron, your argument couldn’t be more flat-out inflammatory and just plain wrong. To try to tie population decline and what you refer to as the challenges of it with the issue of reproductive rights is shameful. Just shameful. Population growth or decline trends are complex and a result of numerous demographic and socioeconomic factors. Indeed, with a world population now at 7 billion the challenges of OVERpopulation in the world are of greater concern, especially in the developing world. I would assume you are a “conservative.” It surprises me that you are not celebrating the closing of public schools in the counties you mention since your ilk usually refers to them as “socialist wastes of money.” In the U.S., which you don’t mention, our population is now over 300million and rising. As to the issue of abortion, no one, including the President, is “for” abortion. It is a question of reproductive freedom. Ultimately, whether or not to continue a pregnancy is a private matter, and beyond fair regulation the government should stay the heck out of these private matters. That should be the “conservative” view, right? Keep big government out of our private lives. Sadly, “conservatives” are now so wedded to fundamentalist religious extremism that they have abandoned reason and traditional political philosophy for fundamentalist doctrine and a desire to replace democracy with theocracy. Glad to see you want poor people to have more babies. I assume you will spend as much time, money, and energy lobbying all levels of government for increased public investments in prenatal care, postnatal care, Headstart, child health and nutrition, and K-8 and higher education programs for these kids. Don’t forget that “prolife” means the child’s ENTIRE life. So you don’t get to screech about the evils of abortion and the screech to cut the guts out of the “liberal” programs which support these kids once they are born.
“reproductive freedom” Oh that’s precious! Translated to mean lets have sex on the first date. Heck, why even date, lets just do it. After all why should we show any kind of personal responsibility when we can just murder an innocent baby without repercussions. Even if we don’t have the stomach to kill the baby we can get taxpayers to support us. Even a bird has the brains to build its nest before starting a family.
most of the women that I know, who have, had abortions, were married. Most of them for many years.
Well, congratulations to Ron Stauble. He certainly got all the crazies going! LOL
If you’re not against something, then you’re for it. And the President is not against abortion.
I’m pro choice, but would never of had an abortion. I’m pro choice because, it’s none of my business how many children someone has. Many people are upset with the Duggars for having 19 kids, there again it’s their choice.