Pelosi Says Birth Control Will Help Economy

STEPHANOPOULOS: Hundreds of millions of dollars to expand family planning services. How is that stimulus?

PELOSI: Well, the family planning services reduce cost. They reduce cost. The states are in terrible fiscal budget crises now and part of what we do for children's health, education and some of those elements are to help the states meet their financial needs. One of those - one of the initiatives you mentioned, the contraception, will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government.

STEPHANOPOULOS: So no apologies for that?

PELOSI: No apologies. No. we have to deal with the consequences of the downturn in our economy.

Click to expand...

DRUDGE FLASH 2009®: PELOSI SAYS BIRTH CONTROL WILL HELP ECONOMY

Right, so let me get this straight, children are a burden on society, so we should limit children to help the country out.

Isn't that a Mao line of thought? What next? Mandatory abortions and euthanasia to any kid born or found in the womb to be mentally deficient/retarded or otherwise a "financial burden"?

Maybe we should limit couples to 1 child, think of the dough we'll save!

MrVicchio said:

DRUDGE FLASH 2009®: PELOSI SAYS BIRTH CONTROL WILL HELP ECONOMY

Right, so let me get this straight, children are a burden on society, so we should limit children to help the country out.

Isn't that a Mao line of thought? What next? Mandatory abortions and euthanasia to any kid born or found in the womb to be mentally deficient/retarded or otherwise a "financial burden"?

Maybe we should limit couples to 1 child, think of the dough we'll save!

Click to expand...

Unwanted pregnancies, and the children that result from them if carried to term, are a horrible burden on individuals, and also a collective burden on society. Yes, indeed.
Ensuring that all citizens have access to the appropriate tools to prevent most unwanted pregnancies will most certainly help the economy.

Yes because Birth Control = Abortion :roll:

Gimme a break, can the crazy righties please go back in the closet.

TheNextEra said:

Yes because Birth Control = Abortion :roll:

Gimme a break, can the crazy righties please go back in the closet.

Click to expand...

I didn't say Birth Control = abortion, learn to read.

MrVicchio said:

DRUDGE FLASH 2009®: PELOSI SAYS BIRTH CONTROL WILL HELP ECONOMY

Right, so let me get this straight, children are a burden on society, so we should limit children to help the country out.

Isn't that a Mao line of thought? What next? Mandatory abortions and euthanasia to any kid born or found in the womb to be mentally deficient/retarded or otherwise a "financial burden"?

Maybe we should limit couples to 1 child, think of the dough we'll save!

Click to expand...

I hear Obama is going to have mandatory abortions for all children under five. A five year moratorium on toddlers I think he's calling it. Those damn libruls, huh?

RightOfCenter said:

I hear Obama is going to have mandatory abortions for all children under five. A five year moratorium on toddlers I think he's calling it. Those damn libruls, huh?

Click to expand...

I hear some people lack the sarcasm gene and will be the first put down too.

I have two thoughts on this:

1) As long as people have the right to make a choice in birth control, I am not against helping them.

2) However, help should come from the states, not the Federal government.

MrVicchio said:

I hear some people lack the sarcasm gene and will be the first put down too.

Click to expand...

Hide your toddlers.

MrVicchio said:

I didn't say Birth Control = abortion, learn to read.

Click to expand...

You brought up abortion in a birth control thread, so if you weren't equating it, then you were bringing up a strawman.

So either your comment was ignorant or partisan stupidity. Take your pick.

Were we supposed to be upset that Pelosi supports family planning?
Surprised, perhaps? Outraged? What?
Is there really anyone reasonable who doesn't think that contraception is a good thing?

Sigh.

I consider adding "Family Planning" to the economic stimulus package on the grounds it will "Help the economy" to be rather a bit dishonest and absurd.

So I tried to make that point by going a bit absurd myself. This went over the heads of a few of you. Not surprisingly some of you didn't just miss what I was saying but created your own reality bubble and interjected.

She is simply stating the truth. Preventing births to poor women will reduce the costs to the states and the Feds. Whether the birth is prevented pre or post conception does not alter that fact.

MrVicchio said:

DRUDGE FLASH 2009®: PELOSI SAYS BIRTH CONTROL WILL HELP ECONOMY
Right, so let me get this straight, children are a burden on society, so we should limit children to help the country out.

Click to expand...

Not quite. It is children that grown up to be thick like Pelosi that are a burden on society.

There is no sorting procedure possible to discover the combination of lunacy, political ambition and gullible regional voting blocs... so we're f***ed some of the time in this country and have to listen to the brilliance of Pelosi-like socialists wax eloquent about their deepest "Ah ha!" intellectual moments.

duplicate... post

I fully support contraception. If you do not want abortion and you do not want contraception either then start adopting or open your church coffers and start supporting these families instead of buying the pastor a new Lexus. Because to many families can not even afford the children they already have. As to abortion I am not a supporter of abortion as an alternative to contraception. I do believe that there are times when abortion should be a legitimate option. Living in a third world country where the influence of the Catholic church frowns on both contraception and abortion I have seen the results of over population and the many children that are simply abandoned to live in the streets as best they can.

Moe

Birth control would help the economy. Contraception to those who would not have it otherwise makes sense. Pardon the generalization, but it does always seem that it is those that are least able to afford it are the ones who pop out baby after baby, or have those unwanted pregnancies, and these are the ones that would benefit from these programs.

That could be one more teenage girl who is able to still have a fair chance at a life ahead of her without the burden of a pregnancy while she in fact is still a child herself. It could be her chance to stay in school, go to college, go out in the workforce, and make a reasonable income.

On a personal level, any family, or individual who does not have an unexpected surprise will have a lot more money to go out and spend that would otherwise be spend on baby formula and diapers. Instead of struggling and worrying about feeding and clothing an unexpected unplanned child that money can go towards buying a new TV, going out to eat a few times a month, taking on a cpl hundred dollars a month for a car payment, getting out of a rental property and actually purchasing a home, ect. A child can, does and will alter a persons spending habits and priorities, regardless of how you slice it, younguns are expensive.

On a state and federal fiscal level, there are less welfare babies, less foodstamps, less govmnt cheese going out, less uninsured children who WILL get medical treatment, even if it is at a "free" clinic that you and I pay for. Less child tax credits claimed equals more federal taxes in the coffers. The government will both save money, and receive more tax income (at least in the near term until that child could or would have became a working tax paying citizen itself).

Is there anybody left in America who can't afford a pack of 3 anymore? They're like $6 for a generic brand....I don't see why money needs to be thrown at it. What forms of 'birth control' Is she talking about? Condoms are like a buck each and I know for fact in Compton alone there are AT LEAST 40 places that will give em to you for free. So as much as I'd like to I simply don't see the sense in this. I mean....yeah birth control. Woohoo. But the most basic form of birth control is so cheap nowadays it doesn't even make sense for the government to put money into the matter anymore.

Ever priced an MAP? $50.00.

Contraceptives for the poor or financially disadvantaged is a good investment. Anti-Choice overpopulationists deny the actual cost of children.

The cost of sending a child to college can be $100,000.00 The cost of getting special training for learning-diabled chldren can be similar.

The cost to the environment in additional pollution, including Mercury from coal into the oceans, and poisons into the ground water, is largely irreversible.

Providing contraceptives to the poor gives a thousand fold return.

Many Republicans oppose public funding for family planning because many Business men feel that more poor people gives more workers at cheaper labor. The social cost of depriving the poor of family planning is not calculated. Businesses don't pay the taxes to take care of the Lerning and Emotionally disabled that result from out-of-reach family planning options.


Social and emotional costs of learning disabilities.(PREVENTION IN ACTION) - Clinical Psychiatry News | Encyclopedia.com

Social and emotional costs of learning disabilities | Clinical Psychiatry News | Find Articles at BNET


How much does Autism cost your conntry? UK spends 28 Billion Pounds, 2007.


19 November 2007: New figures show autism costs the uk £28 billion a year from the Foundation for People with Learning Disabilti

BBC News | HEALTH | Learning disabled 'misplaced and forgotten'

How much of the cost of Jails/Prisons in the US could be saved if better family planning was available to the poor?

The US accounting system does not logically connect the Lines in the budgets.

Funding for Education of the learning diabled is found burried in local school system budgets.






..

Quote marduc:Birth control would help the economy. Contraception to those who would not have it otherwise makes sense. Pardon the generalization, but it does always seem that it is those that are least able to afford it are the ones who pop out baby after baby, or have those unwanted pregnancies, and these are the ones that would benefit from these programs.

Click to expand...

How about personal responsibility and stopping government handouts for baby production?

MrVicchio said:

DRUDGE FLASH 2009®: PELOSI SAYS BIRTH CONTROL WILL HELP ECONOMY

Right, so let me get this straight, children are a burden on society, so we should limit children to help the country out.

Isn't that a Mao line of thought? What next? Mandatory abortions and euthanasia to any kid born or found in the womb to be mentally deficient/retarded or otherwise a "financial burden"?

Maybe we should limit couples to 1 child, think of the dough we'll save!

Click to expand...

FYI: Actually, this is NOT a Mao line of thought. Mao wanted women to have as many babies as possible, awarding women with large numbers of babies with awards. This is one of the reasons China has a massive overpopulation problem today.

ludahai said:

FYI: Actually, this is NOT a Mao line of thought. Mao wanted women to have as many babies as possible, awarding women with large numbers of babies with awards. This is one of the reasons China has a massive overpopulation problem today.

Click to expand...

I consider adding "Family Planning" to the economic stimulus package on the grounds it will "Help the economy" to be rather a bit dishonest and absurd.

So I tried to make that point by going a bit absurd myself.

Click to expand...

Twas part of the fun my dear.

Hatuey said:

Is there anybody left in America who can't afford a pack of 3 anymore? They're like $6 for a generic brand....I don't see why money needs to be thrown at it. What forms of 'birth control' Is she talking about? Condoms are like a buck each and I know for fact in Compton alone there are AT LEAST 40 places that will give em to you for free. So as much as I'd like to I simply don't see the sense in this. I mean....yeah birth control. Woohoo. But the most basic form of birth control is so cheap nowadays it doesn't even make sense for the government to put money into the matter anymore.

Click to expand...

Most people in commited relationships do not want to use condoms and those are the people who are most likely to end up with an unwanted pregnancy. I am guessing she is aiming at women who are in that type of situation. Not really wanting to get pregnant, but maybe can't always afford birth control each month.

MrVicchio said:

Twas part of the fun my dear.

Click to expand...

I do agree that adding this into the stimulus package is not right. But it would not bother me to see separate contraceptive programs for family planning in the future.

The stimulus package is supposed to provide shoring up of the economy to create jobs quickly. The family planning part is more long range.

Moe

MrVicchio said:

DRUDGE FLASH 2009®: PELOSI SAYS BIRTH CONTROL WILL HELP ECONOMY

Right, so let me get this straight, children are a burden on society, so we should limit children to help the country out.

Isn't that a Mao line of thought? What next? Mandatory abortions and euthanasia to any kid born or found in the womb to be mentally deficient/retarded or otherwise a "financial burden"?

Maybe we should limit couples to 1 child, think of the dough we'll save!

Click to expand...

So if you're against the government funding birth control, then you must support one of the following: A) Having the state dole out endless welfare for single mothers with ten children, or B) Allow those children to die in poverty for the horrible crime of popping out of the wrong vagina. Which is it? A or B?

Promoting birth control is very practical. One of the biggest sources of poverty (aside from substance abuse) is having too many kids at too young an age.

Kandahar said:

So if you're against the government funding birth control, then you must support one of the following: A) Having the state dole out endless welfare for single mothers with ten children, or B) Allow those children to die in poverty for the horrible crime of popping out of the wrong vagina. Which is it? A or B?

Promoting birth control is very practical. One of the biggest sources of poverty (aside from substance abuse) is having too many kids at too young an age.

Click to expand...

Economic Stimulus Package... does not need to include "birth control". That's my problem with her statement. Sheesh peeps.