Chelsea Clinton Claims Roe v Wade “Added $3.5 Trillion to Our Economy”

Origanalist

Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2012
Messages
43,060
Chelsea Clinton Claims Roe v Wade “Added $3.5 Trillion to Our Economy”

Chelsea Clinton Claims Aborting 60 Million Babies Since Roe “Added $3.5 Trillion to Our Economy”

If you can’t convince someone to support abortion with bodily rights arguments, try pushing the money angle, Chelsea Clinton told a group of abortion activists Saturday.

CNS News reports Clinton claimed the infamous U.S. Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade was a good thing, not only because it gave women the “dignity to make our own choices,” but also because it led to a $3.5 trillion boost to America’s economy.

“It is not a disconnected fact … that American women entering the labor force from 1973 to 2009 added three and a half trillion dollars to our economy. Right?” Clinton said during a “Rise Up for Roe” rally protesting U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

“The net, new entrance of women – that is not disconnected from the fact that Roe became the law of the land in January of 1973,” she continued.

Clinton said the money argument may convince some people to support Roe, which led to the legalized killing of unborn babies for basically any reason up to birth. Since the 1973 ruling, about 60 million unborn babies have been legally aborted in America.

“So, I think, whatever it is that people say they care about, I think that you can connect to this issue,” she said.

“Of course, I would hope that they would care about our equal rights and dignity to make our own choices – but, if that is not sufficiently persuasive, hopefully, some of these other arguments that you’ve expressed so beautifully, will be,” Clinton continued.

Her comments about using financial persuasion to support the killing of unborn babies are extremely disturbing, but they also are incorrect. Just because Roe v. Wade and a growing economy coincide does not mean one caused the other.

More importantly, research suggests the opposite may be true – that the legalized killing of 60 million babies since Roe v. Wade has hurt the American economy.

continued..http://www.lifenews.com/2018/08/14/...trillion-to-our-economy/#.W3LrrLoBiqI.twitter
 
“It is not a disconnected fact … that American women entering the labor force from 1973 to 2009 added three and a half trillion dollars to our economy. Right?” Clinton said during a “Rise Up for Roe” rally protesting U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

Now you know one important reason why middle class wages have stagnated for 45 years.

They have now run out of women to turn into tax slaves, between abortion, misandry, lesbianism and other weirdosexual delights, birth rates have gone negative, so now you know another important reason why the powers that be insist on importing low skill third worlders into the country by the millions.
 
Now you know one important reason why middle class wages have stagnated for 45 years.

They have now run out of women to turn into tax slaves, between abortion, misandry, lesbianism and other weirdosexual delights, birth rates have gone negative, so now you know another important reason why the powers that be insist on importing low skill third worlders into the country by the millions.

What are they going to do when the next generation born here starts behaving in the same manner? It's a nightmare scenario.
 
e628b30d-ba42-4cba-96c2-b23f774114c8-1_1024x1024.png
 
Before women entered the work force, one man could support an entire family. Nowadays, even two people working often have trouble supporting a family. What went wrong? I mean, it's not like you can blame women working for everything that went wrong, but one might argue that it hasn't benefited men or women financially.

As for boosting the economy, I'm sure those 60 million dead would have boosted it more than the small portion of women able to work because of Roe v. Wade. But that's a rather silly way of looking at things. It doesn't matter how big the overall pie is, it only matters how big the individual pieces are. India has a much bigger GDP than Sweden, but I don't want Indian standard of living. The only ones who care about the overall pie are members of the political class. More money overall means more money for them to play with, individuals can go pound sand for all they care.
 
What would you expect from the spawn of Webb Hubbell and Satan? Downright chilling!
 
I get she is saying more women in the work force is good for the economy but you are also taking workers out of the economy. If preventing kids from marginal situations from entering the labor force by being aborted is good for the economy, it logically should follow that limiting low skill immigration of people from marginal situations in marginal countries should also boost the economy.
 
What would you expect from the spawn of Webb Hubbell and Satan? Downright chilling!

This really shows that she has NO clue of the actual motivations and thought process of many/most of the people that are pro-life. Either that or she is just one sick ghoul.
 
I get she is saying more women in the work force is good for the economy but you are also taking workers out of the economy. If preventing kids from marginal situations from entering the labor force by being aborted is good for the economy, it logically should follow that limiting low skill immigration of people from marginal situations in marginal countries should also boost the economy.

What she is saying is that its ok to kill people if it makes you money. At least that is that argument she is proposing to convince people to be pro-abortion.
 
What she is saying is that its ok to kill people if it makes you money. At least that is that argument she is proposing to convince people to be pro-abortion.

I'll be honest. I am pretty indifferent on abortion. It can be argued both ways. I am probably pro-choice if for no other reason, I believe it reduces crime. http://freakonomics.com/2005/05/15/abortion-and-crime-who-should-you-believe/

I don't think Chelsea Clinton's argument about improving the economy is correct, but if it were, I see it as a good argument to make.
 
I'll be honest. I am pretty indifferent on abortion. It can be argued both ways. I am probably pro-choice if for no other reason, I believe it reduces crime. http://freakonomics.com/2005/05/15/abortion-and-crime-who-should-you-believe/

I don't think Chelsea Clinton's argument about improving the economy is correct, but if it were, I see it as a good argument to make.

The problem is: I would argue that most people that are pro-life are in it because they think abortion is killing of a life. Chelsea is saying that to convince some of those people to be pro-choice we should tell them that abortions increased the economy. In short, she thinks that people that think abortion == killing, can be convinced that killing is acceptable as long as its good for the economy. That's not far removed from some arguments for genocide.
 
Why is it if a guy does something to a chick and causes a miscarriage it's murder and there's outrage, if the miscarriage occurs naturally there's sadness any sympathy with no legal ramifications and if a chick eats a pill to force a miscarriage she's lauded as being empowered?

Why is it?
 
Why is it if a guy does something to a chick and causes a miscarriage it's murder and there's outrage, if the miscarriage occurs naturally there's sadness any sympathy with no legal ramifications and if a chick eats a pill to force a miscarriage she's lauded as being empowered?

Why is it?

I guess... it's the economy, stupid??? :confused:
 
Why is it if a guy does something to a chick and causes a miscarriage it's murder and there's outrage, if the miscarriage occurs naturally there's sadness any sympathy with no legal ramifications and if a chick eats a pill to force a miscarriage she's lauded as being empowered?

Why is it?

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1235522/quotes/qt1875840

Mayor Hostetler: You know, women call men dogs. That's to suggest we're somehow untrustworthy or disloyal. But a dog is anything but. And if men are dogs, what the goddamn hell does that make women? You've ever seen a bitch in heat? She will grind herself across the grass to try and get her that itch. And she can find a way to sneak out of the backyard, as any dog will do.
 
Why is it if a guy does something to a chick and causes a miscarriage it's murder and there's outrage, if the miscarriage occurs naturally there's sadness any sympathy with no legal ramifications and if a chick eats a pill to force a miscarriage she's lauded as being empowered?

Why is it?

See your post #5.

This is just one example of millions of daily doses of doublethink we're supposed to swallow.
 
The problem is: I would argue that most people that are pro-life are in it because they think abortion is killing of a life. Chelsea is saying that to convince some of those people to be pro-choice we should tell them that abortions increased the economy. In short, she thinks that people that think abortion == killing, can be convinced that killing is acceptable as long as its good for the economy. That's not far removed from some arguments for genocide.

I'll take "sick ghoul" for a $1000 Alex.

And what's really frightening?

They don't even realize it...that's how you end with a gulag, a killing field, a gas chamber.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJB
Back
Top