Would there really be a social security crisis in America if...?

Question

...we had not aborted the estimated 25 to 40 million children during the time that abortion has been legal? Those were people who could be in the workforce right now, contributing to the gross domestic product, and having babies of their own....

Answer 1

How many of those unfortunately unwanted children would have become drains on the system? Foster care to start with. Then if they are not adopted or abandoned and bounce from home to home and later perhaps get into crime, drugs and who knows what else. Perhaps charged with serious crimes costing millions in trials.

I am a foster parent to two troubled teens, these were teens who were raised by their parents and were in the end unwanted, but raised by bitter terrible parents. I have been dealing with child services (CAS in Canada) for more than a decade and it is a disaster. There are too many unwanted kids being born now that are not being adopted. Add another 40 million to the system and you are going to see a huge rise in crime, drugs, and senseless deaths.

Then many of these 40 million messed up people will be having the next generation of messed up unwanted children being raised by more bitter parents.

Answer 2

In a fairy tale world this may be true. These abortions occurred because the pregnancy was not wanted or not safe. There would likely be over a million added to the infant death statistic, another million to the mother who died from complications statistic, and a 3/4 of whats left abused and or neglected because no one wanted them. There is an over population issue as it is and it would be much worse if these "children" bred. The surviving children mentioned above as adults would likely repeat what was done to them as children. More abused and neglected children. The social-economic structure is in a poor state now, there are few good jobs to be had, and it would only be worse in the scenario you propose. Sadly most of these children would only add to the problem.

Answer 3

40 million unwanted children would not benefit this country, financially or otherwise. Who would have supported them? There are already HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS of unwanted children languishing in the foster care system. The LAST thing that would help is to add millions more.

FYI, abortion has been legal for centuries. The difference before Roe was that they were controlled by the government INSTEAD of women. They were still being performed legally.

Those women who consider abortion to be wrong have the right to CHOOSE not to have one, thanks to Roe v. Wade. As the Supreme Court acknowledged, in PP v. Casey, without Roe, the government would have the power (again) to FORCE abortions - not unlike China, where women do not have reproductive rights.

Put down the misleading, hysterical propaganda and learn the FACTS.

Answer 4

It seems as though you feel compassion for the aborted, but not those in the workforce right now, contributing to the gross domestic product, and having babies of their own.

Fix yourself before you fix others.

Answer 5

The Social Security program would be flush with enough capital for the next 100 years without taking in another dime, if the Democrats would pay back what LBJ turned over into the Governmental general fund from it in the 1960s.(by the way which he had no legal right to do) Talk about INTEREST, too!

Answer 6

I think that number is inflated. That's one abortion for every 2 or 3 women. But let's just talk about fertility rates.

Take a look at this:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/78/Fertility_rate_world_map_2.png/800px-Fertility_rate_world_map_2.png

Fertility rates by country. See the dangerous trend in Africa?

Fertility rates are not strongly correlated with social security problems. Canada would be worse off than us. They aren't.

The primary reason for the problem is that our social security tax is regressive. If we make it progressive like the rest of the tax code, SS is fixed.

And, in terms of world population, there are basically way too many people. So I'm not inclined to say we need to increase our fertility rate.

Answer 7

No, more people would just make it worse. Miss-managed politics created this situation not a lack of people on the work force. Also more people means more needs too, so at the most optimistic we would have broken even.

And since we are entertaining possibilities, most of those abortions were probably on behalf of lower middle class or poor people, so we might have had more of a poverty problem.

Answer 8

I doubt they'd be in the workforce. Neglected, under-nourished, uneducated children rarely make positive contributions to society. Maybe there'd be enough exceptions so you could live comfortably in your old age, that is until you get beaten half to death by some thug minutes after cashing your social security check.

Answer 9

But they would have eventually collected Social Security, making the problem worse. If you want to increase cash flow into the system, stop exporting jobs. Did your abortion statistics come from religion?

Answer 10

You make a good point, though there probably would be some on welfare.

However, I do think abortion should be illegal, it is killing so it is wrong whether we stand to gain or lose by banning it.