AMERICA IS A FUCKED UP COUNTRY WERE ABORTION IS AS COMMON AS URGING PREGNANT MEXICAN WOMEN TO JUMP OUR BORDER PREGNANT FOR 18 YEARS OF ANCHOR BABY WELFARE
Bernie Sanders Floats Global Population Control at CNN Climate Town Hall
1:43
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) told CNN’s climate change town hall attendees Wednesday night that he is willing to talk about population control, suggesting that abortion is key to addressing the climate crisis.
“Human population growth has more than doubled in the last 50 years,” an attendee told Sanders, adding that the planet cannot sustain such growth.
“I realize this is a poisonous topic for politicians but it’s crucial to face. Empowering women and educating everyone on the need to curb population growth seems a reasonable campaign to enact,” the attendee continued.
“Would you be courageous enough to discuss this issue and make it a key feature of a plan to address climate catastrophe?” she asked.
“The answer is yes,” Sanders said, arguing that population control – in the form of abortion and birth control, specifically – is something he “very, very strongly” supports.
“The answer has everything to do with the fact that women in the United States of America, by the way, have a right to control their own bodies and make reproductive decisions,” Sanders said.
“And the Mexico City agreement, which denies American aid to those organizations around the world that are – that allow women to have abortions or even get involved in birth control is totally absurd,” he continued.
“So I think especially in poor countries around the world, where women do not necessarily want to have large numbers of babies and where they can have the opportunity to birth control to control the number of kids they have is something I very, very strongly support,” he added.
Washington, D.C.
(July 16, 2019) – A new analysis of government data from the Center for
Immigration Studies shows that immigration between 1990 and 2017 added
nearly 43 million people to the population — including both immigrants and
their progeny. However, it had a minimal impact on the share of the
population that is of working age. This is because immigration added to
both the working-age population and to those outside of the working-age
population in nearly equal proportions. The analysis also finds that
post-1990 immigration has had a somewhat larger impact on the ratio of
workers to retirees. However, raising the retirement age by one year has as
large an impact on the ratio as do the nearly 43 million post-1990.
Steven Camarota,
the Center's director of research and co-author of the report, said,
“Looking at the large and relatively young population of post-1990
immigrants and their progeny is a good test of the often cited argument
that immigration can solve the problem of America getting older. However,
this analysis demonstrates something researchers have long known:
Immigration can add a lot of people to the population – but it is no fix
for an aging society.”
Among the
findings:
In
2017, there were 30.8 million post-1990 immigrants (legal and illegal)
and 12 million of their U.S.-born children and grandchildren in the
country — 42.8 million in total, or one in eight U.S. residents. While
adding significantly to the population, the presence of post-1990
immigrants and their progeny only increased the working-age (16-64)
share of the population from 63.9 percent to 64.4 percent. The
working-age share can be seen as the best way to think about the
ability of society to pay for government or support the economy, as
both children and the elderly generally do not work and are supported
by the labor of others. Immigration
had a small impact on the working-age share because immigrants arrive
at all ages, grow older over time, and have children, so they added to
both the working-age and those too old or too young to work in nearly
equal proportions. Even
if the number of post-1990 immigrants and their offspring were doubled
to almost 86 million—about one in four residents—it would still only
have raised the working-age share to 64.8 percent — 0.9 percentage
points higher than if there had been no immigration. Excluding
children, and looking only at the number of working-age people (16-64)
relative to those of retirement age shows that post 1990-immigration
increased the ratio from 3.7 potential workers per potential retiree
to 4.1. If
the retirement age was raised by just one year, assuming no
immigration, the ratio of workers to retirees would be 4.1, matching
the effect of post-1990 immigration. Increasing
the retirement age by two years it would have increased the worker to
retiree ratio to 4.5 in 2017, significantly more than the 43 million
post-1990 immigrants and their children. While
this analysis is focused on all immigrants (legal and illegal), we
roughly estimate that 32 percent (13.8 million) of the people
immigration has added to the country since 1990 are illegal immigrants
or their progeny. Since legal and illegal immigration together have a
modest impact on the working-age share or the worker-to-retiree ratio,
the impact of illegal immigration by itself is very small. In
terms of using immigration as a way to pay for entitlement programs,
it must also be pointed out that a large share of post-1990 immigrants
and their children struggle, living in or near poverty and using
welfare programs at relatively high rates, makes it difficult for them
to generate a fiscal surplus to pay for social insurance programs. In
2017, 45 percent of households headed by post-1990 immigrants or their
adult children used one or more major welfare programs, compared to 26
percent of native-headed households. The rates of poverty or near
poverty for post-1990 immigrants and their children were 50 to 60
percent higher than that of natives.
MEXICO WILL DOUBLE U.S. POPULATION
By Tom Barrett
At the current rate of invasion (mostly through
Mexico, but also through Canada) the United States will be completely over run
with illegal aliens by the year 2025. I’m not talking about legal immigrants
who follow US law to become citizens. In less than 20 years, if we do not stop
the invasion, ILLEGAL aliens and their offspring will be the dominant
population in the United States.
(POPULATION 9-2018)
FINISHING AMERICA OFF: THE FOREIGN INVASION FOR “CHEAP”
LABOR
Open the floodgates of our welfare state to the uneducated,
impoverished, and unskilled masses of the world and in a generation or three
America, as we know it, will be gone. JOHN BINDER
But many less-skilled migrants play their largest role by
simply shifting small slices of wealth from person to person, for example, by
competing up rents in their neighborhood or by competing down wages in their
workplace. The crudest examples can be seen in agriculture.
Overall,
the Washington-imposed economic policy of economic growth via immigration
shifts wealth from young people towards older people by flooding the
market with cheap white-collar and blue-collar foreign labor .
"Critics argue that giving amnesty
to 12 to 30 million illegal aliens in the U.S. would have an immediate negative
impact on America’s working and middle class — specifically black Americans and
the white working class — who would be in direct competition for blue-collar
jobs with the largely low-skilled illegal alien population." JOHN BINDER
The U.S.-born baby is, of course, a U.S. citizen, whose
illegal alien parents are eligible to receive, on the baby’s behalf, food
stamps, nutrition from the Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) program, and
numerous tax benefits, including the EITC.
Most importantly, the newborn is deportation insurance
for its parents. Illegal aliens facing deportation can argue that to deport one
or more parents would create an “extreme hardship” for the new baby. If an
immigration officer agrees, we’ve added a new adult to the nation’s population.
At age 21 the former birthright citizen baby can formally apply for green cards
for parents and siblings, and they, in turn, can start their own immigration
chains.
US now has more Spanish speakers than Spain – only Mexico
has more
· US has 41 million native speakers plus 11 million who
are bilingual
· New Mexico, California, Texas and Arizona have highest
concentrations
Bernie Sanders gives crying baby the heckler treatment
Socialists have never been particularly kind to children, and Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders gives a good whiff of that callousness out on the campaign trail.
At a Sanders speaking appearance in New Hampshire, a baby burst out in a sudden peal of screeches, and Sanders, calmly, without missing a beat, pointed at the baby and said:
Speaking at a breakfast event in Epsom, NH, on Tuesday, video shows Sanders reiterating an attendee’s comment about having to cut his pills in half when he was briefly interrupted by the squeals of a child off camera.
Which raises questions about what kind of ego this guy has to think his own words are just so important that he can't show some consideration for a parent and an involuntarily crying baby, at a minimum, just pretending he doesn't hear them. A crying baby may be a challenge to him but it's always an even bigger challenge for a parent who must calm and comfort -- as well as endure brave nasty stares from outsiders.
Sanders apparently never spent any appreciable time with babies. He got his girlfriend pregnant in 1969 and declined to marry her, something that suggests he viewed the baby as an inconvenience. The rest of the kids he calls his own were stepchildren from his second wife's previous marriage, far from babyhood. Rest assured, he's not been around babies.
But even not being around babies isn't that great an excuse. Just how out of touch is this guy about human reality really? Telling a baby to shut up is insane, and not the least because the child doesn't understand spoken words. Sure, it's stressful, but he didn't sound stressed, he just pointed and commanded the baby as if he had a heckler coming at him. Up until now, nobody in politics -- or in any public speaking situation, has ever told a crying baby to shut up. It's not done. Is this Bernie's new barrier broken? Priests and rabbis undoubtedly deal with this during religious services all the time, and somehow they get through it with patience. The normal response for a public speaker in the face of a crying baby is to coo and perhaps make some droll humor until the child calms down.
It's like he's never developed coping mechanisms. The poet Maya Angelou had an excellent suggestion for dealing with crying children in churches - to say 'let that child cry' because it's the baby's way to pray. It works. For me, when I hear I crying child, I focus on the mother (or father) trying to calm the baby, saying to myself: The mother will always win. The other thing I do is recall that I was once a baby, and surely did the same thing, so it all evens out. I don't point and yell at the baby and say 'keep that down a little.' Nobody does.
Sanders is on record is favoring payments for third world abortions and other anti-baby measures. According to Breitbart, he views population control -- and getting rid of all those crying babies -- as his vehicle for saving the earth , declaring himself 'courageous.' Any surprise he's all in for ordering babies to 'keep that down a little bit,' too?
No comments:
Post a Comment