« Fraudulent transfer and Wall Street | Main | Ahmadinejad says it's the Jews' fault »

September 23, 2008

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bf6ae53ef010534c9376a970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Abortion statistics:

Comments

I agree completely. The eugenic effects of abortion are impressive. Indeed, all reproductive health services should be completely free, and yes, I would gladly pay higher taxes to support it. Affluent/high IQ women will always have ready access to these services, so why shouldn't poor women have the same? I usually don't have too much in common with the liberal Dems, but on this issue I think they are absolutely correct.

Roe vs Wade was by far the best (the only?) thing the modern left has ever done for country.

Had it not been for Roe, there would be an an extra 13 - 20 million American blacks running loose and causing general havoc.

May God bless the abortion doctors!

Do you think abortion is a good thing because it affects poor people and/or because it affects hispanic and black people more than white people ? In France, the second statement could really lead you into jail. A french rightist thinker in the 70'ies joined the feminist movement(to their horror) in favour of abortion rights for this reason : poor people are less able to educate children and poor peoples' children are on average genetically disavantaged (his name is Alain de Benoist).

I think that a society with only white middles class would be boring (and that abortion is a crime and if racism is not a crime in some countries, it's certainly a bad feeling).

Sigma wrote:

"Abortion seems to be having a good eugenics effect. A good reason to support it."

I'll always conceed this to you Sigma, you certainly are fearless in writing what you really think. If you said that in polite company, you'd be called everyting in the book. Roissy pointed out in one of his maxims (truth days) that complete honesty can only be obtained anonymously. He's right.

"Do you think abortion is a good thing because it affects poor people and/or because it affects hispanic and black people more than white people ?"

Poor, unintelligent people are more likely to be Hispanic than white and more likely to be black than Hispanic.

If smart and nice black people, like the Obamas or Clarence Thomas, want to have a lot of babies, I say go for it.

If we were to follow your logic, you should be against contraception among non-NAMs.
Anything that hinders the reproduction of productive members of society should be banned, or shouldn't it?

HalfSigma: "Abortion seems to be having a good eugenics effect. A good reason to support it."

How do you know this? Remember the big debate between Steve Sailer and Steven Levitt on the issue of whether abortion reduces crime?

Do you think abortion is eugenic because blacks and Hispanics get them at a higher rate than whites?

Surely, within each race, abortion is probably having a dysgenic effect the more responsible and richer types getting them while the poor or irresponsible or drug addles or whatever just have them?

Has anyone ever done a study describing the attributes of the people who choose to get abortions (in America)? How well educated are they? How smart are they? And so on?

"Surely, within each race, abortion is probably having a dysgenic effect the more responsible and richer types getting them while the poor or irresponsible or drug addles or whatever just have them?"

No that's incorrect. It's true that an upper class woman is more likely to abort an accidental pregnancy than a lower class woman, but a lower class woman is far more likely to get accidentally pregnant in the first place. Upper class people are better at using birth control, and they also have lower sex drives. Abortion has a eugenic effect.

To really see a benefit we would have to tie reproductive privileges to welfare. With technology allowing us to temporarily sterilize, getting the procedure done (and yes, it's one thing I'd be willing to have my taxes pay for) should be a prerequisite for obtaining any form of government handouts. And yes, I know that means a lot of CEOs will be affected too. So not only will we see a reduction in the violent and parasitic underclass, but it will be easier for our children to get into Harvard.

Well, I can't agree here, because I see abortion generally in moral terms: I guess I'm anti-abortion in that sense, though I don't think it should be illegal.

Anyway, promotion of abortion doesn't seem to be needed to solve any social problem we face. And didn't Steve Sailer debunk the idea that abortion has a eugenic effect? I'll have to look.

Oh, HS is right about class differences here. Maybe it does have a slight eugenic effect.

"Upper class people are better at using birth control, and they also have lower sex drives."

The first half of that statement pretty much goes without saying, but is there really any evidence (as opposed to suppositions) to support the second half?

There are gradations between the upper class and the underclass. There's the working class, the lower middle class, the middle class, and so on.

How likely are underclass women to have abortions? What if it's working class women who are getting them?

Also, my previous sentence in my previous post should have read:

Surely, within each race, abortion is having a dysgenic effect with the more responsible and richer types getting abortions while the poor or irresponsible or drug addled or whatever just have the babies?

If you are interested in welfare reform, there is an excellent book on the subject called "The American Dream" by Jason DeParle. http://www.jasondeparle.com/
He follows three black women through welfare reform.

Woman no. 1, the most responsible of the lot, has three children by 2 men (or maybe 3 men). She lives with the final dad (who is an ex-con) and seems to be in a happy long term relationship with him.
(3 kids total).

Woman no. 2 has 3 children with a guy with whom she has a long term relationship which effectively ends when he receives a lengthy prison term for involvement in a murder. She accidentally gets pregnant by some guy she had dated only briefly. She's extremely upset about the pregnancy and drinks a lot upon hearing the news. She discusses abortion with her gynecologist, but decides against it "because it would mean I'd have to kill my baby."
(4 kids total)

Woman no. 3 has 3 children by a man she may have been married to (I can't remember). She becomes addicted to crack and has 3 more kids by 1 or 2 other men, the last of whom is involved in the crack trade.
(6 kids total)

3 welfare women. Lots of kids. No abortions. Again, who exactly gets abortions?

"Again, who exactly gets abortions?"

According to statistics, and not anecdotal evidence based on a sample size of three cherry-picked to make for a good book, black women are getting abortions.

Does the GSS ask "Have you or has your partner ever had an abortion?" Could you plot that against WORDSUM scores?

"Again, who exactly gets abortions?"

Inquiring minds want to know.

(My theory: the lower middle-class with IQ's in the 100 range??)

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.pdf

"The abortion rate among women living
below the federal poverty level ($9,570
for a single woman with no children) is
more than four times that of women
above 300% of the poverty level (44 vs.
10 abortions per 1,000 women). This is
partly because the rate of unintended
pregnancies among poor women (below
100% of poverty) is nearly four times
that of women above 200% of poverty*
(112 vs. 29 per 1,000 women)."

This is useful.

But wouldn't it be better to (1) list the abortion rates of people at poverty level and people at 200% of the poverty level and (2) list the unintended pregnancy rates of people at the poverty level and people at 200% of the poverty level?

They are using 300% for (1) and 200% for (2).

It would seem from this that people at the poverty level don't get abortions at the rate they have unintended pregnancies.

If you want to understand what's happening on the political front when it comes to abortion, check out the new documentary, Unplanned Democracy: America's First Vote on Abortion.

www.unplanneddemocracy.com

The film, done by a South Dakota journalist, does not take sides on the issue. Instead, it delves into the most active front in work to overturn Roe v. Wade and how others are working to stop that effort.

It's the movie Juno--a great movie by the way.

"I think that a society with only white middles class would be boring"

Reminds me of the old Chinese curse: "May you live in interesting times."

"And yes, I know that means a lot of CEOs will be affected too. So not only will we see a reduction in the violent and parasitic underclass, but it will be easier for our children to get into Harvard."

First, if it were easier for people's children to get into Harvard it would not be as valuable to go.

Second, if CEOs wanted to have children (which is vrtually always a choice for the high IQ) they would probably forgo whatever government benefits you are talking about. The kind of government benefits that would be useful to tie to voluntary sterility are those that contribute to dysgenics, i.e. food aid and what used to be Aid for Families with Defendant Children (welfare queenism). I don't know what benefits you assume CEOs receive that should or would be tied to voluntary sterility.

"I think that a society with only white middles class would be boring"

And I think that a society with only the black lower class would be frightening.

"Upper class people are better at using birth control, and they also have lower sex drives"

So, if I lose my job and get destitute, it will be a great aphrodisiac. My sex drive will go to the roof because, as I would then be poor, have no control about it.

Bruno Brazil, does the Portuguese language not have a word for "average"?

HS writes: "Abortion seems to be having a good eugenics effect. A good reason to support it."

If HS lived in Canada, I am sure that this would get him called before the Human Rights Commission, or put in jail, or something.

In France, the second statement could really lead you into jail.

Which is why your country will cease to exist in any recognizable form within a few short generations. You have lost the will to survive and nurture your identity.

"Which is why your country will cease to exist in any recognizable form within a few short generations. You have lost the will to survive and nurture your identity."

I dunno if you're referring to France or Canada, but if you mean France, well, you're dead wrong.

France has the highest TFR of all WesternEurope, surpassing even Sweden and Norway, because of their pro-natalist policies. It's even near or above replacement level, also for whites.

Lost the will to survive? I don't think so.

Perhaps women should need to be licensed to have a child. This may seem like an off the wall idea, but give it some thought. If a woman had to apply for a license for reproduction and in so doing had to show reasonable resources to support the child, then civil punishment could be meted out for unlawful childbirth. Such punishment would have to fit the crime. Such a law may make women more responsible in their sexual activities and would also be an encouragement to abortion for those who become pregnant and cannot obtain the required license. Since it is generally agreed that our problem citizens by and large originate with unwanted pregnancies of the lower class, it would be a great relief on the rest of society who presently have to pay for the birthing, nourishment, education, medical care, jails and other expenses involved in taking care of these unintended and unwanted offspring.

"I think that a society with only white middles class would be boring"

Hello Bruno, I live in Marseille and a city with lower, middle and upper class of European people would be a fantastic improvement in my city (and in Paris too...)

Must....not...make...Dalek....joke...

According to Freakonomics, more people having access to abortions beginning in the late 60s also caused crime to decline. We didn't the see the decline in crime until the 1990s; despite the bogus right-wing claim that it was because of "more prisons and more cops on the streets".

Crime was declining long before the cop and prison increase, because poor women had the right to obtain abortions; the kids who would have become criminals were simply never born.

If Roe v Wade were overturned and left up to individual states, then in about 15 years, bet on the crime rate exploding in those said states.

Guess we can always build some more prisons, right? Hey, it's a growth industry!

(And don't forget prison labor...it's the next best thing to slavery.)

Jim Beam -
Steve Sailer has written extensively on the abortion-cuts-crime theory and has found it dubious at best.

No name at 8:33pm,

I was making a tongue-in-cheek point regarding corporate welfare (consisting of any benefit granted through government's use of force). Don't worry, I'm more concerned about the welfare queens "buying" groceries using food stamps, and getting into a new fancy Chrysler - it's those folks gaming the system who should not be able to breed future parasites.

Cosmopolitism allows a parisian and a marseillais to communicate through a new yorker's quasi-libertarian website. This is a good thing. I perfectily understand people that are disturbed by the fast transformation of their racial environment. But i myself love seeing different faces every day and Africa in Paris don't disturb me (my social and racial liberalism doesn't prevent me to favour tougher policing against incivilities and rapine).

OK Bruno, this is your point of view. Mine is different.
Communicating is not cosmopolitism to me. I like to visit and share with others in their environement, but to me, my area, my land (lets say Europe) has to be preserved like the environement of other populations. But
this is not the point of this thread.
I liked your reference to Alain de Benoist though. He was the first to talk about "ethno-différentialisme", against cosmopolitism and racism too.
Bonne soirée

I think it's kind of cool that France has found Half Sigma. So Bruno and Francois - what do you believe has contributed most to the civil unrest in your country; unjustified sense of entitlement due to socialism, or the influx of uncivilized elements?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/sep/18/france

To me it is mostly due to the fact that french people in general (but there are some exceptions) have lost the sense of community and identity.
Ths losses have led to make "us" accept everything and especially what you call "uncivized elements" in so much quantity.
The socialism of the last 30 years is partly responsible but the politics that led to "invite" Africa in Europe had started before 1981 under the influence of the employers to pressurize blue collar workers.

"I'll always conceed this to you Sigma, you certainly are fearless in writing what you really think. If you said that in polite company, you'd be called everyting in the book. Roissy pointed out in one of his maxims (truth days) that complete honesty can only be obtained anonymously. He's right."

Actually, Half Sigma has balls of solid rock, and says this stuff even though his identity is public.

For me, the principal culprit is the extrme corporatist nature of all french society. If you take the top corporate management of the 40 biggest firms in France, half of them are top civil servants the other half are heirs (of founders). There is no management ladder. And top civil servants are grown since nursery school (it's really tougher to get into ENA or Ecole Polytechnique + Grands Corps than to get into Princeton/Calltech and Yale Law School or Washington University in Saint Louis MD/MSTP. Not because you must be clever - it's not required in France - but because you've got to learn tons of dumb things by heart to succeed since really young and each step of recruitment since nursery school is locked)). The same thing happen at every ladder of society. So the last one to come (african) have absolutely no way to progress or earn money. And the worst thing is that the system is totally blocked but the french people are sure that it is open to every one because it's based on universalism. Except from ultramar, there is no black, arabic or asiatic MP (even asiatic don't really succeed in France !) ; no one in upper public service, no one in top positions in Public firms (Rama Yade is from Senegal and his father was a member of government, Rachida Dati which is an exception is really hatred). Every single desirable sector works that way. For example, culture and media people are all family related and depends on public subsidies, that's why french films are on average that bad that there not even stolen (downloaded).

So poor french are resigned, poor "visible minorities" are appaled.

This corporatism is also reponsible for french decline : if you recruit 90% of your elite into the children of the top 5%, the average level of your elite can't be very good.

To say it shortly, in France, it's like all society would be managed by sort of "Skull and Bones" people.

Bruno and Francois, thank you - it is really interesting to me to hear the "inside story" of other societies. If we go by the mainstream media in the US, all of Europe is a Disney movie of enlightened socialism and brilliant medical care, no problems with race, everyone is smarter, and the water is cleaner. We've all got our problems.
Are there any English language blogs that go into these issues further?

with a François's perspective :-) , i would say this one : http://www.alaindebenoist.com/pages/textes.php?cat=orientation〈=en or this one http://uk.novopress.info/

with my perspetive : http://www.institutmontaigne.org/accueil-1.html or this one http://fistfulofeuros.net/

but most interesting blog in France are written ... in French.

for Alain de Benoist go to "Consultez les textes en ligne" then "Texte d'orientation" then choose English. You've got perspectives on racisme, identity, Globalization etc.

HS,

I don't always agree with you on everything, but you are very correct on this issue. Keep up the good work sir.

There is no such thing as "racism", per se.

There are only groups of men competing for sexual access to fertile females. All phenomena categorized as "racism" can be traced back to this source, and these phenomena will always exist so long as men want pussy.

"Upper class people are better at using birth control, and they also have lower sex drives."

The women who have the largest number of partners are white college educated chicks who get married late and have around six partners+ a year.

The comments to this entry are closed.