The following is a letter I wrote to the local newspaper after the first Clinton veto of the Partial Birth Abortion Ban. I believe it raises an issue that is pertinent to all the "baby boomers" on this Forum.
July 3, 1996
It is generally agreed that elections are won based on voters perception of the economy rather than political philosophy or moral convictions. This was true in the 1992 presidential race. The electorate perceived the economy to be bad and rejected George Bush, a proven leader, a hero of World War II, a man of demonstrated moral integrity and elected Clinton.
Since 1973 most Americans have ignored the reality that 1,500,000 unborn children, equivalent to 30% of all pregnancies, are brutally killed each year for the convenience of the mother and the economic well being of the abortion industry. Countless appeals have been made that killing of unborn children is inhuman and immoral, exceeding the brutality of the Nazi Holocaust or Stalin’s purges, and certainly contrary to the Judeo-Christian ethic on which this nation was founded, all to no avail. Even graphic descriptions of the horror called Partial-Birth Abortion and the appeal of prominant religious leaders could not awaken the conscience of Mr. Clinton, who recently vetoed the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban.
Two other pertinent events occurred this year, the first of the “baby boomers” turned 50 and the announcement was made that the Medicare trust fund would be bankrupt in 5 years. The Social Security trust fund is apparently secure until 2020. What does all this have to do with the proposition that people vote their pocketbook and the continuing slaughter of the innocents?
The Seattle Times recently reported that the Medicare/Social Security population will double to more than 70 million by 2030. During this same time the ratio of working taxpayers to retirees will shrink from 3.3-to-1 to 2-to-1. Do you have the picture yet? The “baby boomers” are killing off one third of the potential taxpayers who would be paying for their retirement! Pro-life people have been appealing for moral outrage from the American people to end abortion, perhaps we should have been appealing to their pocketbooks instead.
Baby Boomers and Social Security
Discussion in 'Political Debate & Discussion' started by OldRegular, Jan 28, 2009.
-
-
Is poetic justice for "baby boomers" in the future?
-
Nope. Simple adjustments can take care of Social Security if we start within the next four years:
www.brookings.edu/views/papers/orszag/200504security.pdf -
Now I think Social Security and Medicare are done for. Just to spread the pain I think we should immediately cut payments to those who are already retired by 50%. -
No, Social Security is still taking in more revenue than benefits paid out. Diamond-Orszag keeps it that way and doesn't increase the national debt in doing so. And Peter Orszag is the new budget director for our president.
-
-
-
The solution to the world's pension problem is to add a billion or so every ten years to the world's population?
The math in the IP doesn't compute because in the last 35 years we have added many more than 1.5 million people to the mix in the form of very productive immigrants. -
The total murdered since 1973 is 50 million. Have we added that many immigrants who are paying taxes? Many immigrants are drawing Social Security who have never paid into it. Then there are all the illegals who pay no taxes and are sending about $50 million to Mexico each year. -
> Many immigrants are drawing Social Security who have never paid into it.
If so, then they are the widow or widower of someone who did.
> Then there are all the illegals who pay no taxes and are sending about $50 million to Mexico each year.
A mere pittance compared to the millions in foreign aid sent by Christians in the guise of "missions." I propose an export tax on money. -