Would a Basic Minimum Income dramatically reduce abortions?

[Nihil Obstat]

1 hour ago, fides' Jack said:

You may be right.  I used it because in my mind it seemed like a clear example on the spot.  But I haven't put it to the test against Catholic objective morality.

On that specific point, I think we agree.

I don't think it can be denied, though, that most governments, at least in the West, are way more corrupt now than the British were in the mid-to-late 18th century or even the Roman Empire at the height of its persecution of Christians or even the height of its depravity (which are probably at least roughly the same time frame - I'm not an historian).  I mean, I could be mistaken, but although the Romans may have dabbled with something like what we might call "transgenderism", they certainly weren't so far off that they tried to completely deny the dual nature of sex and gender.  It wasn't mainstream.  They didn't try to legislate the acceptance or enforcement of what I can and can't call someone I've never met.  At least, I haven't read of it going that far.  You probably have a better understanding of it than I do.  Did they go that far?

I would not be able to answer specific historical questions, far from my area of relative expertise (and I will emphasize relative, because I do not claim true expertise in any area). 

At the end of the day I think it is worth bearing in mind that our injunction to obey the political powers was not qualified by St. Paul, and in fact was given at one of the most objectively unjust moments in our history. St. Paul certainly could have incited violent revolution, or even some kind of nonviolent resistance. That is, as we are all aware, what the Jewish people expected of the fulfilment of the Messianic prophecies. But what he did was subtler than that. What he (and Christ) emphasized was obedience to just commands, rejection of the unjust, and pious veneration of authority as instituted by God. Our piety towards ruling authorities was not predicated on those authorities being fundamentally just, or just to a certain acceptable point. We can and often do have to obey and venerate unjust authorities, we simply cannot join them in their injustice (and in fact resist that injustice, as a deeper and more complete veneration of the authority).

We trust, at the end of the day, that to whom much is given, much will be expected. Those in authority have a grave duty towards the common good, and yes, most contemporary and historical authorities have failed in that duty, either sometimes or most of the time, but that is between them and God.

[Peace]

1 hour ago, fides' Jack said:

You may be right.  I used it because in my mind it seemed like a clear example on the spot.  But I haven't put it to the test against Catholic objective morality.

On that specific point, I think we agree.

I don't think it can be denied, though, that most governments, at least in the West, are way more corrupt now than the British were in the mid-to-late 18th century or even the Roman Empire at the height of its persecution of Christians or even the height of its depravity (which are probably at least roughly the same time frame - I'm not an historian).  I mean, I could be mistaken, but although the Romans may have dabbled with something like what we might call "transgenderism", they certainly weren't so far off that they tried to completely deny the dual nature of sex and gender.  It wasn't mainstream.  They didn't try to legislate the acceptance or enforcement of what I can and can't call someone I've never met.  At least, I haven't read of it going that far.  You probably have a better understanding of it than I do.  Did they go that far?

Here we go with the good old days again. Dude, that government practically denied that African people were human beings.

[little2add]

On 2/9/2022 at 7:19 PM, Peace said:

its silly to suggest that economic factors do not play a role in the decisions of individual women to have a child.

I object to supporting abomination. 

on a side note, have ever noticed abortion and abomination, first and last three letters of the word are the same?

just saying...

[Peace]

43 minutes ago, little2add said:

I object to supporting abomination. 

on a side note, have ever noticed abortion and abomination, first and last three letters of the word are the same?

just saying...

Well I object to tax dollars being used to fund things like Planned Parenthood, etc. too.

What exactly is your point? UBI gives money to people, not Planed Parenthood.

[little2add]

16 minutes ago, Peace said:

UBI gives money to people, not Planed Parenthood.

 

UBI is funded by yours and my Taxes, so...

In the context of this discussion, UBI could be or would be used to subsidize and/or finance abortions/planned parenthood. 

 

[Peace]

1 hour ago, little2add said:

 

UBI is funded by yours and my Taxes, so...

In the context of this discussion, UBI could be or would be used to subsidize and/or finance abortions/planned parenthood. 

 

Well, if that's your rationale, then you have to eliminate practically every social program. My younger brother is disabled. He "could" take his SSI check and use the money to help a woman have an abortion. The same thing for unemployment benefits. Heck, if a person is on Medicare and gets any type of reimbursement for a medical procedure, that can be used to fund an abortion.People can trade in food vouchers and use it to fund an abortion. The same thing for that nice check that most people got from President Trump.

I'm guessing we would probably have to eliminate whatever government benefits you have or will receive as well, if "could" is your rationale.

[little2add]

Are you forgetting the title or theme of this thread?  

The President Biden State Of The Union Address , he said “ Women's right to abortion in the United States is "under attack as never before," 

President Biden has disavowed “ The Hyde amendment”

5 hours ago, Peace said:

government benefits

I do not want to participate in the funding of abortion.   It is my constitutional right to object,  and refuse and to practice my religion without interference.

Edited March 3, 2022 by little2add

[Nihil Obstat]

46 minutes ago, little2add said:

 

I do not want to participate in the funding of abortion.   It is my constitutional right to object,  and refuse and to practice my religion without interference.

If you manage to bankrupt the government through an overly generous UBI, there will not be any money left over to fund abortion. 

[little2add]

Actually it already has, The birth rate in this country is the lowest it’s ever been.   
All those little fetuses would’ve grown into taxpayers.

Americans are having fewer babies than ever, or at least than since the government began tracking the general fertility rate in 1909. The total fertility rate ticked down to 1.7 in 2019, meaning that the average number of babies an American woman would have over her lifetime is well below replacement level.

 

[Nihil Obstat]

That is supposed to be a "missing the point" gif. Looks like it did not copy and paste like I expected.

[little2add]

7 hours ago, Nihil Obstat said:

missing the point

 

 

[fides' Jack]

20 hours ago, Nihil Obstat said:

If you manage to bankrupt the government through an overly generous UBI...

I think it's clear now that the government already is bankrupt, before it even got to the point where even a slight UBI could be introduced.  If you want to try to apply an overly generous UBI, you don't just bankrupt the government, you destroy all of society, in a fairly quick period of time.

The government has no money, and hasn't for a while.  They're printing money to stave things off as much as they can.  It won't last indefinitely.

Cheerio, mate!

[Dennis Tate]

On 3/2/2022 at 7:57 PM, Nihil Obstat said:

If you manage to bankrupt the government through an overly generous UBI, there will not be any money left over to fund abortion. 

I believe that a Basic Minimum Income that is created exactly as President Lincoln and President Kennedy did is the best way to begin to pay off the national debts of the USA and Canada. An Unconditional Income Supplement of five hundred dollars per citizen and legal resident from cradle to grave, that is taxable but created in the same way that President Lincoln and JFK did would need little bureaucracy because it is unconditional and goes to everybody... would turn around the scheming being done to reward people for not working. A single mother or father with one child would get a thousand dollars per month, but this not being attached to a restriction on his or her ability to work would soon lead to our nations being even more productive. 

The USA and Canadian dollars are backed up by PRODUCTIVITY so rewarding people to not work and produce... is a big part of the problem. 

The key is to educate three hundred and thirty million Americans to the fact that their productivity backs up the value of the USA dollar..... and the USA dollar belongs to Americans... .not to politicians.

An unconditional Basic Minimum Income supplement to all Americans that was taxable..... (for example of five hundred dollars per month)... could set in motion 330,000,000 x 500 dollars per month being put against the national debt.... because the national debt of the USA is significantly a practical joke that has been played on three hundred and thirty million Americans. (This principle also applies in Canada and in all democratic nations that I can think of.

 

Quote

If you are among the people who can benefit GREATLY from a Bear Market, (a stock market crash), by buying companies and real estate at ten cents or less on the dollar......
then standard wisdom is that you should:
1. print a lot of extra money
2. DECREASE PRODUCTIVITY
3 DECREASE PRODUCTIVY EVEN MORE
4. Create a supply chain crisis where fifty to seventy super tankers from Asia are waiting off the coast of California but cannot unload their cargo due to Covid 19 and / or various environmentalism regulations prepared just for a time like this.....
5. Anger truckers and have them DEMONSTRATING or striking as opposed to moving products from point A to point B....
6.... Start a WAR!!!!

So.... does it also look to you as if hyper-inflation and an economic crisis is being deliberately created and that Covid 19 was merely an excuse to set hyper-inflation in motion!!!!?????

 

John F. Kennedy
 

Quote

Melvin Sickler .... "No United States president since Abraham Lincoln dared to go against the system and create his own money, as many of these so-called elected presidents were actually only instruments or puppets of the Bankers. That is until President John F. Kennedy came into office.

On June 4th, 1963, President Kennedy signed a presidential document, called Executive Order 11110, which further amended Executive Order 10289 of September 19th, 1951. This gave Kennedy, as President of the United States, legal clearance to create his own money to run the country, money that would belong to the people, an Interest and debt-free money. He had printed United States Notes, completely ignoring the Federal Reserve Notes from the private banks of the Federal Reserve.

Our records show that Kennedy issued $4,292,893,825 of cash money. It was perfectly obvious that Kennedy was out to undermine the Federal Reserve System of the United States.

But it was only a few months later, In November of 1963, that the world received the shocking news of President Kennedy's assassination. President Kennedy must have had It in mind to repeal the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, and return back to the United States Congress the power to create its own money.

It is interesting to note that, only one day after Kennedy's assassination, all the United States notes, which Kennedy had issued, were called out of circulation. Was this through an executive order of the newly installed president, Lyndon B. Johnson? Was President Johnson afraid of the Bankers? Or was he one of their instruments? At any rate, all of the money President Kennedy had created was destroyed. And not a word was said to the American people." (Melvin Sickler,
by Melvin Sickler
Abraham Lincoln and John F. Kennedy
Two great presidents of the United States Assassinated for the cause of justice

http://www.cidpusa.org/lincoln_JFK.htm

 

On 2/28/2022 at 5:21 PM, Nihil Obstat said:

I would not be able to answer specific historical questions, far from my area of relative expertise (and I will emphasize relative, because I do not claim true expertise in any area). 

At the end of the day I think it is worth bearing in mind that our injunction to obey the political powers was not qualified by St. Paul, and in fact was given at one of the most objectively unjust moments in our history. St. Paul certainly could have incited violent revolution, or even some kind of nonviolent resistance. That is, as we are all aware, what the Jewish people expected of the fulfilment of the Messianic prophecies. But what he did was subtler than that. What he (and Christ) emphasized was obedience to just commands, rejection of the unjust, and pious veneration of authority as instituted by God. Our piety towards ruling authorities was not predicated on those authorities being fundamentally just, or just to a certain acceptable point. We can and often do have to obey and venerate unjust authorities, we simply cannot join them in their injustice (and in fact resist that injustice, as a deeper and more complete veneration of the authority).

We trust, at the end of the day, that to whom much is given, much will be expected. Those in authority have a grave duty towards the common good, and yes, most contemporary and historical authorities have failed in that duty, either sometimes or most of the time, but that is between them and God.

This article may help you... it is written in very clear and simple English.  

 

Alain Pilote ... " First, in order to cast discredit on the Greenbacks, the bankers persuaded Congress to vote, in February of 1862, the "Exception Clause", which said that the Greenbacks could not be used to pay the interest on the national debt, nor to pay taxes, excises, or import duties. Then, in 1863, having financed the election of enough Senators and Representatives, the bankers got the Congress to revoke the Greenback Law in 1863, and enact in its place the National Banking Act. (Money was then to be issued interest-bearing by privately-owned banks.)

This Act also provided that the Greenbacks should be retired from circulation as soon as they came back to the Treasury in payment of taxes. Lincoln heatedly protested, but his most urgent objective was to win the war and save the Union, which obliged him to put off till after the war the veto he was planning against this Act and the action he was to take against the bankers. Lincoln nevertheless declared:

"I have two great enemies, the Southern army in front of me and the bankers in the rear. And of the two, the bankers are my greatest foe."

Lincoln was re-elected President in 1864, and he made it quite clear that he would attack the power of the bankers, once the war was over. The war ended on April 9, 1865, but Lincoln was assassinated five days later, on April 14. A tremendous restriction of credit followed, organized by the banks: the currency in circulation in the country, which was, in 1866, $1,907 million, representing $50.46 for each American citizen, had been reduced to $605 million in 1876, representing $14.60 per capita. The result: in ten years, 56,446 business failures, representing a loss of $2 billion. And as if this was not enough, the bankers reduced the per capita currency in circulation to $6.67 in 1887! " (Alain Pilote, The History of Banking Control in the United States).
https://www.michaeljournal.org/arti...story-of-banking-control-in-the-united-states

Edited March 7, 2022 by Dennis Tate
spelling....

[Tabby Cat]

I don't know about the abortion rate but minimum wage and slightly less than minimum wage social security is available in Australia, unsure what it does but without it I would be screwed as I'm on a government disability pension.

Edited March 7, 2022 by Tabby Cat
Government(missed word)

[Dennis Tate]

On 3/7/2022 at 4:16 AM, Tabby Cat said:

I don't know about the abortion rate but minimum wage and slightly less than minimum wage social security is available in Australia, unsure what it does but without it I would be screwed as I'm on a government disability pension.

Yes...  relative poverty is consider to be one major cause of women choosing to have an abortion in the western democracies.