Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Free contraception could reduce abortion by 75 percent
Topic Started: Oct 8 2012, 09:50 AM (863 Views)
Mountainrivers
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Pat
Oct 22 2012, 01:28 AM
So are you saying to sell and Abrams tank to pay for them? The money has to come from somewhere, if selling a tank is not acceptable, should we sell a park or other piece of real estate? I'm asking for an answer here. It's easy to off the cuff say "we should supply this or that". Paying for it needs to be addressed.
Don't you think that not having to pay for unwanted pregnancies would pay for the cost of contraception?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mountainrivers
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
MrsS
Oct 22 2012, 01:32 AM
To prevent - or at least lower - teenage pregnancy, I`d hand it out for free to students of the upper high school grades.

And no, I don`t think that`ll increase sexual activity among students.......they`ll do "it" anyway.
These old geezers who are opposed to contraception and think just saying no is the answer, have forgotten what it was like when they were young enough to feel that urge to do "it".
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
MrsS
Member Avatar
Member
[ * ]
Pat
Oct 22 2012, 01:37 AM
Agree MrsS, but I would probably supply them for those 10 years old and up. Problem is, I don't have enough money to do so. Do you?

Well, for example all of the health-insurance companies could pay a small amount into a common money-pool. That`d save them the money for taking care of the aftermath of an abortion....
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pat
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Mountainrivers
Oct 22 2012, 01:38 AM
Pat
Oct 22 2012, 01:28 AM
So are you saying to sell and Abrams tank to pay for them? The money has to come from somewhere, if selling a tank is not acceptable, should we sell a park or other piece of real estate? I'm asking for an answer here. It's easy to off the cuff say "we should supply this or that". Paying for it needs to be addressed.
Don't you think that not having to pay for unwanted pregnancies would pay for the cost of contraception?
It really depends Neal, and here is why I say that. If I borrowed money to pay for the condoms, over time, interest payments could lesson and eventually wipe out any savings. I prefer gathering together a bunch of people and having them donate to the cause. We don't need the government nor can we afford for it, to solve community problems like unwanted pregnancy. If the town has say 10,000 kids form 10-18, and each uses say ten condoms a month, then we need 100,000 condoms. If we can arrange to buy them for say 20 cents a piece, then we need $20,000 a month. A community that size has about 40,000 people. I don't think it would be hard to get the donations if you told the community they would need to come up with say $500,000 a month to pay for the unwanted pregnancies.

Removing the government and putting the problem on the community members plate would get more action.

Secondly, if the community doesn't go along, then move to a program of forced abortions and sterilization. "OK Joe, you don't want to keep the kid of yours out of Sally's pants, and you won't pay your share?" "Fine, we take Bobby and Sally for a couple of days and return them fixed." Like dealing with dogs and cats running loose.

I can hear the squeals now form some of you.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mountainrivers
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Pat
Oct 22 2012, 01:48 AM
Mountainrivers
Oct 22 2012, 01:38 AM
Pat
Oct 22 2012, 01:28 AM
So are you saying to sell and Abrams tank to pay for them? The money has to come from somewhere, if selling a tank is not acceptable, should we sell a park or other piece of real estate? I'm asking for an answer here. It's easy to off the cuff say "we should supply this or that". Paying for it needs to be addressed.
Don't you think that not having to pay for unwanted pregnancies would pay for the cost of contraception?
It really depends Neal, and here is why I say that. If I borrowed money to pay for the condoms, over time, interest payments could lesson and eventually wipe out any savings. I prefer gathering together a bunch of people and having them donate to the cause. We don't need the government nor can we afford for it, to solve community problems like unwanted pregnancy. If the town has say 10,000 kids form 10-18, and each uses say ten condoms a month, then we need 100,000 condoms. If we can arrange to buy them for say 20 cents a piece, then we need $20,000 a month. A community that size has about 40,000 people. I don't think it would be hard to get the donations if you told the community they would need to come up with say $500,000 a month to pay for the unwanted pregnancies.

Removing the government and putting the problem on the community members plate would get more action.

Secondly, if the community doesn't go along, then move to a program of forced abortions and sterilization. "OK Joe, you don't want to keep the kid of yours out of Sally's pants, and you won't pay your share?" "Fine, we take Bobby and Sally for a couple of days and return them fixed." Like dealing with dogs and cats running loose.

I can hear the squeals now form some of you.
What kind of action do you think a community can take to keep kids from having sex? I assume you're kidding when you say we should just "fix" em. Secondly, I don't think that every kid in town would have a need for 10 condoms a month, and only one condom per couple so that cuts the usage in half.. So say 50 % would. That cuts down on your projected cost considerably. If the town is going to pay for it anyway, you have a similar situation to our need for universal health care, in which we pay for health care at a higher cost by sending people to the ER.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
MrsS
Member Avatar
Member
[ * ]

Quote:
 
I prefer gathering together a bunch of people and having them donate to the cause. We don't need the government nor can we afford for it, to solve community problems like unwanted pregnancy.


If it works.....fine.

But, I almost hear people say "That`s immoral"...."That`s not the public`s business"...."Let the parents deal with it"...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Brewster
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Pat
Oct 22 2012, 01:28 AM
So are you saying to sell and Abrams tank to pay for them? The money has to come from somewhere, if selling a tank is not acceptable, should we sell a park or other piece of real estate? I'm asking for an answer here. It's easy to off the cuff say "we should supply this or that". Paying for it needs to be addressed.
No, I didn't say sell it. Park it.

It's by far the most expensive tank to buy and to run ever created. It made some sense when the worry was that the USSR was outproducing the US 20 to 1, and the US needed to make up for lack of numbers with technology, but what's the point of such an overbuilt machine now?

Quote:
 
Running 16 tanks 8 hours a day for a one year period would cost $691,200,000. Fueling those 16 tanks for 4 years of war - the minimal amount of time spent at war that Obama and NATO have agreed will be necessary before the “beginning” of U.S. troop withdrawals - that cost will be $2,764,800,000. Yes, that is correct - the cost would approach 3 billion dollars.

The costs above are for fuel only, and do not include tank maintenance, ammunition, compensating the crews and associated costs, i.e., medical, veterans benefits, etc. The above calculation also does not include inflationary costs, or the likely expansion of the one company tank force of 16 to include dozens more of the heavily armored combat vehicles.
LINK

Anyway, that was only one of a hundred ways to handle the problem. As several have said, the savings in abortions or even more likely, welfare for all those unwanted children, would probably more than pay the costs.

And no, free, voluntary donations don't make sense. Why do I as an individual care if the neighbour kid gets knocked up? That's backwards thinking from the Right.

But I as a citizen of the country having to pay all that welfare really do care.
Edited by Brewster, Oct 22 2012, 02:57 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ngc1514
Member Avatar
Moderator
[ * ]
Pat
Oct 22 2012, 01:37 AM
Agree MrsS, but I would probably supply them for those 10 years old and up. Problem is, I don't have enough money to do so. Do you?
But we have the money to support those kids with Medicaid, Peachcare (in Georgia), public school educations, the most expensive medical care possible at the local emergency room, food stamps, Aid to Dependent Children... so a buck for a rubber now or tens of thousands starting the day after sperm and ovum meet?

Sounds like a much better return on our tax investment than those tens of thousands.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pat
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Mountainrivers
Oct 22 2012, 01:58 AM
Pat
Oct 22 2012, 01:48 AM
Mountainrivers
Oct 22 2012, 01:38 AM
Pat
Oct 22 2012, 01:28 AM
So are you saying to sell and Abrams tank to pay for them? The money has to come from somewhere, if selling a tank is not acceptable, should we sell a park or other piece of real estate? I'm asking for an answer here. It's easy to off the cuff say "we should supply this or that". Paying for it needs to be addressed.
Don't you think that not having to pay for unwanted pregnancies would pay for the cost of contraception?
It really depends Neal, and here is why I say that. If I borrowed money to pay for the condoms, over time, interest payments could lesson and eventually wipe out any savings. I prefer gathering together a bunch of people and having them donate to the cause. We don't need the government nor can we afford for it, to solve community problems like unwanted pregnancy. If the town has say 10,000 kids form 10-18, and each uses say ten condoms a month, then we need 100,000 condoms. If we can arrange to buy them for say 20 cents a piece, then we need $20,000 a month. A community that size has about 40,000 people. I don't think it would be hard to get the donations if you told the community they would need to come up with say $500,000 a month to pay for the unwanted pregnancies.

Removing the government and putting the problem on the community members plate would get more action.

Secondly, if the community doesn't go along, then move to a program of forced abortions and sterilization. "OK Joe, you don't want to keep the kid of yours out of Sally's pants, and you won't pay your share?" "Fine, we take Bobby and Sally for a couple of days and return them fixed." Like dealing with dogs and cats running loose.

I can hear the squeals now form some of you.
What kind of action do you think a community can take to keep kids from having sex? I assume you're kidding when you say we should just "fix" em. Secondly, I don't think that every kid in town would have a need for 10 condoms a month, and only one condom per couple so that cuts the usage in half.. So say 50 % would. That cuts down on your projected cost considerably. If the town is going to pay for it anyway, you have a similar situation to our need for universal health care, in which we pay for health care at a higher cost by sending people to the ER.
Outside tying them up, nothing. Kids are going to experiment, we all did. I have another idea. If you don't like one approach how about this one. Since not all of us have kids, let's focus on the people who are getting pregnant and dumping their problem on us. Kids. What is it that kids consume and can be levied. Fast food, kids entertainment outlets, kids clothes, kids electronics. Kids activities.

Those that smoke and consume alcohol have their vice of choice taxed to help pay for the problems their habits create, so apply this same solution to kids. Work out the kinks and go for it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
ZetaBoards gives you all the tools to create a successful discussion community.
« Previous Topic · Fire And Ice General Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Website Traffic Analysis