How large would the US welfare state grow if abortion was outlawed?

Question

Considering that the vast majority of abortions are conducted on women who cannot financially support a child.

Would govt. run orphanges have to open or would we just throw the unwanted children on the street? Especially considering that the existing foster care system is already very overburdened with over 100,000 children ready for adoption.

How much more would taxes go up on citizens to support the additional burden to the welfare state? Or would the govt. just borrow money from the Chi-Coms to pay for it?

Answer 1

Not only would police powers grow for enforcement, but the amount of people seeking welfare would increase astronomically.





<>



At one time even birth control was considered chemical forms of abortion when the right-wingers were allowed to make abortion illegal.

If they are allowed to do so again, you can bet they will once again try to define birth control methods as chemical forms of abortion.



<>



Umm you do realize that was prior to destruction of unions and the American economy by free trade right??

Answer 2

"Considering that the vast majority of abortions are conducted on women who cannot financially support a child."



Are you sure? There's a financial incentive for women on welfare to continue to have children. There's also a reason lower income women have more children than higher income children. You might be right, of course, but without a source, I question the validity of that statement.



"Especially considering that the existing foster care system is already very overburdened"



Except the foster care system has nothing to do with abortion. The waiting list for newborn babies is HUGE, meaning there are thousands of people that want to adopt newborns. Kids that made it into the foster system were originally wanted by their mothers (ie they weren't aborted). Those moms choose to have their kids, and lost them to foster care for whatever reason.



"How much more would taxes go up on citizens to support the additional burden to the welfare state?"



Actually the larger danger to society is that our taxes go up to support the retirees in an over burdened social security state. There will come a time in the near future where retirees outnumber laborers. A wave of youth would actually help support the system. As it stands today, immigration is the only thing that will save our system.

Answer 3

It would not grow by much - if at all. The fact is other things contribute to welfare, a child is not the actual cause.



1) Illogical drug policies that break up families over non violent crimes - imprisoning entrepreneurs in a free (unregulated) market.



2) The fact the abortion programs exist at all inevitabely lead to them being an option in the minds of those who 'risk pregnancy' with unprotected sex.



3) The welfare programs itseif exist. If you do not support people using the programs, eliminate the programs.



However welfare is small in comparison to other programs. NOT TO MAKE EXCUSES FOR WELFARE, but there are other areas that could be cut to save much more, and cause less distress in the lives of those who directly benefit. Of corse, when welfare was the most expensive waste, the next in line, it should also be eliminated.



Annual costs:

$40,000 Million = Welfare

$150,000 Million = The 'war on drugs'

$160,000 Million = Govt retirement funds

$600,000 Million = Medicare

$1,000,000 Million = 800 Military bases across the world

$3,500,000 Million = Totaled STATE government costs

$4,000,000 Million = FEDERAL government costs

Answer 4

I would be careful not to equate birth control and abortion.



If we want to control earth's population and prevent the welfare rolls from growing, why not kill all the poor children? That would solve the problem, would it not? But no, that is not a socially acceptable idea, but the death of millions of unborn children somehow is.



A human life cannot be valued, and society cannot ruthlessly control who is and who is not worthy of being born.



Why not fix the foster program, make it easier to adopt or provide actual help for people who struggle with poverty instead of unfairly denying a child's right to live, all because society "cannot afford it"!



Fix the society, instead of killing the child.

Answer 5

The government could offer "quality day care packages" to working families in order to provide a normalized environment for the greater society's development in the population. The problem with the government social agencies managing families, employment, and other opportunities is that the do decide what a person is approved for and this does alter the course of citizens' lives.



Persons who are not approved for work via the certifications via government offices may not have more children. This is a present circumstance, since the government already manages life sustaining resources.

Answer 6

How big was the welfare population before abortion was legalized? lol FAIL.



How over-burdened was the foster care system in 1973 compared to now? FAIL.



This society is at fault for all of this society's problems. Abortion is just one of those problems, but I think the loss of dignity of life is responsible for ALL of them. And I think legalizing abortion took us down this road, not the other way around.



I submit that not ONE extra mouth would be on the public dole if abortion had not been legalized. Because people didn't expect everyone else to pay for their children back then.

Answer 7

It’s called personal responsibility folks. If you can’t get an abortion to fix your mistakes, don’t make the mistakes in the first place. If you don’t want a child, either practice safe sex or don’t practice sex at all. Simple. We live in a society that wants the freedom to screw around without the consequences of their actions. Make condoms mandatory for unmarried partners and the number of pregnancies will decrease.

Answer 8

are you justifying abortion because people are too dumb to use BC?



people think that if abortion was banned, that there would be herds of starving children running thru the streets.... I dont think so.

How many "little princess" girls from well off families get abortions because they have never had a day of responsibility in their life or are afraid their family will be upset? U gonna tell me if they had kids that their family would let the kid starve?



And if the person knows they wouldnt beable to afford feeding a kid, what the hell are they doing having sex- especially if they are too lazy to use any form of BC?.....

Answer 9

You raise a valid question. However you are doing exactly what the administration is doing. focusing on the wrong issue and offering the band aid patch as oppose to a real solution.

Instead of what you offer or explain in your question.

How about Medicaid and other state sponsored program start covering the costs of contraceptive pills for women still in age to conceive?

It would cost them about $35.00 a month per covered patient. Instead they do NOT cover contraceptives, they would PAY for an abortion, and if the person keeps the child they would pay for all pre natal follow up and tests, pay for the delivery (normal or complicated one) and cover the child until he turns 18.

Now compare the cost of paying for the pill box to the cost of any of the other option and you tell me what makes sense and what doesn't?

Answer 10

Well if people were to use some form of birth control and pratice personal responsibility then it wouldn't need to be such a big problem. Something so simple that so many just flat out refuse to do

Answer 11

It is an ignorant question that leaves me wondering why your Mom didn't think of it herself. But, as an argument, how about this....that would be about 150 million people who now would be paying taxes and Social Security wouldn't be quite so insolvent. Our pool of electable candidates would be expanded greatly and we likely wouldn't have the ignorant morons we now have in Washington. We have quite likely killed a few great minds who may have invented better auto or a never-ending energy source. Your orphanage argument is stupid beyond description and belongs in a conversation with someone really, really uninformed. In fact, once again, your entire argument is 2nd grade, at best.

Answer 12

Using that logic, you could make additional cuts to the size of the welfare state by murdering anyone who is handicapped or unemployed. Financial ends do not justify murder as a means.

Answer 13

If we can abolish welfare, we could abolish the welfare state simultaneously. So that's a moot point.



Why do liberals think that human beings are parasites? It's obvious that they want us all to be wards of the state.

Answer 14

I just don't get why the only options are Abortion or increased welfare state. MAybe we could spend some time figuring out why these people are To stupid to use condoms.

Answer 15

I see where you're going with this, but let's focus on the facts. And the FACT is that 93% of abortions have absolutely nothing to do with health risks, rape, or incest. Just women who had sex, got pregnant, and don''t want to be mothers. So now it's the TAXPAYERS responsibility to support them because THEY chose to have sex and risk pregnancy? That's what I honestly don't get about liberalsm. Absolutely no sense of personal responsibility.

Answer 16

Not much.



The number of additional children born would be more or less offset by the number of mothers who would die trying to give themselves illegal abortions.

Answer 17

If you ban abortion, then you strike down as much welfare as possible, you'll basically have serfdom eventually through a very large underclass.



I think that's what these anti-choice/anti-welfare types are aiming for.

Answer 18

Whats with all the questions on abortion today? Did you guys get your marching orders from the DNC?

Answer 19

funny how the ones who are supposed to be so "enlightened and open-minded" fall so easily into this old pattern of blatant racism ...

Answer 20

Why not outlaw welfare too?

Answer 21

Probably by a considerable amount.

Answer 22

good point but ppl against abortions only answer is to close your legs...

Answer 23

Its ok if they're abused or starved to death, as long as they aren't aborted.