American Birthrates: Quantity vs. Quality [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : American Birthrates: Quantity vs. Quality


maxsnafu
10-10-2012, 07:26
http://takimag.com/article/american_birthrates_quantity_v_quality_steve_sailer/print#axzz28ty0MG8U

beforeobamabans
10-10-2012, 07:56
The latest stats are just shy of 50% illegitimate births nationwide, 70% among blacks. The fatherless family is/will be the downfall of our culture.

ChuteTheMall
10-10-2012, 08:11
The abortion rate was 48.2/1000 for black women (448,000 abortions for 9,288,000 black women between 15 and 44).
The abortion rate was 13.8/1000 for white women (668,000 abortions for 48,480,000 white women between 15 and 44).

http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0101.pdf

I guess you could say that most abortions were performed on white women, but nearly half of all black pregnancies ended in abortion.

Gundude
10-10-2012, 08:53
A Republican blaming Bush for the housing bubble? Must be a pinko Obama lover. :dunno:

Everybody knows that the president sitting at the time something happens has nothing to do with what happens.

Unless it's a Democrat president, of course, in which case it's the sitting president, and him alone, that has everything to do with what happens.

rgregoryb
10-10-2012, 09:05
A Republican blaming Bush for the housing bubble? Must be a pinko Obama lover. :dunno:

Everybody knows that the president sitting at the time something happens has nothing to do with what happens.

Unless it's a Democrat president, of course, in which case it's the sitting president, and him alone, that has everything to do with what happens.

like gas prices? you maroon..........high gas prices were Bush's fault while he was pres. but now you bed wetting liberals don't say a word.........geez, the mental midgets ya'll breed.

CigarandScotch
10-10-2012, 09:07
This doesn't surprise me at all. And it has been going on for generations, although it is probably worse today than it was 30 years ago.

aircarver
10-10-2012, 09:08
like gas prices? you maroon..........high gas prices were Bush's fault while he was pres. but now you bed wetting liberals don't say a word.........geez, the mental midgets ya'll breed.

The hypocrisy is astounding ....:upeyes:

.

JFrame
10-10-2012, 09:11
A Republican blaming Bush for the housing bubble? Must be a pinko Obama lover. :dunno:

Everybody knows that the president sitting at the time something happens has nothing to do with what happens.

Unless it's a Democrat president, of course, in which case it's the sitting president, and him alone, that has everything to do with what happens.

To be fair, Bush warned repeatedly about the collapse of the housing bubble, only to have jack-holes like Barney Frank come back with repeated reassurances of that foundation being fundamentally sound.

I am not dismissing the fact that Bush made some crucial errors. But the set-up for the housing market collapse began some 33 years before Bush ever took office.


.

DonGlock26
10-10-2012, 09:16
Turn off the welfare spigot. That will cross the legs quickly.

JBnTX
10-10-2012, 09:54
Just watch the first 15 minutes of the movie Idiocracy.

It explains exactly what's happening today, and the rest of the movie shows the result of it.

Gundude
10-10-2012, 09:59
like gas prices? you maroon..........high gas prices were Bush's fault while he was pres. but now you bed wetting liberals don't say a word.........geez, the mental midgets ya'll breed.Excusing your hypocrisy by pointing out that the people you hate and don't respect do it too? Nice.

Some people like to claim they're better than the bed wetting liberals. At least you admit you're the same.

Gundude
10-10-2012, 10:01
To be fair, Bush warned repeatedly about the collapse of the housing bubble, only to have jack-holes like Barney Frank come back with repeated reassurances of that foundation being fundamentally sound.

I am not dismissing the fact that Bush made some crucial errors. But the set-up for the housing market collapse began some 33 years before Bush ever took office.


.And some 41 years before Obama took office?

DonGlock26
10-10-2012, 10:05
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v223/DonGlock26/asp.jpg

JFrame
10-10-2012, 11:10
And some 41 years before Obama took office?

Just in the context of this one focused line of thought (the housing bubble), it's sort of the difference between a car careening toward the cliff, and one passenger suggesting that the steering wheel should be turned, versus the other screaming, "Faster! Faster!"


.

Gundude
10-10-2012, 11:13
Just in the context of this one focused line of thought (the housing bubble), it's sort of the difference between a car careening toward the cliff, and one passenger suggesting that the steering wheel should be turned, versus the other screaming, "Faster! Faster!"


.Which is which again?But a particularly gratuitous blow to affordable family formation was Bush’s 2002-2004 campaign denouncing federal mortgage regulators’ traditional bias against zero-down-payment mortgages as racially unjust. He kicked off this crusade in the name of racial equality at his 2002 White House Conference on Increasing Minority Homeownership.If the car was heading towards that cliff for years, he certainly accelerated it, didn't he?

kirgi08
10-10-2012, 11:17
:animlol:

JFrame
10-10-2012, 11:24
Which is which again?If the car was heading towards that cliff for years, he certainly accelerated it, didn't he?

I guess we have to look at the totality of their actions.

Timeline shows Bush, McCain warning Dems of financial and housing crisis; meltdown - YouTube

Don't ask me to defend Bush's missteps, but the pushback he got at every turn was evident.


.

Gundude
10-10-2012, 11:39
I guess we have to look at the totality of their actions.

Don't ask me to defend Bush's missteps, but the pushback he got at every turn was evident.Amazing how Republicans get "pushed back" when they control both branches of congress plus the presidency, yet Democrats in that position can pass gun bans, Obamacare, tax increases, whatever their platform desires.

Is it possible that Republicans are simply lying to their suckers... er... voters about their platform, while they're actually on board with the Democrats when it comes to actions?

JFrame
10-10-2012, 11:41
Amazing how Republicans get "pushed back" when they control both branches of congress plus the presidency, yet Democrats in that position can pass gun bans, Obamacare, tax increases, whatever their platform desires.

Is it possible that Republicans are simply lying to their suckers... er... voters about their platform, while they're actually on board with the Democrats when it comes to actions?

Again, if you think I don't want certain dynamics to change, you're wrong.

But I'm just calling specific instances of malfeasance, and the relative culpability of the suspects, as I see them.


.

series1811
10-10-2012, 11:55
http://takimag.com/article/american_birthrates_quantity_v_quality_steve_sailer/print#axzz28ty0MG8U

I don't think the writer of this article would like what Senator Daniel Patrick Moynahan wrote on this subject in 1965,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Negro_Family:_The_Case_For_National_Action

Or any of the truth squadders, either. :supergrin:

Gundude
10-10-2012, 12:00
Again, if you think I don't want certain dynamics to change, you're wrong.

But I'm just calling specific instances of malfeasance, and the relative culpability of the suspects, as I see them.


.Your vision is being clouded by party loyalty. "Your" guys don't get a pass just because they flapped their lips. You blame the minority for stopping the majority, yet when "your" party is in the minority, you blame the majority for running all over you. Your loyalty is blinding you to the fact that "your" party is equally complicit.

Democrats and Republicans aren't equal, they are just equally harmful.

I don't doubt that you want dynamics to change, but I doubt that you're willing to do what it takes to change them, because it would involve standing up to "your" party, even to the point it'll lose them an election two. Is there any other way to stand up to them?

JFrame
10-10-2012, 12:11
Your vision is being clouded by party loyalty. "Your" guys don't get a pass just because they flapped their lips. You blame the minority for stopping the majority, yet when "your" party is in the minority, you blame the majority for running all over you. Your loyalty is blinding you to the fact that "your" party is equally complicit.

Democrats and Republicans aren't equal, they are just equally harmful.

I don't doubt that you want dynamics to change, but I doubt that you're willing to do what it takes to change them, because it would involve standing up to "your" party, even to the point it'll lose them an election two. Is there any other way to stand up to them?


I have donated considerable funds to get more reliable conservatives elected to office (e.g., via Jim DeMint's PAC, among others). If unsuccessful in actually getting said conservatives onto the ticket, hopefully enough of a scare is thrown into the candidates in question, that they will be more likely to toe the conservative line.

I prefer to try to change the GOP from within, by letting my feelings known to them through who I support. Your preference is to try and effect change outside of either party. I won't characterize either option as the "right" one -- we all have to act based on our own ideals.


.

ArtificialGrape
10-10-2012, 17:06
The abortion rate was 48.2/1000 for black women (448,000 abortions for 9,288,000 black women between 15 and 44).
The abortion rate was 13.8/1000 for white women (668,000 abortions for 48,480,000 white women between 15 and 44).

http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0101.pdf

I guess you could say that most abortions were performed on white women, but nearly half of all black pregnancies ended in abortion.

What is the basis for the "nearly half of all black pregnancies ended in abortion" conclusion?

-ArtificialGrape

juggy4711
10-10-2012, 17:21
What is the basis for the "nearly half of all black pregnancies ended in abortion" conclusion?

-ArtificialGrape

At first glance I'm not following the numbers either, but if you think black folks do not abort babies at a higher percentage rate than white folks (or anyone else for that matter) do you would be wrong. Black culture is all jacked up, more so than any other ethnic culture in the US. As of 2009, the last year I worked in the HIV/AIDS research field, the largest growing population of people infected with HIV were single black women. There is a reason for that. Folks might not want to address it but there is a reason. Hint it has nothing to do with homosexuality.

ArtificialGrape
10-10-2012, 17:26
At first glance I'm not following the numbers either, but if you think black folks do not abort babies at a higher percentage rate than white folks (or anyone else for that matter) do you would be wrong. Black culture is all jacked up, more so than any other ethnic culture in the US. As of 2009, the last year I worked in the HIV/AIDS research field, the largest growing population of people infected with HIV were single black women. There is a reason for that. Folks might not want to address it but there is a reason. Hint it has nothing to do with homosexuality.

I don't doubt that blacks abort at over 3 times the rate of whites as the numbers indicate. My question is what is the basis of the "nearly half" claim.

-ArtificialGrape

podwich
10-10-2012, 17:49
What is the basis for the "nearly half of all black pregnancies ended in abortion" conclusion?

-ArtificialGrape

I'm guessing he read it as 48.2/100.

juggy4711
10-10-2012, 18:11
I don't doubt that blacks abort at over 3 times the rate of whites as the numbers indicate. My question is what is the basis of the "nearly half" claim.

-ArtificialGrape

I suppose that's my point. When the rate is 3x the rates of whites and/or other ethnic groups does it really matter if the nearly half number is inaccurate?

ArtificialGrape
10-10-2012, 22:07
I suppose that's my point. When the rate is 3x the rates of whites and/or other ethnic groups does it really matter if the nearly half number is inaccurate?
There is nothing that I saw to suggest that nearly half of all black pregnancies end in abortion.

Even if the 48.2 was thought to be out of 100 (i.e. percent) rather than out of 1000 as posted, that would be 4.8% of black women aged 15-44 having an abortion in a given year. I found no connection to pregnancy rates.

So the "nearly half" appears to be off by a factor of 10 and for a completely different metric than based on the number of pregnancies.

So, I would say, yes, making a claim that appears to be grossly inaccurate still matters. Unless, of course, I missed numbers that tied abortion rate to pregnancy rate and it turned out to be nearly half.

If the statistic was regarding gun violence and the data supported a 3x claim, but it was then grossly mischaracterized as nearly half, then I think people might agree that words matter.

regards,
-ArtificialGrape

Guss
10-10-2012, 23:03
Don't worry, Mormons are working hard to bring up their numbers. Utah has the highest fertility rate.

kirgi08
10-10-2012, 23:11
:upeyes:

countrygun
10-11-2012, 00:49
Don't worry, Mormons are working hard to bring up their numbers. Utah has the highest fertility rate.

Be kind and do some research for me and find out for me where Utah ranks on the welfare statistics will you?

rgregoryb
10-11-2012, 08:01
Don't worry, Mormons are working hard to bring up their numbers. Utah has the highest fertility rate.

good for them, you scared?