Roe v. Wade - negative population growth and Economic Crisis
Since Roe v. Wade (1973), nearly 50 million babies have been killed. This is 50 million people who will not exist in the future, grow up, get jobs, pay taxes, get married and have children, etc. They represent about 125 million people who will not exist in the future. Close to 40% of the current population of 300 million people. The tipping point occurs in about 2013 - that is, one generation from 1973. The real purpose of Roe v Wade, was to selectively reduce the population to avert possible famine caused by overpopulation. Otherwise, our population would now be around 400 million. The government (or somebody) believed that we could not grow enough food to feed 400 million people. That was a flawed theory. Projections from current technology show that there is enough agriculturally viable land to feed more than that.
If you subtract 40% of the future population, one might expect a 40% contraction of the economy. Right now, population growth in the U.S. would be negative, if it were not for immigration. Any society with negative population growth will eventually cease to exist, or will be taken over by others because of weakness. Expect this to happen in countries like China and India, which both have negative population growth. Famine occurs not necessarily in places with excessively high population, but in ones with negative population growth. That is, ones where more people die than are born. Eventually, there are not enough people of productive age to support the ones that are non-productive.
This is where we are in the U.S. today. As the senior citizens (like me) live to be older because of better medical care and nutrition, the younger ones to work and support us are diminishing. The next step in population reduction to prevent famine is to selectively reduce the number of old people. The Eskimos solve this problem by telling grandma to go take a walk in a snowstorm. I wonder what the method will be in the U.S? Assisted suicide? Gas chambers?
Jim Houchens
Comments