May 04, 2005

Letter to the Paper ILIV

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) is engaging in a brand of macabre hypocrisy by expressing deep concern over a possible 42% benefit for children born 5 years from now when he has no problems with a 100% benefit cut for the quarter to a third of children who won't be born because they'll be aborted.

Michael Williams is on the case and I wrote the following in comments

Social Security solvency heavily depends on birth rates. If total fertility rates weren't 2.1 but 4.1, we wouldn't have a social security solvency problem. We could probably even lower the SS tax rate. This is the ponzi scheme nature of the current program. It is abortion and other fertility altering decisions that have upset the balance of the program.

You can't build up a social program that utterly depends on high fertility and then call fertility discussions out of bounds regarding its continuance. It's just not intellectually honest.

The idea of protection of the unconceived is not held by anybody that I know of and is, in fact, morally and biologically silly. There's an awful lot of sperm that goes to waste in even perfectly normal sexual activity that is meant to result in a child.

As for Sen. Schumer, his politics results in a selective 100% reduction in social security benefits of certain members of that age cohort that he is complaining about in his own letter. This selective reduction in benefits tends to disparately impact minorities and the poor. The rank hypocrisy of piously protesting a supposed 42% benefit for some of that age cohort while backing a 100% benefit cut for others deserves not only comment, but derision.

The title of this post with its roman numeral pun is an absolute coincidence, I swear.

Posted by TMLutas at May 4, 2005 10:51 AM