Week in Review
For the first time in history a credit reporting agency (Standard and Poor’s) downgraded the U.S bond rating in 2011. Why? The agency said they needed to see $4 trillion in spending cuts over 10 years. The best Congress could do was $917 billion in spending cuts over 10 years. And the creation of a super-committee to find another $1.5 trillion. For a total of $2.417 trillion in spending cuts. At least, on paper. That never happened. After winning reelection the president held out for and got increases in tax rates. So he could increase spending.
So how did the U.S. get to where they needed to cut $4 trillion in spending? Well, a large part of it has to do with abortion (see 55,772,015 Abortions in America Since Roe vs. Wade in 1973 by Steven Ertelt posted 1/18/2013 on LifeNews.com).
The United States marks 40 years of legalized abortion in all fifty states at any time for any reason throughout pregnancy on January 22nd, the anniversary of the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision. Since that time, there have been approximately 55,772,015 abortions that have destroyed the lives of unborn children.
Taxpayers pay taxes. And how do we get taxpayers? By having babies. So when we aborted over 55 million babies the effect on tax revenue was profound. We can see how by making some assumptions. And doing a little math.
First of all, 55,772,015 abortions over 39 years come to on average 1,430,052 abortions a year. Dividing this number by two to pair off couples for baby-making that comes to 715,026 couples. Without abortion available we’ll assume about 80% of these couples will have children.
The first babies of the 715,026 enter the workforce 20 years later. So in that year the number of additional workers paying taxes equals 2,002,072 (1,430,052 + (0.8 X 715,026)). The following year the second child of this couple enters the workforce while another couple’s first child enters the workforce. This brings the additional workers paying taxes equal 3,146,114. And so on until each couple brings in three new taxpayers into the workforce. Over a decade the number of new workers paying taxes equals 110,685,999.
Assuming a median income of $50,000 these 110,685,999 taxpayers earn a total of $5.5 trillion over ten years. Assuming an effective federal income tax rate of 18% the total federal income tax these people would have paid equals approximately $996 billion.
Using the 12.4% Social Security tax rate (both employer and employee) the amount of Social Security taxes these people would have provided over 10 years equals approximately $686 billion.
Using the 2.9% Medicare tax rate the amount of Medicare taxes these people would have provided over 10 years equals approximately $160 billion.
Adding these taxes together (Social Security and Medicare) they add up to $847 billion. Adding this to the amount of federal income taxes brings the amount of taxes these people would have provided over ten years to about $1.8 trillion.
When they wrote Social Security and Medicare into law the average family size had fallen from around 5 to about 3.5 over a decade or so. If you take that $1.8 trillion and adjust it for 3.5 children (1.8/3 X 3.5) the lost tax revenue equals $2.15 trillion. At 4 children that lost tax revenue comes to $2.5 trillion. At 5 children that lost tax revenue comes to $3.1 trillion. At 6 children it’s $3.7 trillion.
Today’s seniors entered child-bearing age long before women’s liberation, birth control and abortion. So most women got married and had children. It is not uncommon for today’s seniors to come from families of 10 children or more. This is significant because when the actuaries set up Social Security and Medicare they assumed these trends would continue. But they didn’t. The birth rate (and the population growth rate) declined since Social Security and Medicare became law. Causing the population to age. More people are now leaving the workforce and collecting Social Security and Medicare benefits than there are workers entering the workforce to pay for them.
Abortion has been a part of this decline. In a current 10-year projection we are seeing anywhere from $1.8 trillion to $3.7 trillion in lost tax revenue due to abortion. If Roe v. Wade didn’t legalize abortion and the Left didn’t assault the family (encouraging women NOT to get married or have children) during the Seventies as radical feminism took off there would have been a lot more births. Perhaps as many as those actuaries thought there would be when they calculated the costs of Social Security and Medicare.
If normal family patterns had continued not only would these abortions not have happened families may have had more children. Producing more taxpayers. There were 3,136,965 live births in 1973. The average family size then was about 2.5. If you divide the number of births by average family size you get about 1,254,786 families having children. If each of these families had one additional child that additional 1,254,786 children would be approximately 87.7% of the average number of abortions. If these children grew up to have three children of their own we can calculate this additional tax revenue the same way we did for the loss revenue from abortion. Or we can multiply the loss revenue from abortion ($1.8 trillion) by 87.7% to approximate what those additional children in 1973 would contribute in a ten-year projection today. Approximately $1.9 trillion. Adding the losses from abortion and families having one less child brings the total of loss tax revenue to $4.04 trillion. Which equals the $4 trillion S&P was looking for in spending cuts.
So what is the cause for America’s deficits? Is it because the rich aren’t paying their fair share in taxes? No. It’s because of abortion and birth control. And radical feminism. That attacked the family and encouraged women to do anything but get married and have children. Something FDR and his New Dealers never designed Social Security and Medicare to take into account. For FDR and his New Dealers were sexists. As are Social Security and Medicare. These programs require women to marry and have children to stay solvent.