Prisoner#1 said:

Enlil said:

I'm aware of all of that...and I'm not the one that did the study...But I am telling you that the study controls for all of the popular theoretical factors...

On top of that, I know a guy who personally spoke with a chick from a top secret government organization...and she told him that abortion was legalized for the SOLE PURPOSE of reducing violent crime.

---

the study cant control for shit because it doesnt have a second planet with
identical histories only deciding to maintain a ban on abortion. this whole
thing was part of a book called freakanomics, it was written by an economist
and a law professor, it's also been 'debunked' due to statistical errors
and all it really does is try and explain away other factors. Levitt even
admitted the error and of course tried to say the people that discovered
the error were also wrong


http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB113314261192407815-HLjarwtM95Erz45QPP0pDWul8rc_20061127.html?mod=tff_main_tff_top

BTW, the reptilians wouldnt allow legalized abortion, they're harvesting the
fetuses and growing them in liquid cultures to make them tender, like veal

---

Enlil said:

You know as well as I do that no statistical causation analysis can ever be positively proven beyond a shadow of a doubt..

I simply said there is strong evidence...and there is very strong evidence...

---

Prisoner#1 said:

Enlil said:

You know as well as I do that no statistical causation analysis can ever be positively proven beyond a shadow of a doubt..

I simply said there is strong evidence...and there is very strong evidence...

---

and by the authors own admission there was a large error that weakened that evidence greatly

---

Quote:

Mr. Levitt should have counted arrests on a per-capita basis. Instead, he counted overall arrests. After he adjusted for both factors, Mr. Foote says, the abortion effect disappeared.

---

Prisoner#1 said:

Quote:

Mr. Levitt should have counted arrests on a per-capita basis. Instead, he counted overall arrests. After he adjusted for both factors, Mr. Foote says, the abortion effect disappeared.

---

---

lazyfingers said:

Ideally children will earn a living after existing for a while. They are also fun to have around. You sound like some sort of baby eating monster, and you've been arguing to have the government kill little kids for like 3 days. Buy your own abortion.

---

Prisoner#1 said:

except that's false and at the current high end of $600 a year the 20% that
a person would pay is $10/mo. you certainly dont seem to know much about
what is and isnt covered and simply buy into what ever liberal media tells
you... BTW, did you know that planned parenthood provides birth control?
yeah, free of charge, out of public funds, so does the health department,
they've all done this for decades... are you still under the impression
that insurance doesnt cover birth control? in 28 state's it's actually a
requirement and most companies see it as an investment because they'd pay
out more to cover a pregnancy and other health problems than they would in
paying for birth control

---

Quote:

remember when I mentioned wasteful, redundant legislation?

---

Quote:

it's been well known for many years
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2671
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/culture/articles/050623/23cpb.htm
http://www.britannica.com/blogs/2011/04/public-broadcasting-biased/
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1180

---

Quote:

what defines quality of life?

---

Quote:

I dont need to think about it, but maybe you should because the way you've
phrased it is that if women can have birth control then more people will be
on welfare, you're also not thinking about the fact that women have access
to birth control but it's up to them to actually obtain and use it. same
with crime, I can be poor and own a gun but that doesnt mean I have to use
it, it doesnt mean I have to become a criminal

---

Quote:

so you believe that abortion resulted in the drop in crime rates?

well, let's see

[image]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-sFz04kOybb4/TbWP3VONLSI/AAAAAAAAN18/3qqEywGcH54/s1600/Incarcerated Americans.png[/image]

---

Quote:

maybe crime dropped because people were being locked up and mandatory
minimums were being put into place...

---

Quote:

I'm sorry, what part of "the health department provides birth control" is
so difficult to understand, of course the health department calls it "family planning services" so why again do I need to pay again for people's birth control when there's already more than a single system in place that's available to everyone

---

Quote:

again you show you have no clue what you're talking about

---

Prisoner#1 said:

how can you work with data that's wrong and come to the right answers?

---

Crystal G said:

Um, a person would only pay 20% of their birth control if they had INSURANCE. We've been talking about people who haven't had insurance this whole time.

---

Quote:

In 28 states it's a requirement that insurance covers birth control? Show me please. Sounds like some shit Rush Limbaugh would say without substantiating it.

---

Quote:

Quote:

remember when I mentioned wasteful, redundant legislation?

---

If you were truly about minimizing waste, then you would want to promote easy access for women to have birth control and abortions. Children cost the state a hell of a lot more than birth control does.

---

Quote:

Quote:

what defines quality of life?

---

Access to education, culture, health, food, shelter, and money. You can't deny these things don't contribute to the quality of life.

---

Quote:

Quote:

I'm sorry, what part of "the health department provides birth control" is
so difficult to understand, of course the health department calls it "family planning services" so why again do I need to pay again for people's birth control when there's already more than a single system in place that's available to everyone

---

That's not my question. Shouldn't you, as somebody who is against the state paying for health services or birth control, be AGAINST Planned parenthood? So are you against PP, yes or no?

---

Quote:

Quote:

again you show you have no clue what you're talking about

---

What part of my statement was false?

-Bush and Regan DID approve mass tax cuts
-Currently middle class America DOES pay for the majority of taxes


Again, I ask, what part of my statement was bullshit?

---

Enlil said:

Prisoner#1 said:

how can you work with data that's wrong and come to the right answers?

---

That's just it...it's only one set of data that was wrong...the study approached the analysis several different ways with many different sets of data...This error only affects one of those ways, and it was a relatively minor one...

This is where we get to the point that the only way to go further is to go into every detail, which isn't going to happen here...

---

Prisoner#1 said:

the methodology was also wrong because they didnt look at the per capita
crime rates, they looked at overall crime data, remember when birth rates
were dropping and it wasnt due to abortion being legal

---

Prisoner#1 said:

start wrong, end right? unlikely

---

Prisoner#1 said:

maybe you should make use of google to show how the other 9 are accurate when
they started with numbers being inaccurate to start with, remember, 2 big
mistakes... methodology and numbers

---

Prisoner#1 said:

and you dont understand why your claims arent credible in this, you wont name
the study and author(s) you wont cite anything, you'll simply disagree and
claim that there were 10 methodologies and only one was in error. you of
course say that's accurate but give no foundation other than to say it's in a
study... not like a study has never been wrong or highly biased before so of
course it must be accurate

---

Quote:

Prisoner#1 said:can you simply not accept that you're being lied to by your choice of news
media, if rush made that claim then that would make rush right, yet again,
but you dont listen to rush so you wouldnt know what rush says, let me fill
you in on a little secret... I dont listen to him either, I dont get my
news from fox, I dont listen to political commentators so I have no clue
what he would and wouldnt say

---

Quote:

wait... even the liberal media has covered it so apparently you only get
this info from the politicians and the liberal 'pundits' on TV, the Rush
Limbaughs and Glenn Becks of liberal media

---

Quote:

I'm all for abortion, I wish they'd make it legal until the child is at
least 45 year s of age, I'm not proposing a ban on abortion, I dont want
to see an abortion ban returned what I want to see is people using their
fucking heads before they start fucking and when they choose to ignore the
fact that when you fuck you risk pregnancy, then they need to come off the
hip and pay pit of their own pocket for their abortion since they chose
abortion and stupidity as their preferred methods of birth control, maybe
they should get the 'sperm donor' to cough up a few bucks to help pay for
it, after all, it does take two

---

Quote:

then the US has a great quality of life, seems that in sweden they pay 60%,
kinda contradictory to your claims that the US has the highest tax rate,
did you get that from the biased public broadcasting? with 60% in tax you'd think that would be less access to money

---

Uhh, I said the US has the LOWEST tax rates in the world compared to other first world countries. If I said higher accidentally, then that was a mistake. I meant lower.

Also no, I've visited Sweden, and I consider that society to be utopian. Even though they have some of the highest tax rates, because they use that tax money to actually give back to society instead of spending it on the military, most people are middle class and virtually everybody there is incredibly wealthy. Yea, I'm sure Swedes are living such a horrible life because they pay such a high tax.

Quote:

how much easier can it get than a trip to the local health department, why
shit, that's as easy as going to a doctard, do they want them hand
delivered by shirtless  bike messengers in short shorts or something? you seem to keep ignoring the fact that contraceptives are easily accessible

maybe they'd be embarrassed to go to the health department, isnt that sad

---

Quote:

what part of "the health department provides birth control" is so difficult
to understand, are you so against easy access to contraceptives that the
health department shouldnt even be considered an option

---

Crystal G said:

If 28 states require birth control to be covered, that means that almost half of the other states have no coverage then. They're trying to change laws for the other half that doesn't have access, obviously.

---

Quote:

People fuck for a lot of different reasons, and will always continue to fuck despite intellect. Which is precisely why birth control is necessary.

---

Quote:

Also no, I've visited Sweden, and I consider that society to be utopian. Even though they have some of the highest tax rates, because they use that tax money to actually give back to society instead of spending it on the military, most people are middle class and virtually everybody there is incredibly wealthy. Yea, I'm sure Swedes are living such a horrible life because they pay such a high tax.

---

Quote:

I am not aware the health dept covers birth control everywhere.

---

Quote:

Again, that's NOT my question. Shouldn't you, as somebody who is against state paid medicine, be AGAINST health departments and Planned Parenthood dispensing free birth control? Howcome one's okay and another one isn't? Please explain.

---