Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Abortion and Crime

  1. #1

    Default Abortion and Crime




    Interesting short video from a University of Chicago economist. He makes a persuasive case that legalized abortion caused a substantial decrease in crime. Roe V Wade went into law in 1973. Crime started to drop in 1991 as there were fewer unwanted children turning 18. The states that legalized abortion a few years before 1973 saw a reduction in crime starting in the late 80's. Also states with the greatest ease of abortion experienced the greatest drops in crime. Romania banned abortion in the 60's and crime doubled over the next 25 years as the rate of child birth increased.
    Last edited by Krugminator2; 10-11-2017 at 10:07 PM.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by juleswin View Post
    You do know that you [dannno] are a moron right?
    Quote Originally Posted by juleswin View Post
    I love Che because...
    Quote Originally Posted by juleswin View Post
    ...he did that which I was too cowardly afraid to do
    Quote Originally Posted by juleswin View Post
    Just for the record, 99% of the time I say "In my country........" I am actually messing with you people because I know you guys have absolutely no idea what happens in my country.

    Quiz: Test Your "Income" Tax IQ!


    Short Income Tax Video

    The Income Tax Is An Excise, And Excise Taxes Are Privilege Taxes

    The Federalist Papers, No. 15:

    Except as to the rule of apportionment, the United States have an indefinite discretion to make requisitions for men and money; but they have no authority to raise either by regulations extending to the individual citizens of America.

  4. #3

    Default

    I can't watch right now but this topic was covered by Steven Levitt in Freakonomics, and then rebutted by John Lott in Freedomnomics.
    Lott's rebuttal was basically that the time period in question also coincided with relaxation of gun laws.
    There are no crimes against people.
    There are only crimes against the state.
    And the state will never, ever choose to hold accountable its agents, because a thing can not commit a crime against itself.

  5. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fisharmor View Post
    I can't watch right now but this topic was covered by Steven Levitt in Freakonomics, and then rebutted by John Lott in Freedomnomics.
    Lott's rebuttal was basically that the time period in question also coincided with relaxation of gun laws.
    Here's Levitt's rebuttal to Lott. http://freakonomics.com/2005/05/15/a...d-you-believe/

    Now let’s talk about John Lott for a minute. Along with John Whitley, he wrote a paper on abortion and crime. It is so loaded with inaccurate claims, errors and statistical mistakes that I hate to even provide a link to it, but for the sake of completeness you can find it here. Virtually nothing in this paper is correct, and it is no coincidence that four years later it remains unpublished. In a letter to the editor at Wall Street Journal, Lott claims that our results are driven by the particular measure of abortions that we used in the first paper. I guess he never bothered to read our response to Joyce in which we show in Table 1 that the results are nearly identical when we use his preferred data source. It is understandable that he could make this argument five years ago, but why would he persist in making it in 2005 when it has been definitively shown to be false? (I’ll let you put on your Freakonomics-thinking-hat and figure out the answer to that last question.) As Lott and Whitley are by now well aware, the statistical results they get in that paper are an artifact of some bizarre choices they made and any reasonable treatment of the data returns our initial results. (Even Ted Joyce, our critic, acknowledges that the basic patterns in the data we report are there, which Lott and Whitley were trying to challenge.)

  6. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krugminator2 View Post
    ...What you quoted is the sum of his response. In other words, he said it was all factually incorrect and just expects us to believe him.
    That is a pretty big warning sign, in my experience.
    There are no crimes against people.
    There are only crimes against the state.
    And the state will never, ever choose to hold accountable its agents, because a thing can not commit a crime against itself.

  7. #6

    Default

    I have no reason to doubt this is true. I think slavery also reduces crime. Doesn't mean it's the right thing to do though.
    Last edited by EBounding; 10-12-2017 at 06:29 AM.
    Protest the NSA! Send encrypted e-mails!
    My PGP Key
    PGP Fingerprint: 3A2E 6218 3722 3701 09C9 54CA 9BB3 104C 5049 B6B2






Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02-13-2017, 02:47 AM
  2. Replies: 100
    Last Post: 01-21-2015, 03:50 AM
  3. Replies: 47
    Last Post: 04-02-2013, 02:30 PM
  4. 'Anyone who does not fight war crime is condoning war crime'
    By Ex Post Facto in forum Individual Rights Violations: Case Studies
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-26-2008, 06:19 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •