This is a non-issue. Analysis has shown that children are born to parents who, statistically, can have more children. The cost benefit ratio is such that beyond a certain level of capital investment into a child, the investment will not yield a substantial outcome. It therefore logically makes sense to both the parents as well as society, that up to a certain age, there is no benefit in investing large sums of money just to keep a child alive. It therefore follows that the child be replaced by a new unit capable of withstanding certain biological challenges without the need for medical care. In the long run, society benefits from these choices as it produces a class of people that will produce much with little investment. It's my pleasure to ally your fears. I'm from the government and I'm here to help.
- Quotes of the day Allahpundit 2 hours ago
- Yep: MSNBC would react quite differently if Tea Partiers threw rocks at them Mary Katharine Ham 3 hours ago
- Finally: George W. Bush takes the ALS Ice Bucket challenge Allahpundit 4 hours ago
- WaPo/ABC poll: Majority approves of airstrikes in Iraq … Ed Morrissey 5 hours ago
- Report: Two times as many British Muslims fighting for ISIS as with U.K. armed forces Noah Rothman 5 hours ago
- All in: Red-state Democrat Mark Pryor launches rare pro-ObamaCare midterm ad Allahpundit 6 hours ago