Amoxtli

It is about protecting the sanctity of human life. Most abortions are used as birth control because they are unwanted liabilities. They are not even considered investments into civilization. I give 2 anecdotes of two "accidents" that graduated from high school early and went on to go with productive lives. These two "accidents" are good for civilization, not bad. From the perspective of selfishness and lack of sense of duty, it is always what we want versus what we need. That is the problem with democrat thinking, and why they don't know how to run a government. It is why the issue comes up that younger generations have to pay more for less service because social services are burdened on younger generations than the people who actually benefitted from it. Abortion actually weakens democrat states in the long term because their fertility rates are even lower and if they leave Republican states because of abortion, it simply purifies the state from people who are for their own interests over the collective interest of the state. That is not to say that abortion is an inherently bad policy, but you apply the when, and where, you need it. For example, overpopulation can be a problem; a strain on resources. Red states are already gaining population increases due to immigration, bringing in more wealth, and higher incomes, than they are losing. Population, wealth, and high incomes are the necessary ingredients for a powerful state. This is true in international politics, and no different in competing states within a union.

Correct. Labor is the most valuable natural resource on Earth.

I said spending is an aggregate measure of GDP. You can't even debate honestly and imply you are honest by saying other people are dishonest. It is best you are covered with a veil and blocked. Labor itself isn't value. Value is the end product. Every country has labor. The productivity of that labor is not equal. This is what leftist don't understand about the price of labor; it is not due to the labor itself, but the value that comes out the other end. This is why labor is unequal... and why your statement is nonsensical. No point in debating somebody in economics when they don't know how an economy works. I am not going to waste my time, when blocking is much more efficient.

Kroger and Albertsons don't dominate the grocery market. A monopoly is a company that is in a market devoid of competition. Who shops at Krogers or Albertson's these days? I haven't stepped into either one in decades. Hyperbole and hysteria creation is all this is. If they do manage to merge, it doesn't bother me one bit because I will never shop there. The article is correct. The only people who care are capitalist-haters and zealous bureaucrats.

Including American citizens in the cost of illegal immigrants is dishonest.

It is actually honest. You measure what is paid in versus paid out. Many immigrants come with children. Those people need education services immediately if they are to assimilate into the flow of productivity. They also take healthcare dollars. These are all legitimate costs. Law enforcement costs money and pulled away from normal operation. Immigrants need to be processed. Property owners pay taxes to have law enforcement to protect property. Again, all legitimate costs. But let us examine your logic, if migrants didn't generate net revenues positively in their country of origin, what makes you think they generate a net positive in the new host country? If they didn't generate a net positive for their country of origin, like a failed state like Venezuela, by which evidence do you use to determine they are indeed productive enough? Furthermore, why do municipalities like NYC have to cut services? Why do they have to evict migrants from shelters? The coordination and logistics of feeding them and find them shelter, getting them the proper healthcare, all at no cost to them. Resources are not unlimited and because of that, these new peoples drive up spending that has to be paid for by the native or local populations. If the federal government does not want to fulfill its immigration policy with federal dollars, offload the costs to local governments, what does that say about the scarcity of resources?

Left-wingers are correct that unfettered immigration boosts GDP, because it boosts total spending, even if it means most of it is by taxpayers paying for these new peoples. Using their logic, we should take in all the people in poverty in the world, and boost the GDP to astronomical levels by funding all of it.