Macroeconomics of abortion

Investment Analysis Clubs Macro Economic Trends and Risks
1

https://iwpr.org/iwpr-issues/reproductive-health/the-economi…

Legal access to abortion increased the economic security of women. It increased the educational success of black women. It increased the number of women in the workforce.

The leaked supreme court opinion on Roe vs. Wade would also logically apply to the earlier decision on birth control. It is only a matter of time before a state outlaws birth control; several have already passed laws against abortion that will go into effect when (if?) Roe is overturned.

If you think we have a labor shortage now, just wait.

27 Likes
2

If you think we have a labor shortage now, just wait.

With no abortions there will be more labor…

The Captain

4 Likes
3

With no abortions there will be more labor…

No there won’t, not for another 18 years, at least.

In addition, although there might be fewer abortions, there won’t be “no” abortions, there will just be illegal, risky ones.

15 Likes
4

In addition, although there might be fewer abortions, there won’t be “no” abortions, there will just be illegal, risky ones.

And legal ones in states where it is legal.

DB2

4 Likes
5

If you think we have a labor shortage now, just wait.

WilliB,

I absolutely hate this aspect of America. The “plan” is to USE poor people. It is a very purposeful type of economic management. The babies to be born often will have a very bleak future. The women as well a bleak future financially. Using women is a norm in this world. The decision doubles down on that.

6 Likes
6

With no abortions there will be more labor…

WilliB,

Men are well aware of the plan. To not generalize…not all men.

7

Well, I saw this OP before it was FA’d.

In case you missed it, Justice Roberts has confirmed the draft is genuine, but preliminary. The language in it is pretty harsh, so I expect that may change to more genteel wording, but not the primary thrust.

My first thought is there would be a sharp increase in the number of neglected/abused/murdered children. There seems to be a lot of little kids being murdered by their parents now.

This case happened only a few miles from my home.

Michigan mother sentenced for murder, torture of 4-year-old daughter

Evans said never in her 21 years on the bench had she seen a child sustain injuries inflicted upon Gabby, including tooth decay, burn injuries, vomit in her lungs and traumatic alopecia – her hair was pulled out of her scalp while she was alive. Evans said the ultimate cause of death was septic shock.

https://www.fox2detroit.com/news/michigan-mother-sentenced-f…

More unwanted children means more horrors like this.

As others have commented, more unwanted children means more women withdrawn from the workforce, because child care is prohibitively expensive for many in Shinyland. Some would say that is a good thing, as “traditional family values” dictate a “woman’s place is in the home”, and blame juvenile delinquency on lack of stay-at-home moms.

Note for Tim: see what I mean? There is no such thing as “settled law” in Shinyland.

Steve

13 Likes
8

If you think we have a labor shortage now, just wait.

Given the relative scales involved, I’m not sure there will be much of a labor force impact.

Figures vary, but approximately 600K-800K pregnancies in the U.S. currently end in abortion. Figure (roughly) that about half the population lives in states where state regulation of abortion is not going to change, and some non-trivial portion of women who live in the remaining states will be able to travel to states where abortion remains legal. So for back-of-the envelope purposes, lets assume that somewhere between 100K-300K pregnancies that would have been terminated will not be. Not all women who give birth were in the labor force, and not all women that give birth leave the labor force - and not all babies grow up to enter the labor force, either. So the labor force impacts will be smaller than that, still.

By comparison, U.S. nonfarm employment is about 150 million people - about 1000x larger than the likely population switching from termination of pregnancy to completion.

So while the decision will likely have overwhelming consequences for a very large number of individuals (and thus should not be minimized), it’s not likely to have much of a macro effect on the labor market.

Albaby

4 Likes
9

Figure (roughly) that about half the population lives in states where state regulation of abortion is not going to change,

In Michigan, overturn will restore a 1931 law to force, which bans all abortions. The Gov says she will try to have that law overturned, but I take it as a given the legislature wants to keep it in place.

Some states are trying to reach outside of their borders. Missouri is pushing a law to make it illegal to perform an abortion on a Missouri resident anywhere, including in a state where the procedure is legal.

Even if twenty-odd states still have legal abortion, the next push will be for a ban at the Federal level.

The US has been running about 600K abortions/year, or about 11% of pregnancies. Some of those who have abortions may still be in school. What is the cost of interrupted education? How many will never return to school? Most will probably be lost to the workforce, because daycare is beyond their means to pay.

Worse yet, the cost to society of more neglected/abused/murdered children. How many of the kids that survive that sort of childhood end up as criminals? Once they have a prison record, what are their employment prospects?

By comparison, U.S. nonfarm employment is about 150 million people - about 1000x larger than the likely population switching from termination of pregnancy to completion.

At what age can you leave a kid at home alone, so mom can return to the workforce? 13? 15? Here in Michigan, it is illegal to leave a kid unattended under age 10.

Home Alone Rules by State

https://www.imom.com/home-alone-rules-state/

So multiply that 600K abortions by 10 years. Possibly as many as 6M lost to the workforce, or 4%. That is more than the current unemployment rate. I would assume that there are some people who have multiple abortions over a 10 year period, but I have no data on that.

Meanwhile, attempts at family leave laws beyond the current unpaid 12 weeks are blocked because they “burden” the JCs. Government paid child care is too socialistical for Shinyland. “Traditional family values” dictate women have no place in the workforce. Anyone else here read Gilder’s “Wealth and Poverty” back in the day? There were several professional women in my grad school class that read that book. There was, to put it mildly, vigorous discussion of Gilder’s defense of companies that refuse to give women a career path, based on the assumption they are only killing time working, until they quit to have children and become a stay-at-home mom.

Steve

9 Likes
10

With no abortions there will be more labor…

https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q…

The Captain
:innocent:

11

At what age can you leave a kid at home alone, so mom can return to the workforce? 13? 15? Here in Michigan, it is illegal to leave a kid unattended under age 10.

The overwhelming majority of mothers who have school age children work. Very few children of working parents are left at home alone. Most of them are in school. Others in pre-school child care, organized day care or after-care programs, or with nannies or other home child care workers. A non-trivial number are watched by non-working relatives.

This is part of why school closures were particularly hard for working parents with school-age kids. Typically, about two-thirds of mothers who live with their school-age children actively work. During the worst of the pandemic school closures, that fell to about 55%.

https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2021/03/moms-work-and…

I am not minimizing the burdens of having a young child and trying to hold down a job simultaneously. However, it’s simply not at all plausible that you’d end up with 6 million women leaving the labor force for ten years. Again, taking 600K abortions last year, somewhere close to half of the population lives in states where abortion will remain legal - and abortion rates are higher in blue states, since red states tend to make abortion maximally difficult within the boundaries of Roe. A non-trivial number of women will also be able to travel to states where it is permitted. Some non-trivial number of women who would have terminated their pregnancy aren’t in the workforce to begin with. And as noted above, a very large proportion of women who have children remain in the workforce.

All of which points to a relatively modest macro effect on labor force participation rates and the overall workforce.

2 Likes
12

there won’t be “no” abortions, there will just be illegal, risky ones.

That’s right. The craphole states will become even more of a hellscape.

Prior to Rowe, there were over 800,000 “botched abortions” per year in the US. And the states supporting the abortion ban are also the ones denying health care to poor folks by not doing the Obamacare Medicaid expansion.

intercst

7 Likes
13

Given the relative scales involved, I’m not sure there will be much of a labor force impact.

The direct idea is to have lowly paid people pushing the broom. It is not just one number or one plan. It is a way of life. It is purposeful propping up of a males in power. It goes hand in hand with not educating all people properly. It is an economic system built to use people as something akin to sharecroppers.

3 Likes
14

With no abortions there will be more labor…

Maybe not. Mothers may choose to stay home with their children. Possibly in poverty, which is why they might have preferred abortion.

And if you’re talking about the kids, we still have labor laws, so it will take at least 15 years before they enter the labor pool.

–Peter

15

Most of them are in school.

I got home from school around 3:30. Mom got home from work around 5:30. I could easily have burned the house down in those two hours. And what do you do when the spawn are on summer vacation?

Others in pre-school child care, organized day care or after-care programs, or with nannies or other home child care workers.

All that costs money. A lot of people don’t have that sort of money.

Michigan child care costs rival mortgage payments, some parents forced to make tough choices

the average cost of child care for a toddler in Michigan is $683 a month, and in metro Detroit often higher, with the average in Oakland County at $894 a month.

https://www.wxyz.com/news/michigan-child-care-costs-rival-mo…

That Oakland County child care costs as much as a person working at my local Arby’s, at the “labor shortage crisis” wage of $14/hr will gross in 64 hrs, a week and a half of work, assuming she can get 40 hours/week. What is she supposed to use to pay the rent/taxes/utilities? Food? If she takes a second/third job, that is more hours of child care to pay for. The obvious choice is to stay home with the spawn, and draw welfare.

If states like Michigan have another go at imposing a work requirement for Medicaid, mom is in an even tighter bind. The law that was overturned only provided an exemption for mothers with spawn under six years old. Again, that law had nothing to do with the welfare of the people. The intent was to force people to take the lousy jobs that had the “JCs” crying “no-one wants to work”.

somewhere close to half of the population lives in states where abortion will remain legal -

Again, you are assuming there will never, ever, be a federal ban. I expect a federal ban will be the next thing on the agenda, the moment the SCOTUS decision is made official.

Steve

10 Likes
16

And if you’re talking about the kids, we still have labor laws, so it will take at least 15 years before they enter the labor pool.

Great. Mom drops out of high school, never to return, to raise the spawn. And the kid drops out of school to work to help his mom. Just what Shinyland needs, more poorly educated people./sarcasm

Steve

8 Likes
17

And if you’re talking about the kids, we still have labor laws, so it will take at least 15 years before they enter the labor pool.

–Peter

Peter,

That was said before it is almost entirely missing the point.

Mothers and fathers will be held down, dropping out of schools, not getting promotions, working two or three jobs prior to an education, etc…the numbers are much higher and the impact is now.

18

Great. Mom drops out of high school, never to return, to raise the spawn. And the kid drops out of school to work to help his mom. Just what Shinyland needs, more poorly educated people./sarcasm

And in the mean time, what about the dads? Where did they go?

Wait, I think I know. They give the mom who can’t get an abortion the one-finger salute and carry on with their life as if nothing happened. Because they know mom is poor and can’t afford a paternity suit to collect some child support. A perfect ending here in Shinyland.

Did I forget to attach my own sarcasm emoji? Yes. Yes I did.

–Peter

6 Likes
19

Peter,

Plenty of couples stay together through thick and thin regardless of their ethnicity or socioeconomic standing. No need to assume you know strangers and what is done individually. Or if they are very poor or working hard or upper middle class in college.

There is a saying about economics, “it is only a recession if your neighbor is unemployed. It is a depression if you are unemployed”. The court is creating a lot of recessions unless it is your son or daughter.

20

I got home from school around 3:30. Mom got home from work around 5:30. I could easily have burned the house down in those two hours. And what do you do when the spawn are on summer vacation?

The same thing that every other working mom has to do. The overwhelming majority of women who live with their school age children are still in the workforce. Again, I’m not arguing that every single one of the women affected by the ruling (and their loved ones) will be able to remain in the workforce; rather, that most of them will. Empirically, having a young child (or children) doesn’t make it impossible to work outside the home, and most women with children still do.

Again, you are assuming there will never, ever, be a federal ban. I expect a federal ban will be the next thing on the agenda, the moment the SCOTUS decision is made official.

I’m not assuming there will never, ever, be a federal ban. But there certainly won’t be one any time in the next two and a half years, which is the earliest that the GOP could gain a trifecta at the federal level (a Democrat will wield the veto pen until early 2025) - with no guarantees that they’ll have the political power to either surmount a filibuster or nuke it. It could very well be decades before either political party has the ability to set abortion policy at the national level.

Albaby