Sanctity of Life (Abortion Megathread)

gctest50

hinault wrote: »

Where in the video did the doctor mention "transport/transportation costs"?
......

without even looking at it - unless you are obsessed you will assume that :

slight change in procedures
& it costs money to get things transported


eg:
i donated body to science
if I drop dead anywhere except beside the slab in the university someone will have to transport the corpse
the university will pay for this transport

they also request no-one does any embalming (there's yer change in procedures)


not rocket science really

Delirium

hinault wrote: »

Where in the video did the doctor mention "transport/transportation costs"?

Please quote the statement that you claim the doctor made in the video.
Alternatively please quote the time where on the video the doctor said what you claim.

PP = Planned Parenthood.

PP: You know, I would throw a number out, I would say it’s probably anywhere from $30 to $100 [per specimen], depending on the facility and what’s involved. It just has to do with space issues, are you sending someone there who’s going to be doing everything, is there shipping involved, is somebody gonna have to take it out. You know, I think everybody just wants, it’s really just about if anyone were ever to ask them, “What do you do for this $60? How can you justify that? Or are you basically just doing something completely egregious, that you should be doing for free.” So it just needs to be justifiable. And, look, we have 67 affiliates. They all have different practice environments, different staff,and so that number —

Top of page 4 of transcript provided by group that also recorded the video.

hinault

SW wrote: »

PP = Planned Parenthood..................

So you're saying that the doctor referencing "shipping" is a reference to transport costs.
Your conclusion may, or may not, be accurate.

Let's say your conclusion is correct, for argument sake, these butchers make explicit reference in your quote to "per specimen" and a price range "$30 to $100".
The more "specimens" these killers "ship" the more efficient the economies of scale for "shipping".
Harvesting is a profitable business.

Overheal

hinault wrote: »

So you're saying that the doctor referencing "shipping" is a reference to transport costs.
Your conclusion may, or may not, be accurate.

""

Timberrrrrrrr

hinault wrote: »

So you're saying that the doctor referencing "shipping" is a reference to transport costs.
Your conclusion may, or may not, be accurate.

What else would it mean?

Let's say your conclusion is correct, for argument sake, these butchers make explicit reference in your quote to "per specimen" and a price range "$30 to $100".
The more "specimens" these killers "ship" the more efficient the economies of scale for "shipping".
Harvesting is a profitable business.

Cost to send something to the next state $30

Cost to send something across the country $100

Where is the confusion here? Also your overuse of "" "" just makes your posts look childish. Thanks to the meme posted you will be now tagged as Dr Evil in my mind.

robdonn

hinault wrote: »

Let's say your conclusion is correct, for argument sake, these butchers make explicit reference in your quote to "per specimen" and a price range "$30 to $100".
The more "specimens" these killers "ship" the more efficient the economies of scale for "shipping".
Harvesting is a profitable business.

You are presuming that they have the facilities to house multiple "specimens" until they can "ship" them in bulk.

Great, now you've got me using pointless quotation marks...

MrPudding

hinault wrote: »

So you're saying that the doctor referencing "shipping" is a reference to transport costs.
Your conclusion may, or may not, be accurate.

Let's say your conclusion is correct, for argument sake, these butchers make explicit reference in your quote to "per specimen" and a price range "$30 to $100".
The more "specimens" these killers "ship" the more efficient the economies of scale for "shipping".
Harvesting is a profitable business.

They are butchers. They are doctors. They aren't killers. They are doctors.

MrP

Overheal

robdonn wrote: »

You are presuming that they have the facilities to house multiple "specimens" until they can "ship" them in bulk.

Great, now you've got me using pointless quotation marks...

Do you suppose fetal tissue would have a higher, or lower shelf life than orange juice? Its a crude way of wording the point, but thats it right there. You can't really just wait until you've got enough for a bulk shipment in all cases.

robdonn

Overheal wrote: »

You can't really just wait until you've got enough for a bulk shipment in all cases.

Exactly my point.

Delirium

hinault wrote: »

So you're saying that the doctor referencing "shipping" is a reference to transport costs.
Your conclusion may, or may not, be accurate.

Every day's a learning day:

The term shipping originally referred to transport by sea, but is extended in American English to refer to transport by land or air (International English: "carriage") as well.
Source

But I really doubt you didn't know what it was in reference to seeing as you couldn't provide a logic alternative to support your contention that shipping wasn't referring to transportation.

Let's say your conclusion is correct, for argument sake, these butchers make explicit reference in your quote to "per specimen" and a price range "$30 to $100".
The more "specimens" these killers "ship" the more efficient the economies of scale for "shipping".
Harvesting is a profitable business.

It's not difficult to understand that less shipments mean less cost for whomever is paying the freight bill.

Also, Planned Parenthood (and their medical staff) offer more services than abortion. Services which are used by 2.7 million Americans. Abortion accounts for about 5% of their services. The pro-life politicans/groups who want to shut Planned Parenthood down are being myopic.

They would be denying the poorer sections of the US affordable access to STI testing/ treatment, as well as cancer screening and treatment. Infographic from 2009 to illustrate the services.

Overheal

The percentage on wikipedia is 3%, and according to that infograph only a portion of that 3% is actual abortions being performed, with the rest being abortion related counseling services which I'd have to assume makes up at least half of that figure (mandatory counseling session prior to performing abortion).

Which means that in 2009, PP performed somewhere in the range of less than 200,000 abortions.

Globally, 44 million abortions are performed annually.

Kev W

hinault wrote: »

So you're saying that the doctor referencing "shipping" is a reference to transport costs.

Unless you think the doctors are writing erotic fan fiction about fetuses there's not really a lot of too much for interpretation there.

Not a NSA agent

Overheal wrote: »

Do you suppose fetal tissue would have a higher, or lower shelf life than orange juice? Its a crude way of wording the point, but thats it right there. You can't really just wait until you've got enough for a bulk shipment in all cases.

Maybe they salt it? Make baby bacon and store it in the canteen fridge. I'd say that would help increase the shelf life. Im assuming that they eat babies in PP. I have no proof but they could be doing it so probably are.

Turtwig

Overheal wrote: »

Do you suppose fetal tissue would have a higher, or lower shelf life than orange juice? Its a crude way of wording the point, but thats it right there. You can't really just wait until you've got enough for a bulk shipment in all cases.

Not a NSA agent wrote: »

Maybe they salt it? Make baby bacon and store it in the canteen fridge. I'd say that would help increase the shelf life. Im assuming that they eat babies in PP. I have no proof but they could be doing it so probably are.

MOD:

Folks, I appreciate this is meant to be reductio ad absurdum. It's also however a little crass (especially the latter post quoted). This is a rather sensitive topic so please be mindful of the choice of analogies you choose to use.

hinault

SW wrote: »

Every day's a learning day:

Apparently not in your case, though.

SW wrote: »

But I really doubt you didn't know what it was in reference to seeing as you couldn't provide a logic alternative to support your contention that shipping wasn't referring to transportation.

I'm not here to second guess or to put alternatives to what that doctor said.

Shipping could mean and can mean a lot of different things.

SW wrote: »

It's not difficult to understand that less shipments mean less cost for whomever is paying the freight bill.

No.

More "shipments" means more profit for the butchers. Bulk "shipments" are clearly more "cost effective" (ie. more profitable).

SW wrote: »

Also, Planned Parenthood (and their medical staff) offer more services than abortion.

I couldn't care less about the other "services" that these butchers supply.

These people are killing unborn and partially born human lives.
And they're selling the harvested remains from those that they have killed.

Delirium

hinault wrote: »

Apparently not in your case, though.


I'm not here to second guess or to put alternatives to what that doctor said.

Shipping could mean and can mean a lot of different things.

Interesting claim. Give one plausible alternative to 'shipping' that isn't pertaining to transport.

No.

More "shipments" means more profit for the butchers. Bulk "shipments" are clearly more "cost effective" (ie. more profitable).

You realise that Planned Parenthood are a non-profit so there's no profit to speak of. Rather there is money saved to be used elsewhere in the services they provide, be it cancer/STI/diabetes screening etc.

I couldn't care less about the other "services" that these butchers supply.

These people are killing unborn and partially born human lives.
And they're selling the harvested remains from those that they have killed.

Please provide evidence that Planned Parenthood are illegally selling foetal tissue. And what is your source given some States have already established that there is no illegal sales happening.

hinault

SW wrote: »

You realise that Planned Parenthood are a non-profit so there's no profit to speak of.

These butchers statutory filings show that they're earning vast profits annually.

SW wrote: »

Please provide evidence that Planned Parenthood are illegally selling foetal tissue.

The released videos depict their staff selling the harvested remains from the babies that they kill.

Delirium

hinault wrote: »

These butchers statutory filings show that they're earning vast profits annually.

which is reused for the services they provide and costs associated with those services. They don't pay out to shareholders.

The released videos depict their staff selling the harvested remains from the babies that they kill.

Have they released a new video showing this? The first two definitely didn't. can you link to, and state where in the video, this admission of illegal sales is captured on camera?

hinault

SW wrote: »

which is reused for the services they provide and costs associated with those services. They don't pay out to shareholders.

Lots of commercial entities reinvest their profits back in to their own business.
Retained earnings is not an unusual concept.

SW wrote: »

Have they released a new video showing this? The first two definitely didn't. can you link to, and state where in the video, this admission of illegal sales is captured on camera?

You quoted the transcript earlier.

Kev W

hinault wrote: »

Lots of commercial entities reinvest their profits back in to their own business.
Retained earnings is not an unusual concept.


It's not unusual for a commercial entity but it is mandatory for a non-profit.


You quoted the transcript earlier.

Said quote containing no reference to or admission to illegal activity. So where is the evidence you spoke of?

Delirium

hinault wrote: »

Lots of commercial entities reinvest their profits back in to their own business.
Retained earnings is not an unusual concept.

via google since you're struggling with the concept of non-profits:

A nonprofit organization (NPO, also known as a non-business entity) is an organization that uses its surplus revenues to further achieve its purpose or mission, rather than distributing its surplus income to the organization's directors (or equivalents) as profit or dividends.

You quoted the transcript earlier.

Nowhere in that transcript was there an admission of illegal selling of tissue. If you believe there is, then you can quote the text from the transcript or give a time reference in the video. Should be no problem for you since it's a standard of posting you require of others.

Overheal

Money also exchanged hands when you donate blood, just saying.

hinault

Overheal wrote: »

Money also exchanged hands when you donate blood, just saying.

Nope.

Not in this country.

Jayop

Some of you guys have more patience than I ever would when trying to explain the difference between a creditable unbiased source and a pro-life blog.

Amazing how blind opinions and strong beliefs can make people sometimes.

hinault

Delirium wrote: »

via google since you're struggling with the concept of non-profits:

Incorrect.

Explain to me how Planned Parenthoods net assets increased from $1.159 billion at the start of it's financial year, to $1.244 billion by the end of the same year?

Jayop

hinault wrote: »

Incorrect.

Explain to me how Planned Parenthoods net assets increased from $1.159 billion at the start of it's financial year, to $1.244 billion by the end of the same year?

Assets and profits are different things.

Your local gaa club will have assets but it won't have profits.

hinault

Jayop wrote: »

Assets and profits are different things.

Your local gaa club will have assets but it won't have profits.

The increase in net assets is as a result of net surplus between what was earned and what was spent ie. profit, in that financial year.

These butchers earned $1.246 billion and they spent, net, $1,161 billion, giving a profit €85 million.

That's how net assets increased from $1.159 billion at the start of the financial year, to $1.244 billion by the end of the same year.

Peregrinus

hinault wrote: »

Incorrect.

Explain to me how Planned Parenthoods net assets increased from $1.159 billion at the start of it's financial year, to $1.244 billion by the end of the same year?

You've posted the answer yourself. They had a surplus of revenue over expenses of $87.4 million. Since, as a non-profit, they are not permitted to pay their surplus to owners/shareholders/founders in the form of dividends, it goes into reserves, available to fund the activities of the enterprise in future years. Accumulated reserves are included in net assets. Hence, net assets go up.

In any year in which expenses exceed revenue, net assets will go down.

Peregrinus

hinault wrote: »

Nope.

Not in this country.

Yes, it does.

The blood donor isn't paid, but the blood transfusion service sells the blood to hospitals. How else do you think they fund their operation?

hinault

Peregrinus wrote: »

You've posted the answer yourself. They had a surplus of revenue over expenses of $87.4 million. Since, as a non-profit, they are not permitted to pay their surplus to owners/shareholders/founders in the form of dividends, it goes into reserves, available to fund the activities of the enterprise in future years. Accumulated reserves are included in net assets. Hence, net assets go up.

In any year in which expenses exceed revenue, net assets will go down.

The point being that a company cannot reinvest a loss to increase it's net assets.

Therefore a company can only reinvest a profit to increase it's net assets.
Which is what Planned Parenthood does with it's profits.