An Immodest Proposal

No, I’m not blogging again, but I’m putting up this guest post as a Christmas card for you and yours in this, the Second Age of Newt. On behalf of Prof. Snift, this is dedicated to Amy Koch, Michael Brodkorb, Newt Gingrich and XXXmas lovers everywhere!

———

An Immodest Proposal

For creating new economic opportunities for the economically disadvantaged through legal reforms enabling the fast tracking of qualified youth into early employment

Guest posted by Jonathan Snift

One of the more depressing aspects of our down economy is on daily display in our day care centers, schools and playgrounds. Millions of children of all ages with nothing better to do all day than learn. But learn what? Shakespeare won’t get them a job, and there’s nothing they can do in math class that a calculator can’t do better. College prep? As if most of their underemployed parents could afford to send them to a community college, let alone a reputable four-year institution with a Greek system worthy of the name.

Republicans suggest we lower the minimum wage and jettison our child labor laws so that these waifs might seek gainful employment, but with countless experienced older Americans now available to shelve and bag groceries, rake leaves, serve burgers and detassel corn, why go with the soft hands and unmotivated minds of callow youth?

No, we are clearly wasting our next generation’s most precious and elusive qualities: their youth, their innocence, their nubile bodies. In fact, I have been assured by a very knowing British person of my acquaintance here in the Twin Cities, that a young healthy child well nursed is at eight years of age a most sanitary, satisfying and wholesome bed partner, whether taken orally, oiled or in his or her natural state. At this age gender is less of a consideration, but my friend emphasizes that there is an insatiable market for young children of both sexes, both here and abroad. But it is a market that suffers from an abundance of demand and too little available product thanks to decades of squishy liberal reforms and cumbersome nanny-state rules and regulations.

This is a matter to which I have previously given great thought. Thanks to the internet I have acquired and reviewed copious amounts of photographic evidence of this need, and it is clear to me that the market for this product is well established.  Current business models require that children be fully grown before they can be married off or otherwise prostituted. While this tradition works well for guaranteeing the smooth and trouble-free transfer of wealth and property from one generation to the next, it is not a model well suited to the needs of our present day, propertyless working class, if in fact you can find any of these ne’er-do-wells who still do in fact work, the public dole being more popular now than ever despite all Congressional efforts to the contrary.

For the lower classes to obtain full value from their children, certain laws, rules and regulations need to be adjusted. The ten-year-old daughter of an ironworker, for example, will not noticeably appreciate in value despite requiring expensive maintenance (e.g., food, clothing, healthcare). Why should an ironworker or a baker or traditional incandescent light bulb maker not be able to realize a return on their investment when their children are at peak market value?

Current laws may make sense to Scandinavian-styled liberals, but working people and those on the dole alike need revenue now, and not more pie in the sky education bills that inevitably lead to ever more educated, ever more dissatisfied burger flippers who notoriously do not contribute to their parents’ retirement care or Indian casino outings.

A perspicacious reader might point out that this country has a morbid abundance of young children, and that the law of supply and demand would quickly lead to fire sale prices. This is not a compelling argument because, and let us be honest here, not all children conform with Western ideals for beauty or sex appeal. The parents of an ugly child will have to shoulder that burden until such time as their asymmetrically featured brat is old enough to hold a shovel or wear an apron. Still, even these parents would benefit as the removal of more comely children from the workforce would make it easier for those in the remainder bin to gain employment.

In 2009, there were slightly more than four million live births in the United States. However harshly you sort and grade them, at least a third, or 1,316,000 of them, would have market value. Is 1.36 million children a year enough to satiate the American demand for sex with children? Any close examination of our culture, from Britney Spears’ Pepsi ads to pictures of JonBenet Ramsey on the Usenet, would suggest not. But as Jonathan Swift, another social engineer from an earlier era, once pointed out:

There is likewise another great advantage in my scheme, that it will prevent those voluntary abortions, and that horrid practice of women murdering their bastard children, alas! too frequent among us! sacrificing the poor innocent babes I doubt more to avoid the expense than the shame, which would move tears and pity in the most savage and inhuman breast.

Yes, there is a greater good to consider. Do feminists really wish to abort their children? Or do they simply lack fiscally feasible alternatives? Assuming a market price of at least double the cost of medical care and birthing,  we would no doubt find far fewer pregnant women willing to give up an after-birth bonanza simply to avoid a stint in the ranks of the bovine. The impact of reduced abortions? Assuming a 50% reduction in abortions (with the same ratio of comely to ugly among the additionally born), it would not be unreasonable to anticipate another quarter million or so babies, or 1.5 million all total. Enough to sate a nation that year after year tops the world’s depravity indexes? Possibly, but none of my arguments have yet spoken to the lucrative overseas market. Increased distribution costs to be sure, but there are historical models that suggest ways in which resourceful sea captains could maximize their cargo space.

The lower wholesale cost of Third World children would help defray transportation costs, and any coloration biases could easily be offset with Benetton style marketing campaigns. Even with aggressive use of such marketing, it is doubtful this would undercut the premium for healthy Swedish babies, or even dour Norwegian children (assuming blue eyes and bleachable hair).

There are, of course, drawbacks to my proposed solution. While researching Turkish prison records from the 19th century, it became clear to me that children so employed often do not turn out well, but this liability is partially negated by their reduced actuarial prospects.

The savings to be realized, however, dwarf all other considerations. No new public schools would need be built. Fewer teens on the street would mean less crime, allowing for cutbacks in our police forces (or, more likely, their reassignment to the more important task of protecting private property). With fewer hard-bodied ragamuffins participating in school sports, the more worthy children of the affluent would see less pine time while encountering fewer risks on the field of play (West Burbia’s well-padded Fighting Financiers being no more interested in incurring physical injuries than our own endearingly chubby Battlin’ Butterbutts).

Additional benefits would be numerous. While this plan would not slow the iniquitous rate at which immigrants reproduce, earlier harvests would reduce their impact on society as a whole, time-tested remedies like war and pestilence having failed to sufficiently reduce the numbers of Hispanics and even darker ethnicities to manageable proportions.

Zoning laws should be revisited, creating opportunities for revitalizing economically depressed neighborhoods. Former Miracle Mile projects could be remade into Miracle Smile zones. Although well-heeled establishments could easily be designed to blend with suburban aesthetics, some things are best taken care of well out of sight of home and family. Areas zoned for therapeutic carnality could further enhance their attractiveness to shoppers by banning all use of cameras and phone-cams. As Switzerland has discovered, privacy is a salable commodity and what daddy does in Sesame Alley should stay in Sesame Alley. Likewise Romper Lane, Barney Town, Transformers Park or any of the other newly re-named economic revitalization zones.

Culture, obviously, would be impacted as well. The success of teen strippers grinding for soft drinks suggests there is a market for A Walk on the Child Side branded products, not to mention the inevitable FCK (Former Cosby Kid), MJs (Michael Jackson survivors), and PG (Pepsi Girl) strip club promotions. Television’s child stars would, instead of fading into obscurity, go on to become some of our most famous and beloved courtesans and casino circuit boy band singers. Reality TV would undergo a renaissance with shows like Who Wants to Be a Child Porn Star?, American Idyll and JonBenet for a Day dominating the Nielsens.

Furthermore, this plan would deliver us from the ancient problem of bastards, runaways, truants and vandals, as all would go straight from the holding tank to homes of ‘lil repute. The savings in social services alone would be substantial, and the incentives for children to “be good” would again be self-evident. If you don’t want to grow up dating your Uncle Anthony, behave yourself!

Development of this market would also provide us with a commodity desirous to the oil-producing nations, helping to improve our balance of trade. As America goes, so goes the world, and the introduction of children-for-oil programs to the global economy would be universally beneficial. New laws and attitudes would boost trade, improve morale and create new opportunities for travelers. Mormon missionaries would find ready part-time work. Foreign exchange students would have less cause to write home for money. Children’s choruses and choirs would no longer need to do their fundraising in advance as the real money-making opportunities would come on the road.

In short, providing a full range of employment opportunities to lower and middle class children could undo the damage done by letting women into the workforce. I have submitted copies of this proposal to the appropriate committee chairs in the House and Senate, and expect to see a bill come up for vote early next year.

Given our national stalemate over how to move this country forward, the time for this remedy is now, more than ever.

[Jonathan Snift is a former Deputy Chair of the Anoka County Republican Party, and currently works as a visiting adjunct professor of Social Darwinism at the Stillwater Institute for Penal Science.]

This post was made possible with a grant from Newt Gingrich’s Contract On America, LLC

For more posts like this one, go here.

Advertisement