iWriter is a pay-as-you-go content writing service that offers freelance writers for hire on an assignment basis to meet your digital content needs. To remain competitive in the digital world, you need to keep your website or blog optimized and current. You can check out a list of website hiring reviews here.
For all hiring needs, including overseas outsourcing, check out OnlineJobs, Fiverr, and Upwork.For hiring designers, check out DesignBro, DesignHill, and 99Designs.For hiring developers, check out Toptal, Lemon.io, and Codementor.Looking for more information about another hiring website? With iWriter, you won’t have to sift through unrelated candidates because every freelancer on the platform is there to write content. What sets iWriter apart from other freelance services is that iWriter specializes specifically in providing writing services. Thankfully, makes finding a freelance content writer for your team easier than ever. But with content mills, you have to watch out for scams. A good, reliable writer is key to producing regular content for your business. You have probably realized that managing your digital brand is a lot of work, and anything you can outsource will make managing your business much easier.Īpproximately 23% of businesses fail because they do not have the right team in place. But all it really does is expose how out-of-touch the establishment media are with both basic economics and what pro-lifers actually believe.īrad Polumbo ( is a co-founder of, a co-host of the BasedPolitics podcast, and a Washington Examiner contributor.If you are reading this, you are probably looking for a high-quality writer you can trust to create content for your website or blog. Liberal journalists might think that this line of argument somehow owns the pro-life movement. Now, the HuffPost is blasting pro-lifers as hypocrites for … being OK with providing government services for babies once they’re born. In fact, one of the biggest criticisms levied at pro-lifers is that they’re “only pro-birth, not pro-life” because they don’t support providing government services for babies once they’re born. (Yes, including the Pentagon’s budget!) But we don’t and have never argued that saving taxpayers a few billion is more important than human life itself or worth killing unborn babies to achieve. We want to balance the budget by cutting waste, scaling back entitlements, and reining in the federal bureaucracy. Most importantly, it has never been the position of fiscal conservatives that 0s and 1s on the federal books are more important than human life. Preventing a $13 billion increase wouldn’t make much difference or do anything meaningful to address the ingrained problems with our welfare state that are driving us off a fiscal cliff. Yet $13 billion is ultimately a rounding error when it comes to our $30.5 trillion (and counting) national debt. I’m a big deficit hawk (yes, including when Trump was president) and advocate fiscal responsibility. But much more importantly, this doesn’t matter! It’s not actually clear one way or the other whether allowing more births would increase the national debt. You would also have to weigh all the additional taxes the people who get to be born will pay over their lifetime before reaching any such conclusion - so Nicholson’s $13 billion figure is sloppy at best and deeply dishonest at worst. But you can’t look at that fact alone and therefore conclude it will increase the national debt on net. Yes, more children being born will mean more Medicaid expenditure. This entire argument is absurd beyond belief.įor one thing, the very premise is dubious.
“For a party that has been so quick to raise the alarm on federal spending over programs like expanding the child tax credit, Republicans are noticeably quiet about the financial cost that outlawing abortion will have,” Nicholson concludes. He estimates this additional expenditure at around $13 billion over 10 years. Nicholson goes on to explain that because a taxpayer-funded government healthcare program, Medicaid, covers around 40% of births in the United States, more births will mean more tax dollars spent. But it comes with a string attached - more federal spending, which Republicans usually hate,” politics reporter Jonathan Nicholson writes. “Many Republicans hailed the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision as a victory for one of their highest-profile priorities: ending abortion. “GOP No Longer Cares About The Deficit If It Means Women Having More Babies,” blares the headline of a July 15 HuffPost article. But few of the traditional "government spending is bad" folks want to talk about it. There's a feasible estimate that Dobbs will add about $13 billion to the deficit over 10 years via Medicare.
0 kommentar(er)
