older fathers as well as older mothers: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/09/health/09autism...
According to Wash Post, "When fathers are in their thirties, children have about 1 1/2 times the risk of developing autism of children of fathers in their teens and twenties. Compared with the offspring of the youngest fathers, children of fathers in their forties have more than five times the risk of developing autism, and children of fathers in their fifties have more than nine times the risk."

I'm curious about the house ... are they renting it as a 2 bedroom, or a 4 bedroom? Hmmmm...
And, "the city told the Rubins they would need to repair every item found by the buyer's inspector, which the Rubins couldn't afford" (???)... so, did they fix this stuff before they rented it out, or are they just renting it out 'as-is'? Hmmmm....

Okay, since you didn't bother to gather any facts to back up your assertions, I've done the legwork while I had my coffee this morning...

According to the Denver Post (07/12/2011), "Catholic Charities will close its last two satellite emergency assistance centers in metro Denver on Sept. 1, ending food-bank and clothing services to focus shrinking resources on keeping people in their homes.". Their annual national revenues total about $3.4 billion (2009), but that's clearly not enough to deal with current needs.

(Real Choices Pregnancy Care in Boulder has an annual budget of $66,000, which doesn't seem to make it a real player in this discussion).

If the 74% of women who cite finances as a reason for their abortion received $10,000/ year for 5 years (which might put them at about poverty level, since poverty level is $10,830 for a single woman with no children, and it costs an additional $12,817/year to raise a child)(not including college, of course)... well, giving them this support would cost $9.3 billion the first year, then $18.3 billion the next year, etc etc until it levels out at $46.2 billion a year after five years.

The biggest applicable charities budgets (2006 figures, best I could find):
Salvation Army: $5.3 B
United Way: $4.1 B
Red Cross: $3.8 B
Catholic Charities: $3.4 B
Goodwill: $2.6 B

According to Forbes, in 2009, charities collectively started losing money for the first time since they started tracking in 1999... due to the same investment losses that the rest of us have suffered.

So it seems to me, these charities (which are struggling now) can hardly afford to collectively take on another $46 B a year. Outlawing abortion before having social programs in place would be putting the cart before the horse. (If you haven't guessed: I'm opposed to outlawing abortion, though I'm in favor of enabling women to have children if money is the issue.)

Case closed, no?

According to the National Center for Children in Poverty,
"Nearly 13 million American children live in families with incomes below the federal poverty level, which is $20,650 a year for a family of four. The number of children living in poverty increased by 11 percent between 2000 and 2006. There are 1.2 million more children living in poverty today than in 2000." (2007)
And, individual giving to charitable organizations declined 6.1% from 2007 to 2008 (adjusted for inflation).
... so I guess these charitable organizations have a lot of work to do, and less money to do it.
Ideally, allowing people to keep more of their income without redistribution via government would result in more charitable donations -- but we don't live in that theoretical world.

Since most women cite financial reasons for their abortions*, it seems logical that anti-abortion folks would be lobbying hard for government-funded daycare, financial assistance for new mothers, increased welfare, universal health care... but this is seldom the case. Why is this? I find it a bit infuriating. www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/3711005.pdf

Buddhist Bible may = "Life of Buddha" (a slim volume I discovered in the bedside drawer when I stayed at a hotel in Tokyo)

Not to state the obvious... but if you think the city has too many homeless people, wouldn't putting them in homes be a logical solution?

Correct me if I'm in error, but it appears that Roger Pielke Jr.'s father was a professor at CSU when Jr. was attending CU Boulder... so I would guess he benefited from the in-state tuition, and perhaps other programs for dependents of faculty. In light of this, his stand on tuition seems rather "let them eat cake".

I believe she spells her name 'Michele' (only one 'L')

Exactly! Love those government policies.

I just wanted to double-dip, and invite people concerned about U.S. debt to consider a comparison to that of other countries (relative to GDP)... https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-worl...
...And then ask yourself, would you rather live in Japan & St. Kitts (worst debtors), or Libya & Equatorial Guinea (the most fiscally responsible)?
Interestingly, places like Russia, China and Australia manage to do well, debt-wise, and still provide public healthcare. Their tax rates are comparable to ours. I'd love to hear more from this angle; politics aside, can anyone explain how some countries seemed to pull it off (i.e., Australia), while we went deep into debt?