Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm using a bit of what is becoming an outdated stereotype but it most certainly does happen still. There are thousands of young women who leave their parents house and move into the house of a husband or boyfriend. They don't collect welfare as their is an income.
So a man (could be the opposite but I'm trying to keep it simple) joins the military and his spouse stays home to keep up the house for him. You are going to force her out to get a job or go to college? I might agree it's a good idea but you are going to force it?
If they are collecting government assistance, food stamps, wic, or something like that, yes, both parties should be working.
I was for UMT (Universal Military Training) in 1960, and I still am today.
The "Government Service" would not have to be in the military. It could be in VISTA (Volunteers In Service To America), or the Peace Corps, or the government could reactivate the CCC (Civilian Conservation Corps) to perform work on National Forests and Parks.
The main purpose of UMT was to develop a good work ethic, give training, and SERVE THE COUNTRY!
And grow up. I am old enough to remember how it worked, families used to send their child to the military and a man came home.
__________________
When I post in bold red that is moderator action and, per the TOS, can only be discussed through Direct Message.
When did I say I want to make EVERY 18 year old indentured servants?
You would be forcing 18 year olds to pick one of three paths. How would that not be servitude? Do you understand the difference between a choice made of free will vs. one made under threat of violence?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
For one, I think if someone is conscripted, they should be paid for their work.
Where will the money come from Mr. small Government? Moral hazard of mandatory guv service aside,America is broke and can ill afford more money taken out the private economy to support the public one.
You are basically suggesting a work force that digs holes and fills them back up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
For another, I highly doubt most Americans would take the military choice, and many would find jobs...
What jobs? The ones being eliminated or never created because of minimum wage hikes, onerous government regs and bloated fed spending (hole digging details)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
or go to college
College tuition should be paid for by the individual with no government assistance. This would help ensure they enter a field of study to support the level of debt they are assuming.
I should not be on the hook for my neighbors 18 year old to learn how to party for four, five ...years.
Seems as though you are small government only when it fits with your beliefs, otherwise not so much.
You would be forcing 18 year olds to pick one of three paths. How would that not be servitude? Do you understand the difference between a choice made of free will vs. one made under threat of violence?
Perhaps you don't understand the meaning of "option"?
You would be forcing 18 year olds to pick one of three paths. How would that not be servitude? Do you understand the difference between a choice made of free will vs. one made under threat of violence?
Where will the money come from Mr. small Government? Moral hazard of mandatory guv service aside,America is broke and can ill afford more money taken out the private economy to support the public one.
You are basically suggesting a work force that digs holes and fills them back up.
What jobs? The ones being eliminated or never created because of minimum wage hikes, onerous government regs and bloated fed spending (hole digging details)
College tuition should be paid for by individuals with no government assistance in order ensure they enter a field of study to support the level of debt they are assuming.
I should not be on the hook for my neighbors 18 year old to learn how to party for four, five ...years.
Seems as though you are small government only when it fits with your beliefs, otherwise not so much.
No, indentured servitude would be work with no pay, essential slavery for a extended period of time in exchange for food. I think they should be paid for any work they do.
Money for people working on infrastructure? We can do that with cuts in other programs that are bloated, mainly the food stamp and welfare programs that these people would no longer be on, if they are working.
I didn't say that we should pay for their college, they can go into debt, or work to pay their tuition like most people do.
Do you understand the word, Option?
If someone is independently wealthy and doesn't need to work, but doesn't need government assistance, then I have no issue with them doing whatever they want. If they are 18, living at home, and their parents are drawing government assistance, I'd much rather put that 18 yr old to work building something worthwhile for the nation, then to play Xbox all day.
Perhaps you don't understand the meaning of "option"?
One of three options. What about 4 or 5 or none of the above?
Perhaps you don't understand what free will is?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
