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.
Mbuzu, you could perform duties in a separate role (See above)
But I dont see how you willingly pay taxes that fund the military and reasonable expect that your a separate entity from the military??
You also have to wonder how many kids would get "straightened out" by a few years doing military service, away from mom and dad and the 'hood (that includes wealthy hoods too). Job training, poverty goes down. When poverty goes down, crime follows. Oh...and how many crazies would get flagged before they snap and go off on the local elementary school.
(And I haven't seen a teeter-totter in years either, heh)
Anyway, that was my original point, was I wish the US did what the Swiss do. Make everyone serve in the military. At the moment the US employes less than .5% of its population as military active or reserve.
In Switzerland's militia system, professional soldiers constitute about 5 percent of military personnel; the rest are conscript citizens 18 to 34 (in some cases up to 50) years old.
The economics don't support it. Right now, professional soldiers in the US amount to less than 1% of the population, around 2,600,000 troops. That's considering the country is still winding down from the second of two recent wars. If the US is not fighting a war, that strength should go down to a bit less than 2,000,000.
There are about 4,000,000 teenagers reaching their 18th birthdays each year. If the US was to induct every 18-year-old, that would quadruple the number of active duty personnel. Yes, quadruple (not triple) because that crop of 4,000,000 new inductees would be useless for war--that number would be constant training overhead.
The US would also have to enlarge training facilities and career training personnel by a huge factor. Right now, military training facilities are scaled to handle about 100,000 new troops annually. You're talking about increasing the annual training load by 4,000%.
That's just considering the impact of the numerical increase.
But the fact is that the DoD would have no use for that many semi-trained troops. It takes a good year to make even an infantry soldier operationally useful.
It's pretty much how things used to be pre-Vietnam, when America didn't have many of the problems it has today.
Nope. The draft lottery inducted no greater percentage of troops than currently enlist. Moreover, it was pretty easy to avoid. Until 1968, for instance, anyone with enough money to go to college got an automatic college deferment. Every young man was theoretically vulnerable to the draft, but the number actually drafted was very small pre-Vietnam.
You also have to wonder how many kids would get "straightened out" by a few years doing military service, away from mom and dad and the 'hood (that includes wealthy hoods too). Job training, poverty goes down. When poverty goes down, crime follows. Oh...and how many crazies would get flagged before they snap and go off on the local elementary school.
(And I haven't seen a teeter-totter in years either, heh)
That's not the military's function. It is not the military's job to handle the problems that society refuses to handles itself.
As a "Provost Marshal" (the Navy term is different but said here in that matter so more will understand), I was probably instrumental in throwing a few people out of the Navy. With one of them, I expressed to my father about the concern of letting that person loose on society and he told me that if society had done its job in the first place, it wouldn't be a concern at all.
The whole thing of the Judge saying, "Bobby, I am going to give you a choice. I'm going to send you to the prison farm for 2 years or you can walk out that door and enlist in the Marines." is wrong. For then, the military has to spend money, YOUR MONEY, trying to train and correct someone, to get them to behave and do a job.
Long story short, if society doesn't want them around in their neighborhood, why in blazes would they want them someplace around such wonderful firepower?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Westcoastnavy
........
Our military budget is about 640 billion
Our veteran budget is about 1.6 billion
Approx 30% of the US are veterans.
So if we triple our veteran budget it would be approx 4.8 billion That is 90% of the US population. That part is easy, and sooo many less people would need Obama care........
I'm curious how you are running your numbers and definitions.
I'm a veteran........................and as far as I know, I don't figure into the vet budget at all. I have no retirement pay (got out at just over 5 years) and I have no medical benefits, nothing from the VA.
Now, perhaps I do....and no one bothered to ever tell me, but from my aspect, there are a great many vets who are not part of the veteran budget.
BUT......perhaps that is not even the point here, but rather, I gather, that if more people had been in the military, they might be better trained with weapons.
Perhaps, but consider a few things. Five years in the military, for that matter my entire life, and I have never shot full automatic. I might be slightly mistaken to the "never", it might have been, perhaps, permitted back in the mid 60's under demos at Armed Forces Day, but other than that......
My brother yesterday (and my arms dealer years ago) was surprised to hear that, thought that I had least gotten my hands on a M-16 in the regulars, but no. In my particular section of the regulars, we were issued M-14's and in any event, not on the range or anywhere else did they let us go full auto.
But who gets to decide who in the military has the arms and martial training that qualifies? A public or politician who believes (at least before 9-11) that the only people in the Navy who know how to sharpshoot are SEALS (and is not aware of the various other sections)? Or the area Captain who, after I spent months and lots of dollars training a security force for his area says, "Oh, Sailors with guns? I don't know about that.".
Finally, despite having, at the time, FAST training units Marine Corps Security Force Regiment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia around, one didn't always get what was out there.....but training needed to be done........so often the CO said work out a plan and get it done. I grabbed whoever I could when I could and ended up training my forces with FBI, FAST, Marine Barracks, and even myself.
Plus, there is another thing or two that has to be considered. Is what is being taught appropriate to who is asking for it. I'm sure a lot of people would approve of some of our training where the 1911 was carried in the hip holster without one in the chamber. With two hands, we pulled it from the holster, racked the slide, and came up on target. It works...if one has two hands.
But in another example, an observer pointed out that the FBI instructor who was teaching my people with a simple twist of the arm to hit someone in the knee or belly or temple with a baton....that he shouldn't be teaching people to go for the head.
Finally, one has to remember what is military and what is "civilian". One of my books on close quarter battle (it's in my library, I didn't write it) goes into how to disarm someone with a knife. After the person has been disarmed, it says that the police path may be to secure the person to take him into custody while the military path might be to use his knife to finish the person off.
It sounds all nice and neat on paper, but in reality, it is often not the case.
Last edited by TamaraSavannah; 01-02-2015 at 07:02 PM..
The economics don't support it. Right now, professional soldiers in the US amount to less than 1% of the population, around 2,600,000 troops. That's considering the country is still winding down from the second of two recent wars. If the US is not fighting a war, that strength should go down to a bit less than 2,000,000.
There are about 4,000,000 teenagers reaching their 18th birthdays each year. If the US was to induct every 18-year-old, that would quadruple the number of active duty personnel. Yes, quadruple (not triple) because that crop of 4,000,000 new inductees would be useless for war--that number would be constant training overhead.
The US would also have to enlarge training facilities and career training personnel by a huge factor. Right now, military training facilities are scaled to handle about 100,000 new troops annually. You're talking about increasing the annual training load by 4,000%.
That's just considering the impact of the numerical increase.
But the fact is that the DoD would have no use for that many semi-trained troops. It takes a good year to make even an infantry soldier operationally useful.
See that is what makes it soo versatile!!
What could you do with that many troops?!?! Brainstorm! Dont tell me you cant think of anything!
In the navy, while we are waiting for our training classes after boot camp but before A school, they have around 500 sailors in one barracks. They make them clean their own barracks. Not their personal rooms, but public areas. That is 8 hours of 1 sailor cleaning about 4sqft. If it sounds insane it is, but I did it along with thousands of other people, when we had this huge work force, Pensacola was recovering from a hurricane. We could have been better utilized. And all of it was run by people of the same rank with the same time in service. We did have 2 petty officers for around 300 to 500 people.
Budget first:
Ok, sure you would need time to scale up some. But you can easily build an army base for the cost of one F-18 $80 mil or so. One less plane a year for the navy, and one new base a year. easy as pie.
Plus im sure there are many other programs you could replace to gain extra capitol.
IMO a flat tax 20% no breaks should generate something
Cut boarder patrol:$12 billion
welfare: thats about $92 billion (not counting TARP)
civvies working on military equpiment=$150billion
Im not by any means a financial guy. I own a manufacturing company and I pay people to do the math for me. but It seems many programs could be done cheaper, bythe military than by civvies.
Purpose
Infantry, MPs, MAs, and all combat oriented troops could be used country wide as a tactical police unit. Like swat, but military instead of civvies. It provides training as well as experience. Each military person is much cheaper than a cop.
Or they could be used as boarder patrol, that way we could eliminate the boarder patrol saving some funds. Each soldier takes home far less less than a boarder agent makes.
Medical staff could be used in hospitals, as could dental staff.
Sea bees and army engineer corps could build federal stuff and state stuff and the state pays for the build. Its less work for civvies, but many of those civvies are in the military anyway.
I mean, think some, what else could the military replace?
If you average all the EOD for example, the base pay should come out too about $32k to $36k a year. A civvie doing EOD work on bases like fallon NV make 90k to 110k a year.
Replace all the paramedics, firefighters, police ect. It could be done. and at much lower costs than what is currently paid.
Anyway, just a few ideas. Im sure you could bring some to the table.
Numbers:
how did you get quadruple from 2mil military and 4 mil teenagers??
Well we wont need the reserve anymore, chalk that up to more funding!
Also even in switzerland they deny a certain % of people due to medical related issues. I think we turn down like 80% currently. (according to military.com) the swiss turn down like 25%.
So 3/4 of all 18 year old kids, that's 3mil.
Also if the majority of individuals were doing a minimum enlistment time, then the majority of the funds paid in payroll/BAH/BAS/Fam SEP would be of a much lower order or non existent.
Nope. The draft lottery inducted no greater percentage of troops than currently enlist. Moreover, it was pretty easy to avoid. Until 1968, for instance, anyone with enough money to go to college got an automatic college deferment. Every young man was theoretically vulnerable to the draft, but the number actually drafted was very small pre-Vietnam.
I was referring to the years of my father's generation when pretty much every man leaving high school went into the service voluntarily.
I was referring to the years of my father's generation when pretty much every man leaving high school went into the service voluntarily.
That never happened. The closest was during WWII, and even then the total inductions during the entire war was 10,000,000 men, which was about 20% of the draft-age men 18-36 during that time.
I'm curious how you are running your numbers and definitions.
The VA stuff came from the VA website. Other stuff from the US census bureau.
I chose a $ amount of $2700 because that is well above the estimated average number of troops per rank.
I dont have a pension, but I am rated as 60% disabled.
Not every military person ends up with VA benefits, but thats why I called that one easy. If 30% of the current population is a vet, (some use it some do not) but the $ amount needed is 160, then to cover 90% of the population AS veterans should be comparable. three times the people, three times the number of people using it.
Sure the military has it screw ups, just about any vet that left in the last 20 years knows what 45/45 half month X2 means, either by personal experiance or as a witness. But the military does provide a certain level of discipline. Sure, if you go in a dirt bag you might come out a dirtbag, but I have seen many people correct their poor behavior once they had something to work for and some direction.
Plus, in terms of gun violence, the CDC list males between the ages of 18 and 24 especially likely to perpetrate said violence. That is good time to be attached to the military. I know I made most of my mistakes in that time period.
Also as a provost, I am sure you can attest, that military punishment functions quite differently than civvie punishment does.
Currently in the navy, everyone learns hand gun safety and fires a shot gun at least once. (or they get a chance too). I do not suggest that type of weapons training, but rather more of a marine/rifle relationship.
Also, just idle curiosity, but what was your rate and what years did you serve?
See that is what makes it soo versatile!!
What could you do with that many troops?!?! Brainstorm! Dont tell me you cant think of anything!
Nothing the DoD actually needs. Make work--"painting rocks"--yeah. Fight a war? No.
Quote:
In the navy, while we are waiting for our training classes after boot camp but before A school, they have around 500 sailors in one barracks. They make them clean their own barracks. Not their personal rooms, but public areas. That is 8 hours of 1 sailor cleaning about 4sqft. If it sounds insane it is, but I did it along with thousands of other people, when we had this huge work force, Pensacola was recovering from a hurricane. We could have been better utilized. And all of it was run by people of the same rank with the same time in service. We did have 2 petty officers for around 300 to 500 people.
Make work. If all you want to do is keep a bunch of kids busy, put that burden on some other agency, not the DoD.
Quote:
Budget first:
Ok, sure you would need time to scale up some. But you can easily build an army base for the cost of one F-18 $80 mil or so. One less plane a year for the navy, and one new base a year. easy as pie.
Plus im sure there are many other programs you could replace to gain extra capitol.
IMO a flat tax 20% no breaks should generate something
Ah, so this plan to quadruple the size of the DoD with a bunch of useless bodies includes not buying equipment the DoD needs and changing the national tax basis.
Quote:
Cut boarder patrol:$12 billion
Border patrol takes trained adults, not 18-year-olds nursing a conscription grudge.
Quote:
welfare: thats about $92 billion (not counting TARP)
Most welfare does not go to the unmarried 18-year-olds that would be drafted, so you can't just take that money.
Quote:
civvies working on military equpiment=$150billion
Right now that's being done by civilians who have jobs and like having jobs. So you're going to stick a knife in the civilian economy to pay for this useless bunch of conscripts.
Quote:
Purpose
Infantry, MPs, MAs, and all combat oriented troops could be used country wide as a tactical police unit. Like swat, but military instead of civvies. It provides training as well as experience. Each military person is much cheaper than a cop.
Or they could be used as boarder patrol, that way we could eliminate the boarder patrol saving some funds. Each soldier takes home far less less than a boarder agent makes.
Besides the fact that we're still talking about relatively untrained people, your real goal here is to create a huge military police force. Hmm.
Quote:
Medical staff could be used in hospitals, as could dental staff.
So now you're talking about truly socializing medicine. You're not talking about 18-year-old conscripts anymore, you're talking about some very expensive training.
Quote:
Sea bees and army engineer corps could build federal stuff and state stuff and the state pays for the build. Its less work for civvies, but many of those civvies are in the military anyway.
I mean, think some, what else could the military replace?
If you average all the EOD for example, the base pay should come out too about $32k to $36k a year. A civvie doing EOD work on bases like fallon NV make 90k to 110k a year.
Replace all the paramedics, firefighters, police ect. It could be done. and at much lower costs than what is currently paid.
Anyway, just a few ideas. Im sure you could bring some to the table.
I gotta believe you're just pulling my leg.
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.
