Originally posted by generalissimo You can cut their pay without implementing the draft.
Not unless you're willing to accept a steep drop in both the quantity and quality of volunteers.
Keeping a well paid cadre of perhaps 100,000 in all the services and requiring a six month training period for all 18 year olds with them going into the reserves ready for immediate call up in emergencies might work well.
Originally posted by no1marauder Not unless you're willing to accept a steep drop in both the quantity and quality of volunteers.
Keeping a well paid cadre of perhaps 100,000 in all the services and requiring a six month training period for all 18 year olds with them going into the reserves ready for immediate call up in emergencies might work well.
Thats a risk you have to take, for the greater good. Conscription is proven to be both morally reprehensible and economically wasteful.
Originally posted by generalissimo Thats a risk you have to take, for the greater good. Conscription is proven to be both morally reprehensible and economically wasteful.
Why is conscription "morally reprehensible"? Defense of society is a communal obligation; why should we accept free riders? And it's not like 18 year olds are usually doing anything economically critical anyway; 6 months of military training would hardly ruin their career prospects.
Originally posted by no1marauder Why is conscription "morally reprehensible"? Defense of society is a communal obligation; why should we accept free riders? And it's not like 18 year olds are usually doing anything economically critical anyway; 6 months of military training would hardly ruin their career prospects.
I don't believe that in times of peace the state has the right to take control of a citizen's life and force him into unwanted work, all things being equal.
There is no such thing as an "obligation to defend society", you can't force someone to join the armed forces any more that you can force them into joining the police force or into any similar occupation.
And it's not like 18 year olds are usually doing anything economically critical anyway thats hardly the correct criterion to be used in order to determine the validity of conscription.
Originally posted by generalissimo I don't believe that in times of peace the state has the right to take control of a citizen's life and force him into unwanted work, all things being equal.
There is no such thing as an "obligation to defend society", you can't force someone to join the armed forces any more that you can force them into joining the police force or into any similar occ ardly the correct criterion to be used in order to determine the validity of conscription.
There's no such thing as an obligation to defend society? That's ridiculous; every social animal down to ants has such an instinct as part of their nature. Man is no different in this regard.
You make a claim that conscription is "economically wasteful" and then say that it's not a "correct criterion" to take into account what 18 year olds are doing economically to evaluate such a claim? That's plain dumb.
Originally posted by no1marauder There's no such thing as an obligation to defend society? That's ridiculous.
You make a claim that conscription is "economically wasteful" and then say that it's not a "correct criterion" to take into account what 18 year olds are doing economically to evaluate such a claim? That's plain dumb.
No, there isn't, and calling a point of view other than your own "ridiculous" won't change this in any way. The rights of individuals shouldn't be neglected in favor of any hypothetical benefits to society, and in this case I don't see any of these anyway; what good would come out of the implementation of conscription which compensate for its disadvantages?
Its wasteful if you consider you'll be using public money to train conscripts which are there against their will and for no apparent reason.
here's a useful link:
http://econjwatch.org/articles/the-role-of-economists-in-ending-the-draft
Originally posted by generalissimo No, there isn't, and calling a point of view other than your own "ridiculous" won't change this in any way. The rights of individuals shouldn't be neglected in favor of any hypothetical benefits to society, and in this case I don't see any of these anyway; what good would come out of the implementation of conscription which compensate for its disadvant ...[text shortened]... useful link:
http://econjwatch.org/articles/the-role-of-economists-in-ending-the-draft
No, there isn't, and calling a point of view other than your own "ridiculous" won't change this in any way.-generalissimo
Hmmmm, generalissimo dishes it out but cant take it when it comes back on him.:'(
If Elvis could do 2 years in the Army and give up his music and movie career to fulfill his obligation to his country why can't some kid right out of high school?
Originally posted by no1marauder There's no such thing as an obligation to defend society? That's ridiculous; every social animal down to ants has such an instinct as part of their nature. Man is no different in this regard.
You make a claim that conscription is "economically wasteful" and then say that it's not a "correct criterion" to take into account what 18 year olds are doing economically to evaluate such a claim? That's plain dumb.
every social animal down to ants has such an instinct as part of their nature. Man is no different in this regard
this is beyond risible now. are you seriously considering using the behavior of ants as the foundation of your argument for the draft? LOL
I do accept that it is very noble of someone to dedicate his/her life to the welfare of society, but once you make this a legally enforced duty its no longer morally acceptable. Individual freedom takes precedence over society.
Originally posted by generalissimo There is no such thing as an "obligation to defend society", you can't force someone to join the armed forces any more that you can force them into joining the police force or into any similar occupation.
[b].
Then go live in an igloo by yourself and see how long you last when the bandits from the next "society" over comes to take your stuff and your life.
Originally posted by Sam The Sham Then go live in an igloo by yourself and see how long you last when the bandits from the next "society" over comes to take your stuff and your life.
oh yeah, because the inevitable result of the absence of conscription is conquest by another society, followed by mass looting. 🙄
how old are you sam? you seem to be losing the ability to reason properly.
Originally posted by Sam The Sham If Elvis could do 2 years in the Army and give up his music and movie career to fulfill his obligation to his country why can't some kid right out of high school?
The King never squaked about, much to his credit.
Dont forget the Great Ted Williams! Joe Louis,etc.
13 Nov '10 18:22
America needs to stop trying to police the world
Back to Top