Earlier quoted context omitted.
How widespread were those sort of shenanigans back when the draft was on, do you know?
Wasn’t the last president who has served bush senior? This would mean it‘s rather common in some circles.
Blame Economists for the Mess We’re In
121–130 of 143 posts
Re: Blame Economists for the Mess We’re In
#122Earlier quoted context omitted.
A draft raises the cost of war, making war less likely.
Does this argument back-test successfully? Has the US suffered fewer war-fatalities in the era(s) where it had a draft (including the Civil War, WW1, WW2, & Vietnam), or in the era where it has an all-volunteer force (since 1973)?
Re: Blame Economists for the Mess We’re In
#123We in the USA live in the most gilded time in history, partially thanks to free markets and all the reasons the author bemoans. All income levels experience a level of prosperity without equal. Our poor are obese, unemployment is low, and the access to career altering knowledge and skills has never been better. A dip in the economy is overdue yet here we are, still experiencing a historic period of growth and economi…
Needing loans, and keep on debt for a very long time, to study on a university, isn't "easy access to career altering knowledge".
Add an injust healthcare system, that can bankrupt anyone in the lower class.
Re: Blame Economists for the Mess We’re In
#124Earlier quoted context omitted.
That depends on how easy it is to get out if it. If the influential always go to the coast guard or whatever, war is less meaningful for those in power.
“That depends on how easy it is to get out if it.” Exactly. That’s why I despise ppl whose connections got them out of the draft. For everyone of those punks, another one of McNamara's morons had to be drafted. Mohamad Ali, on the other hand, he had the courage to go to jail. Burn your draft card, escape to Canada, or simply refuse. But those who use university exemptions or bone spurs can go to hell.
The only difference between your methods is consequences for the person undertaking it, not those that have to replace them. You appear to want people avoiding being drafted to suffer. Pretty odd if you otherwise sympathise with them.
Re: Blame Economists for the Mess We’re In
#125Nobody pays attention to Goodman's problem of induction [1]. The truth is that nobody really knows how we ought to arrange society, and which arrangement is likely to work. Everybody is guessing! The moment you arrange the system one way, people game it and your economic model no longer applies. What worked in 1999 needs not work in 2019. Blaming the people you chose to listen to is just another form of avoiding the…
Related: To act on the belief that we possess the knowledge and the power which enable us to shape the processes of society entirely to our liking, knowledge which in fact we do not possess, is likely to make us do much harm. In the physical sciences there may be little objection to trying to do the impossible; one might even feel that one ought not to discourage the over-confident because their experiments may after…
Re: Blame Economists for the Mess We’re In
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does this argument back-test successfully? Has the US suffered fewer war-fatalities in the era(s) where it had a draft (including the Civil War, WW1, WW2, & Vietnam), or in the era where it has an all-volunteer force (since 1973)?
That’s almost impossible to compare due to advances in both weapons and protective equipment.
The quality of weapons and armor (and training and medical care!) also isn't independent of the draft/volunteer dimension. A all-volunteer-force may find it necessary to invest more in each, because fewer people will volunteer to be part of a military force that tries to win with raw & disposable strength-of-numbers.
So maybe the all-volunteer-force "raises the cost of war" even more, considering financial costs & second-order effects, and thus best deters war? It's possible, which is why such claims need to be evaluated against history, not just asserted.
Re: Blame Economists for the Mess We’re In
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
UBI can also be inflated away to nothing. It's a neoliberal scam.
So can all the other forms of welfare.
UBI is transparently an attempt to redistribute tax income to private companies such that no opportunity for profit stays with or is limited by government. UBI would mean no more Medicare stipulations, no more existing conditions protections. Just your ten grand a year or whatever and a bunch of private companies who have what you need, at whatever price they set.
Re: Blame Economists for the Mess We’re In
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
Western militaries for hundreds of years have been working class soldiers and upper or at least upper-middle class officers. The middle-middle class is very underrepresented. This is true even today.
Is there a survey or study of the demographics? I'm genuinely curious about how it currently looks because I have a hard time believing the upper crust bothers with this sort of thing any more. Service just doesn't seem to carry the social weight it once did, and there are plenty of stories of rich kids dodging deployments and the like.
Re: Blame Economists for the Mess We’re In
#129If you actually 'understand economics' which is more about 'understanding that you don't understand economics'
One thing is for sure is that we are wealthier now than ever before in history. In 1969 how many households had infinite knowledge at their hands? How many even had basic appliances?
>The rise of economics is a primary reason for the rise of inequality.
It's literally supply/demand. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_force_in_the_United_Stat...
As women entered the workforce, men left the workforce. Which isn't a bad thing, talented women are now contributing to society and displaced the incompetent men.
Those men however are still looking for a job and so we have greater supply and same demand. It means those people at minimum wage are competing with each other and driving their wages down.
Re: Blame Economists for the Mess We’re In
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are reasons the draft can be a good idea. When the military is only voluntary you get a military with specific ideas about foreign policy and how you see the enemy, whoever they are. If you introduce the draft you have a more heterogenous military.
Absolutely. A draft would also force Americans of all backgrounds to interact with each other in an environment that builds cohesion. It would also give even the most powerful of Americans skin in the game when it comes to starting wars.