As it is, I have no desire to “assault” your character. But if you’d like to explain why you think receiving military training = leeching, I’d like to hear it. You may have impressions about the academies that go above and beyond those the average civilian has, but they do not surpass those of someone like myself who actually attended an Academy.
And in fact your statements make it very obvious to me you are either 1) heinously hateful, or 2) just simply do not understand how the academies work (or education in this country in general.)
I understand you are a college freshman so I expect crass ignorance from you, I had a lot of it myself back then.
I should remind you that virtually all education in the United States is subsidized. Either on a state or a federal level. Many private institutions receive some form of support from local, state, or federal government. And individual students are heavily subsidized by donations from alumni which in function are not much different from taxes used to pay for military training.
Secondly, I disagree with some of your points. You claim that going to the AFA is not a “college” education. Actually, it is. Graduates receive a Bachelors Degree, in one of many fields, just like a “college”. You also claim that graduates do not go on to “real” jobs outside of the military. Tell that to the military! To my knowledge, they have scads of trouble keeping graduates in the military to “justify” their free education rather than going on to lucrative (compared to military pay) careers in aeronautics, science, and just plain piloting jobs in the private sector.
This wasn’t meant to be a rant. I saw no reason to bring this to the pit as I don’t think it’s an appropriate place for it. But NinjaChick decided to pull the “I’m not talking about it anymore, you have to pit me if you want me to” card. All I wanted was an explanation, as to how someone could think the AFA is “leeching.”
Yes, I’m well aware that the academy’s give out “real” bachelor’s degree. Did you read where I said I attended the USMA? I have a very real degree from there (though actually you don’t have to get a degree, FYI.)
When I said it wasn’t “college” I mean it’s not what you think of when you think of college. You are in an institution where you receive demerits for bad decorum in the mess hall. You are in an institution that is very structured, you don’t do a lot of the things regular college kids do (at least not as often.) And you have to serve in the military after you graduate.
The academies are designed to train military officers. When you graduate you HAVE TO SERVE ON ACTIVE DUTY FOR SIX YEARS. So yes, after that 6 year enlistment some people may decide to go on to the private sector. I didn’t, and most people I know didn’t, but in certain fields yes people do feel it is worth it.
But after six years that isn’t an issue for the academy to be concerned about anymore, the cadet has paid back the government for six years by serving in the military, at that point whatever a person does has little to do with this discussion.
I’d say six years of active duty is enough for the military to justify the cost of educating the cadets. The way your post was phrased you seemed to almost be suggesting people graduate from the academy then go into the private sector, you are not legally allowed to do that.
Try to keep in mind that thanking a specific serviceperson is somewhat symbolic. You can’t thank the entire active military (unless you have a great deal of time on your hands), but you can thank the servicepeople you see. I wouldn’t, but I’d hardly pour scorn on those who do. Remember, the Marines who trot the flag out at the Superbowl, or are invited to the State of the Union address or whatever- they’re symbolic of the military at large too.
Plus, there’s a pretty huge distinction between, say, agreeing to play football for three years for $4 million a year, and agreeing to be shot at for six years for rather less money. Hell, I’m going to refinance my auto loan sometime this year, and you better believe I’m not doing any damn pushups afterward…
I never really said I supported the applause or not. I said personally I wouldn’t feel comfortable being applauded in that way. I found no glory or greatness in actions I took while in the military. In fact the concept of glory is one I don’t really like very much, and I don’t think I’d ever want to feel “glorified.” Did I feel there was a sense of dignity? Yes, I did. But I’ve never asked for nor wanted to be applauded.
I’m a respectable guy though so I wouldn’t respond to applause rudely, but I would feel very uncomfortable if I was in the situation of the theoretical soldiers who are supposedly getting applause.
(link for those interested, since Martin neglected to provide one in the OP)
The reason I wanted this to be continued in the pit, if at all, was because I have no desire to hijack a GD thread. I find it interesting that you’re not trying to insult me, yet are saying I’m either ‘crassly ignorant’ or ‘heinously hateful’.
The Air Force Academy is a college, as are the other 3 military academies. The cadets are, in fact, college students. They take classes, they chose a major, they do copious quantities of homework.
True, it is a highly structured environment with strict disciplinary guidelines. So is Bob Jones University. This makes it atypical, yes. My college operates entirely on a preset curriculum (no electives or anything) and has a very strict attendance policy which is strongly enforced. This makes my college atypical. That doesn’t make it any more prestigious or anything like that, it simply makes it different than the “typical American college experience.” The students at any ‘atypical’ school are not nessecarily better or worse than at a ‘typical’ school. They’ve simply made a completely voluntary choice to place themselves into a different type of environment.
Yes, there’s a military commitment afterwards, and that’s often viewed as ‘repaying’ the government. I disagree with that, on the basis of the fact that military cadets get paid for going to school. Many of them have jobs, within the student body. Others do not. They all do get paid - not much, but they do get paid for the act of going to school. My sister is most likely going on to grad school, once again paid for by the American public. Then, she’ll most likely end up teaching for a few years at the Academy - still effectively on the same payroll - and then enter the private sector.
Now, I’ve got a work-study job, the money for which comes from federal funds: the taxpayers. I have several subsidized loans. Is this coming, eventually, from the same place as my sister’s monthly paycheck? Yes, it is. The difference is that my paycheck and loans go directly towards my tuition, allowing me to get an education*. In turn, I will get a four-year degree, perhaps go to grad school, and become a productive member of society.
You yourself admit that OCS is ‘functionally no different’ from the Academies. So why do the taxpayers get stuck paying for both? If the end product is the same (a military officer), it seems like something of a redundant system. “Well, I could enlist and through hard work get a spot in the OCS. Or, I could - still through hard work - have the government pay me for getting a 4-year college education, and then maybe even grad school. Huh, tough call.”
It’s a redundant system on the government’s part. I hold no animosity towards the cadets: god knows they were smart enough to see a good thing and go for it. How has someone is repaying the government for their education while they’re still collecting a government paycheck?
*Before anyone brings it up: with the financial situations my family has been in, there is no way I could’ve attended any 4-year college without some form of government assistance.
I beg your pardon? I am collecting UNsubsidized federal loans, and I’m still going to pay the government back for the oh-so-handsomely furnished loans. Each person that gets a college education enhances the American public by having better skills to give to their work. Collectively we are a lot better off having skilled, higher educated people running around. THAT is why the government hands out subsidized federal loans and grants and scholarships.
Those things aren’t easy to get, either, they’re not handed out like candy you know. In order to get a subsidized student loan your parent must not make much money at all. In fact I know a couple of students who were turned down for subsidized loans even though they were much worse off than I was growing up. Grants are particularly difficult to get (talk to my friend who is a grant writer) and scholarships – I’ve never even seen a scholarship. States actually mail out scholarships? :boggles:
He has stated several times in both threads that he’s a West Point man (that’s what USMA means).
b]NinjaChick** was extreme in her depiction of her sister as a “college leech” while she completes her 4 years at Colorado Springs. Looking at it, I think she meant to express that she found it somehow odd that people would look up to her sister just for wearing that odd-fitting blue suit, when as of yet SHE, the individual, is still years away from making her actual contribution to the national defense, and as of yet, all NC has seen is Cadet Sister getting paid to get an education at a tough school.
Maybe NC understands that the people are reacting to what that odd-fitting blue suit stands for, not to the Sister, yet that doesn’t quite make it OK. Why? I’ll speculate, and she can shoot me down over it, that to NC that’s not a US Cadet, it’s it’s her sister. She knows her too well, she can’t be in awe of her. Yet.
However, that said Martin Hyde inflicts a bit of pot/kettle-ness into the argument by turning around and laying the “leech” label on the civilians who avail themselves of government aid and do not perform some sort of special civic duty to “repay”; as well as the the facile comments about college freshmen and ignorance .
When the Pell Grant or the Stafford Loan Acts are amended to carry legal service-in-kind obligation, I’m sure the civilian college grads of America will fulfill that duty gladly. Until then, they are incurring NO moral deficiency by carrying on with their lives as they see fit once they square away their accounting. Society is repaid by having a better educated workforce and electorate in general.
I’m no Academy man but I did serve (Reserves); my commitment and obligation were freely assumed on my part, the full-time civilians do me no wrong by going about their civilian ways. Their lifestyle was exactly what I was supposed to be ready to protect with my life if called; not something for me to look down upon. Citizen-soldier? Anytime. Warrior Caste? Wrong century.
If there were no trained Medical Doctors in the world and you had a coronary dysrhythmia; would it not benefit you if an individual completed his medical education? And would you not agree that if you benefit from something, you must provide compensation? We can’t do everything in the world. So we let others make our clothes and build our houses for us and we compensate them. Thusly, wouldn’t you consider it fair compensation to pay, in part, via taxes, for someone’s military education. You’re paying for someone else to defend your liberties when you choose not to yourself.
As far as this “good thing” to which you refer, I think the greater potential for going to war, injury and death far outstips “free,” or subsidized, education, health care and housing. Of course most don’t choose military service due to a fierce devoutness to defend my liberties; but I’ll always respect a soldier more for his choice to join the military for its benefits than I will a person who chooses to be an actor or software developer for its benefits.
As I said I don’t mean to be “pitting” you. I have no problem with you personally and I find the whole “pitting” system to be sophomoric and I don’t engage in it. But you made it clear you would not continue discussion unless it was moved to the pit, so since I had an interest in hearing you further explain your “interesting” viewpoint I had to take this to the pit. I don’t mean “heinously hateful” to be an insult. I’m just saying you would have to be a hateful person to call academy cadets leeches unless you were just misinformed. From your post it is obvious you are just misinformed.
Yes, I have tried to clarify what I was saying. I was trying to point out that going to the academy isn’t like going to a regular college. It isn’t a college, it’s an Academy. Which while it does provide a bachelor’s degree that is recognized nationally that doesn’t necessarily mean that is the primary purpose of the institution. The Virginia Military Institute is an institution that is primarily an educational one, but it is an educational institute that also tries to prepare people for a military life if they so choose. Last I checked about 18% of VMI grads choose such a life.
The Academies (btw there are five, not four; United States Military Academy at West Point, United States Naval Academy, United States Air Force Academy, United States Merchant Marine Academy, and United States Coast Guard Academy) were founded and are primarily institutions designed to prepare recruits (cadets) for military service. They are intensive institutions that are there to prepare the “cream of the crop” to eventually be the elite of their respective services. The education aspect is to create intelligent well-rounded individuals but the primary purpose is to create elite officers. I don’t know about every college in the United States but I don’t know of any other than the academies that allow you to go there for four years, graduate, and not have a major. You may select a major from the Academy but you do not have to do so. Because the primary desire of the people running the Academies is the prepare officers, as long as they feel you are prepared to be an officer they don’t care if you have a major. You can be given a BS that basically just says you had xx field of study, and it isn’t near the same academically (at least as far as the requirements) as a full major from a regular school is.
My base salary as a cadet was something like $3,000 per year. Out of that salary I had to pay for books, uniforms, dry cleaning, hair cuts et cetera. And then I also had to pay taxes on that salary as well.
What did I do that the regular college student doesn’t do that might justify a few hundred dollars a year in take home pay? Well I was required to attend training camps during the summer.
First summer I did cadet basic training, which was very similar to “real” basic training. (For which “real” Army recruits are paid) That was six weeks long
Second summer I had to do cadet field training during the summer. No academics, just soldier training, 8 weeks.
During the third summer myself and all other cadets were sent to military installations around the world. Do you think people shouldn’t be paid for a deployment like that?
The fourth summer you are expected to function as commanding officers in the Corps of Cadets (which is headed by a real live Brigadier General btw.)
And no, I did not receive pay for any of those summer activities that was in addition to or specifically for those activities. I received my ~$3,000 a year and that was for everything, it was them paying me to be educated academically and educated militarily. So honestly unless you view military training as something trainees shouldn’t be given “for free” you can’t view cadets as leeches.
Especially when you consider you have to give up 8 years to the military after you graduate!!
Do you think that it is really doing a huge dent in the cost it actually is to educate you? Right off the bat like 60% of your education is subsidized by the government, that’s before we even factor in tuition. A USMA education is valued at around $225,000. I honestly don’t see how 8 years of military service can’t be seen to equal a value of $225,000 to the Federal Government.
I don’t want to seem arrogant here. But OCS is there to produce officers because we have such a need for officers in the military. But the elite officers, the cream of the crop, come from the Academy. Patton, Grant, Lee, Eisenhower, Schwarzkopf, the list goes on and on. Virtually all of the great military leaders of our history started at the United States Military or United States Naval Academy. These acadmies are integral at creating a class of young men who will some day become the leaders of the United States Armed Forces. You don’t create a foundation like that in OCS.
So the taxpayers have an interest in funding both because we as a nation have an interest in maintaining “regular Army” and, “elite” unites like the Rangers. It costs money to produce greatness above and beyond the average, and that’s exactly what the USMA and other academies are designed to do (in addition to the post-Academy institutions like the Army War College and et al.)
I’m a fairly wealth guy. I could afford to send you to school. If I had come up to you after your senior year in high school and agreed to pay for you to go to any school you so chose outright, and also pay for your living expenses; would you take me up on that offer if the only caveat was you had to sign a contract saying once you were done you had to serve 5 years active duty in the military and 3 years in the reserves (otherwise the amount I gave you instantly becomes a loan that must be repaid in full within 30 days)?
Do you really think these cadets are “pulling one over” on Uncle Sam? A four year degre = 8 years of your life? And more than just time it could also equal you DYING for your country. And if you change your mind about it after graduation you would go to prison.
If you decide to say “fuck off” to your student loans you have assets seized, may have to declare bankruptcy et cetera. Not quite the same as being sent to Ft. Leavenworth.
The students who attend the service academies are among the most impressive high school graduates in the country. There’s no doubt that the vast majority, if not all of them, could attend a civilian school on either scholarships or loans and come out with a bachelors degree and a significantly higher paying job than the Second Lieutenant or Ensign. They’re sacrificing several years of considerable earnings in return for their education. NinjaChick, you’re comparing the first four years of the cadets’ commitment to four years of civilian life without considering the years that follow.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen Martin Hyde post something I’ve agreed with before. I’m a certified tree hugging liberal hippie with a beard and ponytail, but I have family members who’ve attended West Point and the Naval Academy, and others who have taught at West Point. I’ve also seen where they’ve had to go and what they’ve had to do in return for that education. To say that it’s “just a college” is simply not true.
I’m not saying we should get rid of military officers. There’s two seperate systems in place to train them (OCS and the academies). I don’t think the redundancy is nessecary. Also (and I know I’ll get hell for this), my liberties have never been ‘defended’ by the military. Never. I have never been attacked by anyone who wants to imprison me. The closest I’ve come, in fact, to someone wanting to take away my liberties, is various acts of governmental legislation. I am, in no way, benefitting from any actions of the American military.
Selecting a major does not a college make. The academies educate students, in various fields. That is their primary purpose. I know fully well that there’s a lot of extra, mandatory training. Great: that’s a choice someone makes when they join the military. I chose my college, and thereby chose to be in a lot of debt when I graduate.
Why do we need an regular and an ‘elite’ military? My sister is going to be an engineer, likely a professor at the Academy. It would be far more cost-effective to either hire someone from the private sector to do so after they got an education on their own, or to simply train an enlisted member of the armed forces as a specialist, and have them teach.
Regardless: Fine. Keep the academies. Why should a cadet who is simply a cadet - who doesn’t hold any sort of quasi-officer position within the cadet body - be paid for going to school? Give them a free education. Why should they get a paycheck for it? I personally don’t think it should be free, but I also acknowledge that A) other people disagree, and B) I won’t be convinced that those other people are correct. I have a really, really hard time coming up with a justification for paying someone simply to study. Providing room and board and a solid education, I think, ought to be compensation enough.
This does, to me, reek of elitism. “Well, they provide the foundation, but we’re better.” There are no noteworthy generals/admirals who’ve gone through OCS? They just aren’t ‘good enough’?
No, I wouldn’t take you up on the deal, because I have no desire to serve in the military. I could have joined the National Guard, or the reserves, or some such, and a lot of my money problems would’ve disappeared. I don’t want to, though. I fail to see what relevance this has to the point at hand.
