How about universal non-military service?

[Bear_Nenno]

@msmith537

Problem is that there are not to many options for students who are not at least pursuing a degree. Most likely they won’t be able to find jobs where they can afford to live on their own and would have to stay at home anyway. They won’t be exposed to any new surroundings like they would if they went to college, the peace corp or the military.

That’s a pretty good argument for mandatory government service. It would be a good experience for people right out of highschool. They could get used to being away from home. It would be sort of a right-of-passage. It would get them out of the nest and out doing something.

Yeah you know what? We don’t seem to be wanting for clerks, firemen, metermaids or auto-machanics in this country. Do you percieve a shortage that we need to start drafting them?

A shortage? Nope. Ohhh, and Garbage Men. Garbage men would be on that list too. But there’s no shortage of them either.

What exactly is the point of this indentured servitude anyway? What social problems do you think that this system will address? As already pointed out, if this work was so worthwhile, there would be someone willing to pay to have it done.

People do pay. It’s called taxes. I think that this mandatory service helps out smaller countries that are not collecting enough money in taxes to pay for all these services. But the “people” still need these services if the country is going to survive. That’s the social problem it address. In America, we don’t have that problem. So there is no need for such a system.
Like I said, I never claimed it would be a good idea in America. I just want to describe the manner in which such a program might function or operate.

Is this more “people learn fundamental life building skills and values by being forced to do crappy work they don’t want to do” bullshit or “everyone should share in experience societies crappiest jobs” bullshit?

It would be more like the people of the country need certain services; the government cannot function without certain others. The government cannot afford to pay for these jobs. So it could either raise taxes to a ridiculous rate and force it’s people into poverty forever, taking the country down with it. Or it could ask the people to give up two years of non-military service to keep the country going strong.
I think that’s pretty much the main reason to implement such a program.

And it’s not slavery. It’s not slavery because you are FREE TO LEAVE. It’s kinda like a tax, but you give service instead of money. But no one is forcing you to stay in that country. You can freely leave and go to any other country. But part of the payment to live in the country is to serve it. If you don’t like that, you are not stuck there. It’s not like a communist country that doesn’t let you leave. There are pleanty of South Koreans who moved to America and never had to give their 2 years of service. I wonder what would happen if they moved back after they were 32 though??

[Bear_Nenno]

@MGibson

What do you expect to achieve in two years what couldn’t be done in 13?

I’d say that the next two years helps the government more than it helps the person. The person may learn and benefit from the experience, but I don’t think that would be the main purpose.

[Ninja_Pizza_Guy]

@D.E.S.K.Top668

First off, I’d like to comment on the use of the word “volunteer” in the OP. Giving somebody a choice of where they are forced to do their community service doesn’t equal volunteering.

My wording there was less than it could be. The entire program as I proposed it would be non-voluntary but volunteering for hospitals etc would fall under it.

[Ninja_Pizza_Guy]

I still think it’d be a good idea, but I can’t explain why. Furthermore, there are quite a few reasons that have been brought up that make it sound like it’d be a bad idea. Since it’ll never happen, it’s all just a mental exercise anyway. I’d like to thank everyone for playing.

[yBeayf]

So it could either raise taxes to a ridiculous rate and force it’s people into poverty forever, taking the country down with it. Or it could ask the people to give up two years of non-military service to keep the country going strong.

Universal poverty, or universal slavery? A more ridiculous false dilemma never have I seen.

It’s not slavery because you are FREE TO LEAVE.

Bullshit. Consider the US’s current efforts to ensure that if the draft is reactivated, escapaping to Canada won’t be an option again. Do you really think they would let citizens leave the country if they felt it wasn’t in their best interest to do so? And offering exile as an alternative to slavery is no better than offering imprisonment as an alternative.

One thing I haven’t seen mentioned in this thread: how does this proposal not violate the 13th amendment? It is, by any reasonable definition, “involuntary servitude” at the least, those who would be subjected to it would not necessarily have been convicted of a crime, and since the service is not military in nature, it wouldn’t fall under Article 1 providing for Congressional authority to provide for calling force and organizing a militia.

[Ms2001]

Jesus. Everyone’s always so gung-ho to propose mandatory service and other restrictions on rights, as long as they only affect young people. If you think it’s so great to force people to work at jobs they’d rather not do, maybe you should start with yourself.

Yeah, this would be equivalent to slavery, and so is the draft. Speaking of which, haven’t you noticed the military’s opposition to the draft? People who don’t want to be soldiers, surprisingly enough, don’t make very good soldiers. There’s no reason to think they’d make good garbage men, construction workers, or librarians if they don’t want to be there either.

@Bear_Nenno

It would be more like the people of the country need certain services; the government cannot function without certain others. The government cannot afford to pay for these jobs.

It can’t? How are they being done today, then?

[Bear_Nenno]

@yBeafy

Bullshit. Consider the US’s current efforts to ensure that if the draft is reactivated, escapaping to Canada won’t be an option again. Do you really think they would let citizens leave the country if they felt it wasn’t in their best interest to do so?

Since we’re making up the program, we can make up the rules. And the rule would be that you could leave the country. And besides, as I mentioned, people who no longer wish to live in the country can up and leave. It’s their choice. Even if they don’t want to live there simply because they’d rather not give up two years of service.

And offering exile as an alternative to slavery is no better than offering imprisonment as an alternative.

I like to think of it as a “No Freeloaders” rule. Why should those who sham out of their commitment get to stay and reap all the benefits?

@Mr2001

It can’t? How are they being done today, then?

Ummm… well, in a country that CAN’T afford to pay for these services (Like South Korea), they’re doing exactly what I’ve described. They’re making the citizens do it for roughly 30 dollars a month. As I said before, the US has no need for such a program, because the government has so much money. But if that ever changed. Say there was a huge global war that was really, really, depleting the resources and tax money of the United States. And the government could no longer afford all these services and employees.
I’m saying that instead of making PAID military service mandatory, they could make all the non-military jobs mandatory instead… oh, and not pay them much.

Jesus. Everyone’s always so gung-ho to propose mandatory service and other restrictions on rights, as long as they only affect young people. If you think it’s so great to force people to work at jobs they’d rather not do, maybe you should start with yourself.

There’s no way this comment was directed toward me. Where are all these Old People who are gung-ho to propose mandatory service?

[Odesio]

@Bear_Nenno

I’d say that the next two years helps the government more than it helps the person. The person may learn and benefit from the experience, but I don’t think that would be the main purpose.

If the government needs people to fulfill certain jobs then they can offer real employment to people instead of indentured servitude. I don’t really see how the government is going to benefit from a largely unmotivated workforce. If I had been forced into such a program I assure you that calling my work half-assed would have been an insult to half-assed.

Marc

[Ms2001]

@Bear_Nenno

Ummm… well, in a country that CAN’T afford to pay for these services (Like South Korea), they’re doing exactly what I’ve described. They’re making the citizens do it for roughly 30 dollars a month.

Sorry, I see now that you were referring to SK with that comment. My mistake.

Say there was a huge global war that was really, really, depleting the resources and tax money of the United States. And the government could no longer afford all these services and employees.
I’m saying that instead of making PAID military service mandatory, they could make all the non-military jobs mandatory instead… oh, and not pay them much.

Indeed. That would be a tough choice to make at a hard time, though. I hope the United States never becomes that desperate in my lifetime.

There’s no way this comment was directed toward me. Where are all these Old People who are gung-ho to propose mandatory service?

It was directed at people like Fritz Hollings and the folks behind community service requirements at colleges, as jimmmy and vivalostwages mentioned. Even some high schools are imposing these requirements.

If we were to pass a law today that required all 18-21 year olds to give up their freedom temporarily and perform public service, 70% of the current population (including myself) would be exempt from ever having to join up, simply because of their age. Regardless of the merits of mandatory service, it’s simply not right to give them a free pass just because they’ve been here longer, but AFAICT that’s what all these proposals would do.

[Bear_Nenno]

If I had been forced into such a program I assure you that calling my work half-assed would have been an insult to half-assed.

LOL!!

I guess for such a thing to work, it would take a populace with great National Pride, love and respect for the government, and a sense of Duty. One that views the service as being necessary for the greater good. One that wants to do whatever they can to make the country strong and successful. Since America hasn’t witnessed such a populace since the 1940s, it probably would not work well there.

Maybe we could threaten all the half-assers with earlier curfews or more time to serve or something? Or reward the harder workers with early release or more benefits or even more pay.

hmmm… kinda starting to sound like prison.

[msmith537]

@Bear_Nenno

Maybe we could threaten all the half-assers with earlier curfews or more time to serve or something? Or reward the harder workers with early release or more benefits or even more pay.

Yeah we already do that. It’s called “having a job”. It automatically provides the carrot and stick incentives through “raises” and “getting fired”

@Bear_Nenno

That’s a pretty good argument for mandatory government service. It would be a good experience for people right out of highschool. They could get used to being away from home. It would be sort of a right-of-passage. It would get them out of the nest and out doing something.

We also have that. It’s called “college”, “the military”, or “getting a job”. Funding for your crazy program would be better served providing financial aid for college.

@Bear_Nenno

Quote:
What exactly is the point of this indentured servitude anyway? What social problems do you think that this system will address? As already pointed out, if this work was so worthwhile, there would be someone willing to pay to have it done.

People do pay. It’s called taxes. I think that this mandatory service helps out smaller countries that are not collecting enough money in taxes to pay for all these services. But the “people” still need these services if the country is going to survive. That’s the social problem it address. In America, we don’t have that problem. So there is no need for such a system.
Like I said, I never claimed it would be a good idea in America. I just want to describe the manner in which such a program might function or operate.

I don’t see why people should be forced to travel overseas and live in some dirtball country digging sewers and building shanty towms against their will.

@Bear_Nenno

It would be more like the people of the country need certain services; the government cannot function without certain others. The government cannot afford to pay for these jobs. So it could either raise taxes to a ridiculous rate and force it’s people into poverty forever, taking the country down with it. Or it could ask the people to give up two years of non-military service to keep the country going strong.
I think that’s pretty much the main reason to implement such a program.

Maybe basic economics courses would be more beneficial?

I don’t get what you are suggesting. Should people from industrialized countries be forced to volunteer helping third world countries or is this a system that third world countries would implement internally?

@Bear_Nenno

And it’s not slavery. It’s not slavery because you are FREE TO LEAVE. It’s kinda like a tax, but you give service instead of money. But no one is forcing you to stay in that country.

Work under threat of banishment? Sorry…still indentured servitude.

@Bear_Nenno

I guess for such a thing to work, it would take a populace with great National Pride, love and respect for the government, and a sense of Duty. One that views the service as being necessary for the greater good. One that wants to do whatever they can to make the country strong and successful. Since America hasn’t witnessed such a populace since the 1940s…

We witnessed such a populace in the 1940s all right. It was called Nazi Germany.
Really this is such an idiotic idea. Countries grow strong by building strong economies. Strong economies are not built by forcing large segments of the population to perform “busy work” to foster some bullshit sense of nationalism. They are built by allowing people to pursue their own interests, develop their own careers and build sustainable businesses. There is an oportunity cost associated with the future engineer spending two years digging ditches or the future computer programmer filing DMV licenses (and don’t kid yourself, the only jobs that this program will provide are the ones that take 2 weeks or less to train someone to do)

[Odesio]

@Bear_Nenno

Maybe we could threaten all the half-assers with earlier curfews or more time to serve or something? Or reward the harder workers with early release or more benefits or even more pay.

hmmm… kinda starting to sound like prison.

You might want to think about that when considering mandatory civil service to be a good idea. I’d rather join the military then be forced into civil service.

Marc

[msmith537]

@MGibson

You might want to think about that when considering mandatory civil service to be a good idea.

Double-plus good, brother!

Service IS citizenship!

[Bear_Nenno]

@msmith537

Funding for your crazy program would be better served providing financial aid for college.

Funding? You dont think this would be SAVING the government money?? Have you been paying attention at all?

I don’t see why people should be forced to travel overseas and live in some dirtball country digging sewers and building shanty towms against their will.

Where is this coming from?

I don’t get what you are suggesting.

I can see that!

Should people from industrialized countries be forced to volunteer helping third world countries or is this a system that third world countries would implement internally?

We’re definitely not on the same wavelength here. So I’ll start again…
The OP was asking about mandatory nonmilitary government service. He made a couple suggestions about “Internal Peace Corp” type stuff (internal being that no one would be shipped off to help other countries), but he couldn’t think of any more “useful stuff” volunteers could be used for. He also mentioned maybe having a “Basic Training” type period and some other things.

So I came along and tried to mention other things these “volunteers” could be used for. I was showing that there is a whole huge list of things a person could do for the government that was nonmilitary related.
Also, because I thought it was relevant, I mentioned how South Korean citizens serve their government in either a military or nonmilitary manner for approximately two years. They are paid only nominaly for this service. They are sent to a Basic Training, and advanced job training, they are given a place to live and food. That’s pretty much it.

Having a little understanding of their system, I suggested for the OP a simple modification that would exclude military service. So now we’re left with citizens only doing the nonmilitary government work. This includes law enforcement, fire fighting, tax auditing, science labs and research (people can serve after college, remember), garbage collection, secretarial work, desk jobs and computer jobs galore, plumbing, electrical, road maintenance, government building construction… anything your tax dollars usually have to pay much, much more for.

Such a system would offer some benefit and life experience for the citizen, but more importantly it saves the government billions in expenses. As I mentioned, I think the whole point of such a system is to keep strong a country that cannot afford to pay for these things. The idea is not to give the citizens some kind of valuable education or something. The citizens need these services and the government needs to find a way to provide them. So such a system is in place to have citizens do these jobs for about two years. Then they can keep that job and become a supervisor and help the noobies, or they can go pursue the job they want.

I never said this is something I think the US needs. In fact, I mentioned a very specific time that such a program may be necessary. This is why the whole “why can’t they just be paid for it” and “it’s called a job” comments don’t apply. In my scenario, the government can’t afford to pay for these mandatory and much needed jobs and services. It would be like a draft to help the government function and survive, instead of a draft to help win a war. This could kinda be worse though, because at least war draftees get paid for their service.

Maybe I got off the point of the OP. Maybe the OP was thinking more along the lines of college requirements or something. But it was clearly suggesting nonmilitary government service, and not just mandatory volunteer service at nonprofit organizations.

Work under threat of banishment? Sorry…still indentured servitude.

No, it would be “work under the threat that if you and all your peers don’t you might not have a country left to live in”. That and “No freeloaders”. Why should you get to stay in a country that’s only kept strong by the involuntary service of your peers.

@MGibson

You might want to think about that when considering mandatory civil service to be a good idea. I’d rather join the military then be forced into civil service.

I never once considered it a good idea.

[yBeayf]

No, it would be “work under the threat that if you and all your peers don’t you might not have a country left to live in”. That and “No freeloaders”. Why should you get to stay in a country that’s only kept strong by the involuntary service of your peers.

There’s a difference between a country or nation and the government that happens to be ruling it at the time. I may owe something to my country, or I may not, but I owe jack shit to the government.

[Bear_Nenno]

But you believe the people can function effectively without a government.

[yBeayf]

But you believe the people can function effectively without a government.

No. I am not an anarchist.

[ITR_champion]

Philosophically I don’t have any problem with a proposal like this one. We live in a civil society, and as the government, as Hobbes said, is the only thing protecting us from leading nasty brutish, short lives, it is permitted to place requirements on us. It may require us to refrain from murder, to get a license before driving, to join the military and fight the Germans and Japanese, and it might require a reasonable period of civil service if it wanted to. The founding fathers could have put an eleventh amendment on the Bill of Rights if they wanted to ban the draft, but they didn’t.

My objection is entirely practical. I’ve worked with a federal government office the National Park Service) doing volunteer work, as have many of my family members and friends. All of us agree that the offices we worked with are just badly run. Administration is inefficient, paperwork gets lost or delayed, tasks aren’t scheduled in advance or in an intelligent manner, no one has any idea who’s supposed to be in charge of what, there’s no evaluation of whether jobs are being done right, and people who don’t do the work don’t get removed from their positions.

Picture this scenario. Bob, manager of an NPS office somewhere, decides he has a trail maintenance project, so he submits it to the civil service office. Six months later a group of ten draftees is chosen and arrives at the location. By that time, Bob has been shuffled to a different job, and Joe, the new manager, doesn’t have any clue why these ten draftees have been sent to his office. So what does he do with them? And most likely even their housing hasn’t been prepared, since no one at the office actually knew they were coming. etc…

[iamthewalrus_3]

@Bear_Nenno

I like to think of it as a “No Freeloaders” rule. Why should those who sham out of their commitment get to stay and reap all the benefits?

Why should those who are already here get to reap the benefits of a “commitment” they’ve manufactured and applies only to those who come after them? As proposed, everyone over 20 years old would have no additional burden due to such a plan. This boils down to a tax on the young. Since they haven’t got any money, this program takes their freedom and time, instead.

Any governmental programs that really need to be run can be run the same way we’ve run programs in the past: the government can tax the populace and hire people to do the jobs.

Calling someone who objects to being forcibly “volunteered” for civil servitude because of an age limit a “freeloader,” while ignoring the rest of society who hasn’t been affected in the slightest is absurd.

[JohnBckWLD]

It wasn’t just Sen. On The Fritz Hollings, Sen. John Kerry floated the idea as well during his last campaign

…John Kerry will call on all Americans - tapping into the idealism and ingenuity of Americans and putting it to work on building a safer, stronger, and more secure nation. Americans already make an enormous difference in their communities, volunteering, in Boys and Girls Clubs or homeless shelters. Many Americans do full time service. John Kerry believes that in these times, we need to bolster these efforts with a nationwide commitment to national service. Whether it is a Summer of Service for our teenagers, helping young people serve their country in return for college, or the Older Americans in Service program, John Kerry’s plan will call on every American of every age and every background to serve…

Rep Charlie Rangel’s hair-brained ploy aside, even old-guard right-wingers support mandatory national service: William F. Buckley first proposed it 15 years ago in Gratitude: Reflections on What We Owe to Our Country