# The homeless, the impoverished and the Military **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 26, 2009, 1:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-homeless-the-impoverished-and-the-military/515173 "2009-10-26T13:32:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-homeless-the-impoverished-and-the-military/515173/21 "2009-10-26T16:13:51Z")
> [@](#): > > Are there no Prisons? […]And the Union workhouses.’ demanded Scrooge. 'Are they still in operation? plus ça change… ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-homeless-the-impoverished-and-the-military/515173/22 "2009-10-26T16:19:11Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > A lot of them are also people who never were provided with full on skills as they grew up. Since the majority are children you are correct. But, do people believe there is no drinking or drugging in the Army? We send them into the garden spot of drug growth and of course they would never partake. ---
**Author:** ![ZPG\_Zealot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/e47c2d/32.png) [@ZPG\_Zealot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZPG_Zealot)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-homeless-the-impoverished-and-the-military/515173/23 "2009-10-26T16:22:12Z")
> [@Kearsen](#): > > Now we are getting somewhere!!! When did you first realize that all welfare recipients are thieves, drug addicts and rapists? Sorry, that wasn’t a good analogy. The analogy I was trying to make was that the same conditions that often lead to the being homeless and unemployed (of which drug addiction and mental illness are major factors) would carry over into the military and would make them very poor quality soldiers. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-homeless-the-impoverished-and-the-military/515173/24 "2009-10-26T16:23:52Z")
> [@Kearsen](#): > > I think I covered that in my OP. However, if alcoholism is the prevailing factor wouldn’t you think they might be rehabilitated by basic training and no access to the alcohol? No. At best, all you would do is detox them (and put training facilities in the position of having to deal with the physical consequences of that detox). There’s a hell of a lot more to treating alcoholism than just detox. Most real, hardcore alcoholics would just go AWOL after a day or two anyway. It’s not difficult to escape from Basic Training. My CC at the (now defunct) Orlando NTC even took us and showed us the best spot to go over the fence. They didn’t really care if someone took off, and didn’t try that hard to stop them. We had several overnight disappearances in my company alone (most got caught by the local cops and brought back, but not all). An alcoholic going nuts for a drink is just going to split. ---
**Author:** ![Blalron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/35a633/32.png) [@Blalron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blalron)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-homeless-the-impoverished-and-the-military/515173/25 "2009-10-26T16:26:50Z")
> [@Kearsen](#): > > Are those two little gems from you not diametrically opposed? After reading and rereading to try to discover what apparent contradiction you’ve seen, no I don’t see any contradiction. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-homeless-the-impoverished-and-the-military/515173/26 "2009-10-26T16:33:09Z")
> [@Kearsen](#): > > I’m not sure I follow you. Surely they don’t want to go to boot camp. > I mean, I would agree with you because I think of alcoholism as more a mental addiction than an actual physical addiction. No, it’s a congenital, physiological disease. > [@](#): > > You still fail to address the question posed? Could others benefit from this and why would them “working” for their free handouts be a bad thing? The US miltary could not benefit from a massive influx of people with chemical addictions and mental illnesses, no. The US no longer has a “Welfare” system, by the way. Clinton got rid of it. Your impression of able bodied people sitting around collecting checks for nothing is not based on reality. The system now in place (TANF, which essentially replaced welfare) already requires employment as a condition of assistance, and a five year limit. ---
**Author:** ![Blalron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/35a633/32.png) [@Blalron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blalron)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-homeless-the-impoverished-and-the-military/515173/27 "2009-10-26T16:35:33Z")
To clarify: I think the employer-employee relationship, at least in the cases of those on the lower end of the wage scale, is [wage slavery](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery). So long as an employee absolutely requires an employer to survive, there’s an unacceptable bargaining inbalance. This is why I support a [Basic Income](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=535834): An income granted to all on an unconditional basis that is sufficient to meet all basic needs for food, clothing, and shelter. Military conscription is even worse. An enlisted man can’t quit, or he will be court martialed. ---
**Author:** ![Beware\_of\_Doug](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/278dde/32.png) [@Beware\_of\_Doug](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beware_of_Doug)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-homeless-the-impoverished-and-the-military/515173/28 "2009-10-26T16:36:34Z")
> [@Kearsen](#): > > FDR’s policies were closely tied to the great depression’s increasing rise in unemployment. This is different in that unemployment is nowhere near what it was. Our military is also nothing like what it was in the 1930s. It was a skeleton force, with a lot less of the training, weapons and warrior culture that now separate it from civilian life. ---
**Author:** ![Tastes\_of\_Chocolate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tastes_of_chocolate/32/3232_2.png) [@Tastes\_of\_Chocolate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tastes_of_Chocolate)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-homeless-the-impoverished-and-the-military/515173/29 "2009-10-26T17:20:33Z")
Which jobs are you going to put these people in? I don’t see thousands of jobs sitting unfilled, as people loll around eating bon-bons. So will you take these jobs from people that already have them? Maybe you will create “make work” jobs, that the tax payers will have to pay for. Will you offer benefits? Can we as the taxpayers afford to pay people a living wage + benefits, for make work? How about the children that will now have to be put into daycares? Will your program pay the parents enough to cover daycare + living wage + benefits? ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-homeless-the-impoverished-and-the-military/515173/30 "2009-10-26T17:45:42Z")
> [@Kearsen](#): > > I mean, I would agree with you because I think of alcoholism as more a mental addiction than an actual physical addiction. I guess this is a hijack, but I’m curious as to the implication of “mental addiction” in this phrase. Does this mean that somehow alcoholism is easier to cure? How does the physical effects of alcoholism, like delirium tremens (or the DTs) caused by withdrawal of alcohol, factor into this belief? How about the relationship between genetic history and alcoholism? Sorry if this is too far off topic, but I genuinely don’t understand this idea that something may be less addictive because it is only “mentally” addictive, or that “physical” addiction is somehow more serious, or that “mentally” addictions are easier to kick, or something like that. ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-homeless-the-impoverished-and-the-military/515173/31 "2009-10-26T18:03:14Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > No. At best, all you would do is detox them (and put training facilities in the position of having to deal with the physical consequences of that detox). There’s a hell of a lot more to treating alcoholism than just detox. > > Most real, hardcore alcoholics would just go AWOL after a day or two anyway. It’s not difficult to escape from Basic Training. My CC at the (now defunct) Orlando NTC even took us and showed us the best spot to go over the fence. They didn’t really care if someone took off, and didn’t try that hard to stop them. We had several overnight disappearances in my company alone (most got caught by the local cops and brought back, but not all). An alcoholic going nuts for a drink is just going to split. In your analogy, if he splits that is fine (he just has to find something else to do for money) However, like I answered a bit further down than you probably read, Alcoholism is a mental disease with ties to genetics as well so I don’t advocate sending alcoholics into our Military. However, those that are fit to should be given the opportunity to work (for the government in the Military or elsewhere) ---
**Author:** ![Dripping](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d2c977/32.png) [@Dripping](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dripping)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-homeless-the-impoverished-and-the-military/515173/32 "2009-10-26T18:04:34Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > A lot of them are also people who never were provided with full on skills as they grew up. “provided with”?? 😕 No one “provided” me with my skills, I worked hard to **learn** them. Any ablebodied person over age 16 who just sits around waiting to be “provided with” anything is just a lazy self-entitled leeach on society. ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-homeless-the-impoverished-and-the-military/515173/33 "2009-10-26T18:07:00Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > I guess this is a hijack, but I’m curious as to the implication of “mental addiction” in this phrase. Does this mean that somehow alcoholism is easier to cure? How does the physical effects of alcoholism, like delirium tremens (or the DTs) caused by withdrawal of alcohol, factor into this belief? How about the relationship between genetic history and alcoholism? > > Sorry if this is too far off topic, but I genuinely don’t understand this idea that something may be less addictive because it is only “mentally” addictive, or that “physical” addiction is somehow more serious, or that “mentally” addictions are easier to kick, or something like that. I never said that, at all. In fact, in my opinion, a mental addiction is the worse of the two. ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-homeless-the-impoverished-and-the-military/515173/34 "2009-10-26T18:08:37Z")
> [@Tastes\_of\_Chocolate](#): > > Which jobs are you going to put these people in? I don’t see thousands of jobs sitting unfilled, as people loll around eating bon-bons. So will you take these jobs from people that already have them? Maybe you will create “make work” jobs, that the tax payers will have to pay for. Will you offer benefits? Can we as the taxpayers afford to pay people a living wage + benefits, for make work? How about the children that will now have to be put into daycares? Will your program pay the parents enough to cover daycare + living wage + benefits? From my OP: “and/or performing other jobs most likely to be seen done by community service folks” ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-homeless-the-impoverished-and-the-military/515173/35 "2009-10-26T18:13:24Z")
> [@Blalron](#): > > To clarify: I think the employer-employee relationship, at least in the cases of those on the lower end of the wage scale, is [wage slavery](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery). So long as an employee absolutely requires an employer to survive, there’s an unacceptable bargaining inbalance. This is why I support a [Basic Income](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=535834): An income granted to all on an unconditional basis that is sufficient to meet all basic needs for food, clothing, and shelter. > > Military conscription is even worse. An enlisted man can’t quit, or he will be court martialed. The basic income premise is one that I could get behind, if for no other reason, that it benefits everyone. I just don’t see it happening anytime soon, if at all. ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-homeless-the-impoverished-and-the-military/515173/36 "2009-10-26T18:16:50Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > No, it’s a congenital, physiological disease. > > The US miltary could not benefit from a massive influx of people with chemical addictions and mental illnesses, no. > > The US no longer has a “Welfare” system, by the way. Clinton got rid of it. Your impression of able bodied people sitting around collecting checks for nothing is not based on reality. The system now in place (TANF, which essentially replaced welfare) already requires employment as a condition of assistance, and a five year limit. Let me pose a question to you: If you were unemployed for five years would you be able to “make it”? Five years is too long. And you get credit for “looking for work” and “working 20 hours a week” By the time its said and done, people will have been on it for ten years. Empower the people, not enslave them. By continuing to give handouts to folks, you help enslave the people you are trying to better. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-homeless-the-impoverished-and-the-military/515173/37 "2009-10-26T18:19:11Z")
> [@Kearsen](#): > > I never said that, at all. In fact, in my opinion, a mental addiction is the worse of the two. Fair enough. FTR, I don’t see that there’s any real difference between psychological or physiological addiction. Addicted is addicted. ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-homeless-the-impoverished-and-the-military/515173/38 "2009-10-26T19:30:39Z")
> [@Dripping](#): > > “provided with”?? 😕 No one “provided” me with my skills, I worked hard to **learn** them. Any ablebodied person over age 16 who just sits around waiting to be “provided with” anything is just a lazy self-entitled leeach on society. You didn’t have any parents? No friends? No teachers? No mentors? Never read a book? You didn’t drop out of your mother’s womb and immediatly slither off into the wilderness to make your own way in the world, like a baby lizard. You were so helpless for the first few years of your life that you shit your pants every day, and someone had to wipe it up. You couldn’t life a spoon, someone had to stuff a nipple into your mouth, or shovel babyfood in. You were so stupid you had to be taught not to run into the street. You had to be taught to speak, to read, to add and subtract, to tie your shoes, and wipe your own ass. And today your life is dependent on thousands of other people–farmers, bakers, teachers, cops, firemen, engineers, scientists. You have learned all sorts of things, but how many of those things did you figure out yourself? Or were you taught them? And even if you’ve come up with a couple of good ideas in your lifetime, well congratulations, you’ve made things 0.001% better for the rest of us. And even those good ideas and inventions and discoveries depend on millions of people over thousands of years making small improvements too. A hunter-gatherer living in the Amazon Rainforest was provided by his society with an incredible amount of training and stored knowledge. And as proof, drop him into the Amazon Rainforest naked, and he’ll survive. Drop you into the Amazon Rainforest naked, and you’ll be dead in a week. Of course, drop that tribesman into mid-town Manhattan naked, and he might not live more than a few minutes. The point is, you weren’t born knowing how to live in 2009 America. You were carefully trained since birth to know how. So carefully you don’t even realize that you were trained. ---
**Author:** ![sqweels](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f19dbf/32.png) [@sqweels](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sqweels)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-homeless-the-impoverished-and-the-military/515173/39 "2009-10-26T19:52:37Z")
Of course it takes both a teacher (who more often than not is being paid by someone else) and some effort on the part of the student for skills to be learned. ---
**Author:** ![Chessic\_Sense](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/7c8e57/32.png) [@Chessic\_Sense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chessic_Sense)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 12:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-homeless-the-impoverished-and-the-military/515173/40 "2009-10-27T00:37:46Z")
> [@Blalron](#): > > I find it deeply disturbing that so many poor in our country have signed up for the military, not because of patriotic fervor, but purely out of financial desperation. If we cut back on military expenditures, we could easily afford to pay for more non-military vocational training, plus room and board for the impoverished. Your solution to poverty and unemployment is to…cut jobs? > [@Blalron](#): > > So long as an employee absolutely requires an employer to survive, there’s an unacceptable bargaining inbalance. You don’t think that people are just paid a figure off the top of their head, do you? It seems like you’re forgetting that the employer needs the employees to survive as well. They don’t make any money working for themselves, after all. If the employee had any skills that someone else was willing to pay for, then the imbalance goes the other way. I think you need to take your commie philosophy back to the drawing board. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-homeless-the-impoverished-and-the-military/515173.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-homeless-the-impoverished-and-the-military/515173.md?page=3)