I recently researched this question for a discussion on another forum. While national service may sound great, it has a great cost associated with it. The draft, when it last existed in the '70's was random in nature, one didn't know if he would be called or not. It was based upon the needs of the military. Not all were called to serve and there were numerouse exemptions and ways to serve in areas out of danger, such as done by our current President. It became more formally random when the lottery selection system was introduced. But, at no time was the entire body of eligible men called to serve in the military.
When one looks at the number of graduating from high school each year, its in the millions. Each person called to universal service would have to be paid a salary, just as soldiers are paid. They would have to be housed and fed. The government would need to provide medical benefits. It would be unfair not to pay reasonable costs and a salary equal to what those on active duty receive. The cost is enormous and not easily absorbed by the current government budget. It would require either an increase in taxes or a reduction of programs funded by Congress, neither very popular plans, even though many say the dislike the way the feds spend money. That may be true, at least until their pet project loses funding.
Universal mandatory service is impractical from a funding viewpoint. A lottery system may reduce and make more affordable a service program, but may not be very popular. Would you like it if you were drafted for service and your friend, who is the same age and got out of school when you did, remains free to do what he/she wants?
To further illiustrate the cost of a universal program of service, when I researched the concept, I found that to set up the program and call up only those between 18 and 42 who were in college would cost over $300 billion.
2006-09-15 19:55:28
·
answer #1
·
answered by jerry f 2
·
4⤊
0⤋
I have no issue with a Peace Corp and mandatory service, though I do not believe it should be used as an out for Republicans if a draft is needed!
2006-09-15 12:20:42
·
answer #2
·
answered by cantcu 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
i did see a reply where someone mentioned that mandated community service is part of some schools' curriculum and they seemed fine with that. how about teaching our kids how to find America on a map? or being able to multiply 2-digit numbers? good grief. just because the public education system implements something does not qualify it as rational, beneficial, or educational. the mandatory national service is just another step to obama's destruction of this once great nation.
2016-03-27 03:20:47
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
People who are doing a job because they have to are not as motivated as people who are doing a job because they want to. Peace Corps volunteers typically work without much direct supervision; they don't have a sergeant who will straighten them out if they get out of line, the way soldiers do. I do not think it would be a good idea.
2006-09-18 05:21:48
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Mandatory National service wreaks of solialism. In America we are proud to have the freedom to choose how we spend our time and resources. We don't like the government telling us how to do it.
So I agree we need more people helping with world issues, but mandatory service is not the way to go about it.
2006-09-15 12:19:57
·
answer #5
·
answered by big-brother 3
·
4⤊
0⤋
We we once a respected country, and Americans were warmly received around the world. Unfortunately with our present administration we are so despised and hated by most peoples of the world, that sending our young men and women as members of the peace corps is sending them into harms way. They could become victims of violence, kidnapping, and death. Most of us Americans fail to recognize how the last 6 years of arrogance, superiority, and colonialism and eliminated us the list of "good guys" that we once so proudly held.
2006-09-16 14:24:00
·
answer #6
·
answered by looking4ziza 3
·
2⤊
1⤋
I agree and the first to join should be George Bush's daughters, term of service 18 months, place Iraq, call to serve first Monday in December. A Christmas present to George now let's see how fast the troops come home.
2006-09-15 12:17:17
·
answer #7
·
answered by Mr. PDQ 4
·
3⤊
1⤋
Yes in most european countrys that is what they do.
I grew up when there was a draft, I belive in nataional service. Maybe 10% of the people I was in basic training with were there because the judge said " jail or the army" mosy of them came out as productive people.
Kennedy said it best "ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country"
2006-09-15 12:29:07
·
answer #8
·
answered by gobobgo55 3
·
2⤊
1⤋
yes I think in good be good to have a manatory peace corp for these reasons
1 It would teach us to be more kind to others
2 by being more kind to others there would be less crime
3 it teach us what disable people and sick people go through
4 it would help us to want to find a cure for all diseases
5 it would make us want to help get the gangs off the street
6 it would help us be more sentive to people needs
7 it would help us to more closer to Jesus
8 it would help us want to give to the poor
9 it would help us visit people in prision
10 it would help us visit people in hospital
i believe it would help us be more sentive to mankind and there would be no crime but we would be doing nothing, but helping people I think it would be great to make manatory cause we would care about peopl weather than commiting crimes and hurting people.
2006-09-19 06:26:19
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, why send our man hours overseas when they are needed at home. Create the Civilian Labor Corps and put them to work improving America.
2006-09-15 17:56:09
·
answer #10
·
answered by Black Sabbath 6
·
2⤊
1⤋