Would national service be a good idea?

Question

I don't mean army service, rather two years spent serving the nation as needed, IE assigned ot work on projects or work which will benefit the nation before getting the right to vote.

The exact nature of the 'service' could be determined by need/govt. I think this would have several benefits,

1 perhaps people would value the vote if they had to earn it.
2 ANY immigrant would also have to do their time but would then have at least contributed something to the country and so have earned their place making it harder for racists to call them freebooters etc
3 young people could do something useful instead of coming out of school onto govt funded crap courses designed to keep them off the dole.

Answer 1

I don't think assigning it to them is a good thing.. but I think that giving them options between the peace corp, military, law enforcement.. anything like that really.. 2 years after highschool.. that doesn't sound like a BAD idea.. also might throw in that those that complete higher level education.. doctorates.. things like that.. could also receive their citizenship...

Answer 2

This question sounds a bit like the BNP's policy of compulsory national service (except they specifically mean service in the armed forces). Those who refused to do it or didn't complete it would be denied the vote, and those who did complete it would be allowed to keep a standard issue army assault rifle in their home, giving lunatic gunmen a chance to repeat massacres like Dunblane. Madness!

I am a steadfast supporter of our armed forces by the way, but the last thing they need is to be inundated with new and mostly unwilling recruits who they would have to train and keep in line.

As for forcing young people into low paid or unpaid work, it has already been tried under the Thatcher government and turned out to be a miserable failure. It was simply used as an excuse for employers to get jobs done on the cheap, and most of the young people who took part ended up on the dole once they had finished. It was called the "Youth Training Scheme" or YTS.

A much better course of action would be to reintroduce an apprenticeship or job placement scheme to teach young people a useful skill while paying them a decent wage and giving them a good chance, if not an absolute guarantee, of employment afterwards..

Answer 3

NO. And the reason becomes obvious when you bring the Trade Unions into the equation. Trade Unions are there to protect the rights of their worker members. They are not going to sit around silently while a government places non-Union [low paid] workers in jobs which the Unions want for their members.

This same rule of thumb applies to work given to people serving prison sentences. The Unions will not stand by and allow people in prisons to do work that their law abiding members outside should be doing. Result, most prisoners spend their time either banged up in their cells or making mail bags for Royal Mail.

Any form of National Service will cost the tax payer dear. There's the minimum wage to consider. We're talking about something like over one million young men and women doing service for the nation at the taxpayers expense with nothing to show for it at the end, except a generation of resentful people, who have lost two years of their 'youth' and for what?

I have seen with my own eyes as a Regular Soldier, boy and man in the 1950s and 60s, what National Service does to people. It disrupts their education and stops people earning proper salaries and wages. It is a crap idea.

Answer 4

I'm in favour of proper army national service. Not for all youths out there, but for any youth who breaks the law, say 3 times in a short period, and is in need of some proper discipline.

Why not have them in the army acting for the country, it might give them some self respect and at least they will be earning a living, paying into the country via taxes and keeping away from the people who were getting them into trouble.

It would be an alternative to the Borstals we now don't have on offer.

Answer 5

A better idea would be massive government investment to provide proper jobs - in transport, housing, healthcare, and other public services, with real training programmes and incentives for people on the dole.

During the late 1920s - early 1930s one of the projects by the British government was funding the then Southern Railway to fit all its suburban lines (south of the Thames, in London) with 3rd rail for electric trains. This rail system still brings around half a million people in and out of London every day.

Who says 'public-private initiative' is new? I can't see the present government or any of its successors doing this though. We are trapped in a low-wage economy where much of the investment is going abroad and a pool of unemployed is needed to keep wages down - in a time of full employment wages rise, but the government is in the pocket of big business who don't want that.

Answer 6

I think you make some very good points but I don't quite see it working and it would be confusing to tie it up with voting rights. We would need to set up a new body to police who had the right to vote. People fought and died for universal sufferage.
If young people HAD to "join up" they would feel even more resentful of society.
Our armed forces have been the envy of the world because they have become to mean a proper career to be proud of and not a duty. There are ways of civilians also helping in society but it has to remain voluntary to be meaningful.

Answer 7

i think of national provider stopped for those born after 1939 and the final national provider guy had to serve 30 months as a replace of 24. I did my national provider in 1957 and so a techniques as my dad and mom have been in touch it did me a international of sturdy and consistent with probability it made me a extra powerful guy or woman because of the adventure for the period of the two years. might it artwork this contemporary day, i might say NO. I might desire to believe a number of the quicker comments we now choose professionally knowledgeable workers in this age of contemporary weapons.workers that choose to serve the country and not be crucial drafted into the amenities. there's a extensive distinction between prepared to serve and having to serve.

Answer 8

I earned the vote by being a UK citizen and have enrolled on the voting list. What's you're problem with immigrants? Look back in your family history and you may be very suprised! Do you want our young to become government slaves? Hitler did the same with his youth and look what happened there. Please learn from history.

By the way, the upper age limit to join the armed forces has been raised to 55 in the UK.

Answer 9

It would teach respect and hard work to a young chavy nation and give them a back bone, I am all for National Service but only because I am too old for it now.

Either Join the army, navy, Air Force

Or help your local council with community project etc.

Should be compulsory for anybody not attending university.

Just my view and it will never happen

Answer 10

So you are basically asking every citizen to work for the government for 2 years without payment.

Why not just increase taxes instead?

It amounts to the same in the end. And it's more efficient, since people don't get assigned to jobs they don't want to do.