Yesterday the new Time magazine came out for subscribers, and as I was delivering my route I could not help but notice the cover story regarding it is time for a national service program, or something to that effect.

I have not gotten a copy to read yet (was not yet on the stands when I grocery shopped this morning) but am eager to see if this is similar to the thoughts some of us have been expressing here on the boards. Has anyone out there received a subscription copy and had a chance to look at the article? Does anyone have some thoughts on national service they want to share, or re-share?

Personally, I feel that the best way to build a stronger country is through personal investment; not of finances, but of involvement. Putting together a national program for rebuilding our nation's infrastructure could in itself take most off the unemployment rolls, if people really want to work. Better to receive a government chack for a fair day's work than for laying on one's ass watching Oprah.

Could possibly tie in to the state college systems and get tuition credits, or accredited vocational training, for each year of work on a national project.

There are a lot of young folks out there with ideas and ambition and energy, but no means to focus those resources. National Service could be the answer to many of this country's ills.

It depends on if it is voluntary or manditory service.
If it is voluntary, how will it be different from, let's say, the Job Corps?
If it is manditory, what ever happened to free will, comrade?

Right because those evil facists the Swiss and their evil mandatory civil service!

Free will, will still be there, just the free hand out wont be. OMFG People might have to work?!? OH NOZ!

I haven't yet seen the article, but think mandatory national service is an excellent idea. It would provide young people with job training in what *real* work is like, and give them a sense of investment in their communities, as well as provide tangible benefits to their community. That, and if you have any doubts as to the value of this type of work, look around your downtown's curbs and bridges or at the local elementary school (if it's an older neighborhood) and see if you don't see a WPA stamp somewhere on the concrete. Much of the infrastructure that we are still relying on (now crumbling) is now *seventy* years old and dates from the last time we had national public works projects.

There are a lot of ways to sweeten the pot, or lessen the sting (depending on one's perspective) with regard to national service, from improved student loan and other scholastic benefits to improved employment opportunities via apprenticeships, etc. It would also get Americans in the business of actually, erm, making things again, as we've become a society of dog walkers and telephone sanitizers over the past 30 years.

I think a year of mandatory service of the student's choice out of high school, and two for enhanced benefits, would do a world of good for the country both materially and socially, and (as I can't help notice the replies from the vets here) young people are, by and large, *willing*, and even happy, to serve as it gives them 'ownership' in the community and a sense of citizenship as something other than a meaningless word, but that must be earned, so to speak (much as has been, or should be imho, considered in any naturalization process for illegal migrants).

Regards,
Nydia

Mandatory National Service would be one of the best things for this country, whether it be military service, peace corp or a WPA type of program.

I think that having all three of those as an option would be the way to go, the biggest issue being how to divide manpower between all three.


If it is manditory, what ever happened to free will, comrade?

I think comparing this to communism is a bit ridiculious and over reaching.

In such a program, how do you account for those unwilling or unable to work? What if someone just says, "no"?

I'm not entirely opposed. I think everyone should work a few months in food service, for example, to learn how to treat other people. A stint at McDonalds does you a world of learnin'.

The idea is great in principle, and has worked well for several other nations, however we don't have any of the industrial base that predicates a "job corps" type of option anymore, largely limiting it to mandatory military service or peace corps activities. As long as the people who profit off war can't buy their kids out of that, or into desk jobs in bunkers under the Rockies, I'm all for it.

Let me make my stance a little clearer: I'm for the idea wholeheartedly.
After reading Starship Troopers (read the book, not the movie) by Robert Heinlein, I thought manditory Federal Service was a great idea.
I firmly believe that if you own something, you take pride in it.
If you are given something, you don't care about it.
There will be, however, opposition to the idea, predominantly from the ones who expect to collect a paycheck while watching Oprah.
They will draw similarities to <insert facist regime here>.
And can you really blame them? If you got paid just because you process oxygen, wouldn't you feel a bit put off, now that someone (society) thinks you should now have to work?

It's been a while since I read Starship Troopers, but wasn't the idea that you didn't have to do any service, you simply received more right afterwards? That I could buy into. Could work for all sorts of categories - childbirth, travel, voting, etc.

serving provided citizenship. Was a good book and Im all for programs like that, If there are enough options and flexabilty ties with scholarships as mentioned medical benifits. I think there are alot of young people out there that would jump for something besides the military as an option.

Yes, in fact, they had just that sort of scenario. When you completed Federal Service, you became a Citizen, with the right to vote, have children, and travel freely.
While I'm not too keen on the travel restrictions, I really don't have an issue with the childbirth nor the voting issues in the story.

Man am I glad I read the replies this time before going on a rant on Starship Troopers. The book is one of the best social models I've seen even if it's completely fascist at points. Service should give more rights.

Sweden has mandatory military service.
It's fucking awesome.
Though, the service should not have to be miltary in its form, but please - no cushy desk jobs.

it hasnt been mandatory for a long time, dude. although i guess showing up is mandatory.

we don't have any of the industrial base that predicates a "job corps" type of option anymore


And what is to stop the development of that industrial base as a part of the national service program?

1. Develop industrial base.

2. Rebuild infrastucture (roads, bridges, utilities, schools, clinics, etc)

3. Provide for both state and national projects to be coordinated and appropriate credit given for service.


At some point in the future, I have no doubt we will see a push for voting rights to be something that is earned; national service is most likely going to be a component of that discussion. And, as the repair and replacement of infrastructure is not something that will have a finite end, this can be an ongoing program spanning generations. There are so many potential uses for this, the only thing that could stop it is greed; the greed of big business and of unions. It will take some very intelligent wording and some compromise to get legislation passed for national service to become a reality.

Well you've got a bit of a chicken-egg problem there. You want a job corps, but what jobs do they DO?

They're not going to build roads, make shoes, dig ditches, build furniture, or work farms, because we're already unwilling to pay working wage for people to do that now (see massive migrant worker population). I guess healthcare jobs are an option, but those require fairly extensive training that sort of turns into it a schooling program, not a service one. People here don't need (and likely would not accept) roving vaccinations clinics like the Peace Corps runs in malaria-land.

And given the history of our national politics, the way in which we would implement "earned" voting rights fills me with great trepidation.

They could work at the DMV?!@!!!!

Staffing low and mid-level government jobs with temporary volunteers to prevent bureaucratic empire building would actually be a fantastic idea. Imagine if the entire welfare setup wasn't primarily functioning to employ social workers.

Heh, I place social workers slightly below insurgents on my list of people that I hate...

Would be nice though, shake the system up a little bit. Not like it could run much worse.

Imagine if the entire welfare setup wasn't primarily functioning to employ social workers.

I think you are maligning a convenient (and frequent) punching bag here (and I think it's not entirely a coincidence that the fact that these positions are overwhelmingly held by minorities and women and thereby 'easy targets') - and actual social workers make up a small fraction of the Federal social service bureaucracy. Having actually been a client of the Social Security system in a non-default role (as in applied for and received disability) I can say that my caseworkers were by and large extremely competent and helpful, and did their best to make sure that my file didn't get lost or abused by the system. Problems, when they arose (and I have a big one right now), were invariably caused by other areas of the agency, and, I might add, I had no problems with my benefits, etc, at all until 2004 when the Bush Administration cuts and reconfiguration of the agency resulted in huge amounts of client data being simply lost.

One thing you have to understand with regard to HHS in the last decade is that the function of the agency has shifted to a degree unimagined even in the Reagan years from that of a more or less good faith effort to accurately process people and make sure that they received the benefits they were legitimately entitled to, to a primary goal of *preventing* people from receiving benefits (under the guise of eliminating fraud and what I can only describe as a 'new Puritanism') by any means possible, or attaching strict, obscenely heavy paperwork requiring conditions or demands such as mandatory work or schooling (not in itself intrinsically bad but read as: adding additional bureaucracy) to those benefits, all done while funds to HHS itself (its operating budget) were being cut. This was, of course, a recipe for disaster :).

While I don't disagree with you that a suitable position for national service would be entry level paper/data-pushing/telephone service positions at the various Federal agencies, I don't think that this would necessarily solve many of the *actual* problems endemic to these bureaucracies as: 1) if you think lifetime entry level civil servants have a less than stellar attitude towards clients and their cases (the most frequent complaint of applicants to the system), what sort of care do you think a conscripted 18-year old is going to show? and 2) most of the real functional problems with these agencies come from outside the public contact sphere.

Regards,
Nydia

It's been a while since I read Starship Troopers, but wasn't the idea that you didn't have to do any service, you simply received more right afterwards? That I could buy into. Could work for all sorts of categories - childbirth, travel, voting, etc.

Wow... Travel?!

So in your mind, people who dont settle for doing crap paying work for a government they may have not voted for, cant even leave now? WOW just WOW

Just earn your citizenship, and you won't have to worry about it.
;)
In Starship Troopers, the only rights citizens had over non-citizens was the right to vote, and the right to hold public office.
I'm sure the current holders of public office would love it if they had to perform military service to hold thier current positions.
:rolleyes:
And even if you don't vote for the administration, you are still expected to abide by the will of those that did.
That's the Democratic part of the Republic, or so I have always been told.

Just earn your citizenship, and you won't have to worry about it.
;)
In Starship Troopers, the only rights citizens had over non-citizens was the right to vote, and the right to hold public office.
I'm sure the current holders of public office would love it if they had to perform military service to hold thier current positions.
:rolleyes:
And even if you don't vote for the administration, you are still expected to abide by the will of those that did.
That's the Democratic part of the Republic, or so I have always been told.

Well, i dont think Travel is appropriate, and if child birth becomes one, then you will have more abandoned baby's because the mothers wont want to be fined or arrested. The only thing that makes sense is voting, and it doesnt seem like most of them care to vote anyhow. I think the system needs to be different, but this is too different in my opinion.

As far as childbirth was concerned, women were sterile, untill licensed.
Then they could have babies.
I know, Science Fiction, is great, isn't it?

That is not what I said, don't jump the gun. I was listing ideas off the top of my head.

Voting makes sense. If youre' not educated or involved in the system, should you really be allowed to vote on which ever candidate looks the prettiest? If you can't point to Iraq or Afghanistan on a map, should you be allowed to decide the leader of your country?

Childbirth - this one is sticky, I know too many incredible people who were 'accidents' as it were, and came from ugly homes. On the other hand, I've met plenty of parents who shouldn't ever be allowed near children. Something's gotta give, especially with growing issues of children from broken homes.

I'm sure we could keep a list going. Is it fair? No, and it's not perfect, but I always liked the idea of the social contract. Want to live in a society, live off it's benefits? Then get off your lazy ass and contribute. Don't like it? Time to change your country, or change countries.

Learning to play the Cowbell should be mandatory.....

I finally had the chance to read the Time magazine (Sept 10) and I really am impressed with the article. The author has compiled a wealth of information on volunteerism in this country (as well as some comparisons to other nations).

National Service programs are available even now, but not given much publicity other than local news media highlighting local activities. The article states that overall, 27% of Americans volunteer each year. We have AmericCorps, Senior Corps, Learn and Serve America, and so on; but, what the author is proposing is a Department of National Service under which these varied programs would fall, and which would be given a much higher profile.

Senators Arlen Spector (R) and Hillary Clinotn (D) have cosponsored legislation to start and fund the U.S. Public Service Academy, which would provide a four year undergraduate education in return for a five year commitment to public service following graduation.

Senators Christopher Dodd (D) and Thad Cochran (R) and Representative Rosa DeLauro (D) have cosponsored a bill aimed at those kids between middle school and high school who need some kind of structure during the summer. (Too young to work and too old for babysitters)

National Service can focus on education, health care, conservation, rapid response to disasters, repair of infrastructure, etc. Or, it can consist of military service. But as the phrase keeps recurring in discussions about the topic, it should be a rite of passage; one which will help bind citizens more closely together and give more of a sense of involvement and ownership in both community and country.

I highly recommend reading that September 10, 2007 Time magazine article.
Just the small blurbs on compulsory nonmilitary service in Malaysia, Nigeria and South Africa was something of an eyeopener for me. Naturally, we can not have a mandatory program, but the way other countries have implemented their own sure makes it attractive.