Millitary recruiting middle class?

8 posts / 0 new

I am sure this has been braught up before, but do the Republicans have another hidden agenda with the middle class. With Jobs being hard to find and banks tight with lending money, where do the next generation middle class go? Millitary looks like a great option. Looking at a paid education AND a Job... Has anyone looked into the numbers of recruitmen vs. Economy lately? Just something that came to mind today.

RGoody's picture
RGoody
Joined:
Aug. 3, 2010 4:03 pm

Comments

To start with, Democrats are in charge of the military right now, so it would be hard pressed to make this a Republican issue.

I agree that the military is targeting the middle class, but I don't believe it has anything to do with politics. Having a child that recently enlisted, the ordeal was almost as hard as getting into college. They run credit rating checks, criminal background checks, check grade point averages, and demand ever increasing scores on the entrance exam.

I see this a more on an issue of supply and demand. The military has a limited number of people thay can hire, but an increasing pool to pick from. They are just getting more picky about who they select. When I joined in the 70's, they would take anyone with a pulse.

Paleo-con
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

I suppose it differs from the last administration when the military was MUCH less picky about who they chose. I believe they were Republicans???!!!

[quote] Since 2003 the Pentagon has taken unprecedented steps to try to meet its recruiting goals, including lowering education standards, raising the maximum age, and steadily increasing the amount of bonuses for new volunteers. But granting more waivers for criminals, specialists said, could end up backfiring.

One former senior Defense official, who remains a consultant to the Pentagon, said there is growing concern in the ranks that members of street gangs have been joining the military and then engaging in criminal activity

meljomur's picture
meljomur
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote meljomur:

I suppose it differs from the last administration when the military was MUCH less picky about who they chose. I believe they were Republicans???!!!

Yes, Mel, they were Republicans. That only goes to support my point. Who the military targets is about economics, not politics. In 2003, the economy was much better and unemployment was around 4%. Therefore, the military had to scrape the bottom of the barrel for recruits; they were not very picky. Now that the economy is in the tank and unemployment is skyrocketing, more peopel find the military a viable option, including the middle class. Now, they can be picky.

Paleo-con
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

My son recently inlisted and they do scrutinize much more than in the past. I think the different branches also have different standards.

slabmaster
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 10:12 am

So what does that say about the overall quality of the US military?

It seems strange to me, to have different standards for recruitment just because of what is economically happening in your country.

Doesn't bode well for the overall reputation of the whole military institution in my book.

Also, I have to ask, as a parent, how does it feel to have your child involved in an institution which at any given period could decide to take criminals in to fight? I guess criminals are just more expendable... I mean in many states if you have a criminal record you can't vote, but apparently you can still enroll in the armed forces (given a gun and weapons) and fight overseas.

What a country- ehh?

meljomur's picture
meljomur
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote meljomur:

So what does that say about the overall quality of the US military?

It says the overall quality of the US military is second to none. Who they accept and who they end up with are two different people. Those embedded in military life understand that, so I give you a pass for not getting it.

Quote meljomur:

It seems strange to me, to have different standards for recruitment just because of what is economically happening in your country.

Doesn't bode well for the overall reputation of the whole military institution in my book.

Changing tactics for a changing world is how one stays competitive. It makes perfect survival sense, nothing strange about it. It bodes very well. It proves the military is adaptable. Perhaps you need a new book?

Quote meljomur:

Also, I have to ask, as a parent, how does it feel to have your child involved in an institution which at any given period could decide to take criminals in to fight? I guess criminals are just more expendable... I mean in many states if you have a criminal record you can't vote, but apparently you can still enroll in the armed forces (given a gun and weapons) and fight overseas.

What a country- ehh?

Growing up in Harlem and the Bronx, I have met many a criminal, I would have no issue giving many of these "criminals" a gun and letting them loose on the bad guys. Of course, there are some of those guys I wouldn't let within a 100 feet of a gun, even if they are on my side.

Please reread the thread and check your calendar. Allowing criminal records was a 2003 thing and not allowed anymore. Current enlistees have to pass a criminal background check.

Yes, what a country. There is none better or more exceptional.

Paleo-con
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Yes, but they were allowing criminals in until 2008, so once the "credentials" change, do these people still get to stay in the military?

I think its nuts to allow convicted criminals to go into the military. Are they just easier to brainwash, or does the government figure since they are already criminals they won't have a problem killing people indiscriminately?

How is that exceptional?

Besides Paleo, I thought the whole Tea Party premise was about not spending tax payer money in foreign wars (or is that just one of those pesky Libertarian ideas, that they don't agree with).

I mean what are these wars even for? And who benefits the most from them? You really believe its America? And if so how?

meljomur's picture
meljomur
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Currently Chatting

The other way we're subsidizing Walmart...

Most of us know how taxpayers subsidize Walmart's low wages with billions of dollars in Medicaid, food stamps, and other financial assistance for workers. But, did you know that we're also subsidizing the retail giant by paying the cost of their environmental destruction.

Powered by Pressflow, an open source content management system