Originally posted by generalissimoNot unless you're willing to accept a steep drop in both the quantity and quality of volunteers.
You can cut their pay without implementing the draft.
Keeping a well paid cadre of perhaps 100,000 in all the services and requiring a six month training period for all 18 year olds with them going into the reserves ready for immediate call up in emergencies might work well.
Originally posted by no1marauderThats a risk you have to take, for the greater good. Conscription is proven to be both morally reprehensible and economically wasteful.
Not unless you're willing to accept a steep drop in both the quantity and quality of volunteers.
Keeping a well paid cadre of perhaps 100,000 in all the services and requiring a six month training period for all 18 year olds with them going into the reserves ready for immediate call up in emergencies might work well.
Originally posted by generalissimoWhy is conscription "morally reprehensible"? Defense of society is a communal obligation; why should we accept free riders? And it's not like 18 year olds are usually doing anything economically critical anyway; 6 months of military training would hardly ruin their career prospects.
Thats a risk you have to take, for the greater good. Conscription is proven to be both morally reprehensible and economically wasteful.
Originally posted by no1marauderI don't believe that in times of peace the state has the right to take control of a citizen's life and force him into unwanted work, all things being equal.
Why is conscription "morally reprehensible"? Defense of society is a communal obligation; why should we accept free riders? And it's not like 18 year olds are usually doing anything economically critical anyway; 6 months of military training would hardly ruin their career prospects.
There is no such thing as an "obligation to defend society", you can't force someone to join the armed forces any more that you can force them into joining the police force or into any similar occupation.
And it's not like 18 year olds are usually doing anything economically critical anyway
thats hardly the correct criterion to be used in order to determine the validity of conscription.
Originally posted by generalissimoThere's no such thing as an obligation to defend society? That's ridiculous; every social animal down to ants has such an instinct as part of their nature. Man is no different in this regard.
I don't believe that in times of peace the state has the right to take control of a citizen's life and force him into unwanted work, all things being equal.
There is no such thing as an "obligation to defend society", you can't force someone to join the armed forces any more that you can force them into joining the police force or into any similar occ ardly the correct criterion to be used in order to determine the validity of conscription.
You make a claim that conscription is "economically wasteful" and then say that it's not a "correct criterion" to take into account what 18 year olds are doing economically to evaluate such a claim? That's plain dumb.
Originally posted by no1marauderNo, there isn't, and calling a point of view other than your own "ridiculous" won't change this in any way. The rights of individuals shouldn't be neglected in favor of any hypothetical benefits to society, and in this case I don't see any of these anyway; what good would come out of the implementation of conscription which compensate for its disadvantages?
There's no such thing as an obligation to defend society? That's ridiculous.
You make a claim that conscription is "economically wasteful" and then say that it's not a "correct criterion" to take into account what 18 year olds are doing economically to evaluate such a claim? That's plain dumb.
Its wasteful if you consider you'll be using public money to train conscripts which are there against their will and for no apparent reason.
here's a useful link:
http://econjwatch.org/articles/the-role-of-economists-in-ending-the-draft
Originally posted by generalissimo
No, there isn't, and calling a point of view other than your own "ridiculous" won't change this in any way. The rights of individuals shouldn't be neglected in favor of any hypothetical benefits to society, and in this case I don't see any of these anyway; what good would come out of the implementation of conscription which compensate for its disadvant ...[text shortened]... useful link:
http://econjwatch.org/articles/the-role-of-economists-in-ending-the-draft
No, there isn't, and calling a point of view other than your own "ridiculous" won't change this in any way.-generalissimo
Hmmmm, generalissimo dishes it out but cant take it when it comes back on him.:'(
Originally posted by no1marauderevery social animal down to ants has such an instinct as part of their nature. Man is no different in this regard
There's no such thing as an obligation to defend society? That's ridiculous; every social animal down to ants has such an instinct as part of their nature. Man is no different in this regard.
You make a claim that conscription is "economically wasteful" and then say that it's not a "correct criterion" to take into account what 18 year olds are doing economically to evaluate such a claim? That's plain dumb.
this is beyond risible now. are you seriously considering using the behavior of ants as the foundation of your argument for the draft? LOL
I do accept that it is very noble of someone to dedicate his/her life to the welfare of society, but once you make this a legally enforced duty its no longer morally acceptable. Individual freedom takes precedence over society.
Originally posted by utherpendragonwhat are you talking about?No, there isn't, and calling a point of view other than your own "ridiculous" won't change this in any way.-generalissimo
Hmmmm, generalissimo dishes it out but cant take it when it comes back on him.:'(
edit- if you don't have a point to make why bother polluting this thread with your vacuous posts uther?
Originally posted by generalissimoThen go live in an igloo by yourself and see how long you last when the bandits from the next "society" over comes to take your stuff and your life.
There is no such thing as an "obligation to defend society", you can't force someone to join the armed forces any more that you can force them into joining the police force or into any similar occupation.
[b].
Originally posted by Sam The Shamoh yeah, because the inevitable result of the absence of conscription is conquest by another society, followed by mass looting. 🙄
Then go live in an igloo by yourself and see how long you last when the bandits from the next "society" over comes to take your stuff and your life.
how old are you sam? you seem to be losing the ability to reason properly.