Mandatory Public Service

I'm not sure that 2 years would be enough of a commitment to make it worth it to the military. Some jobs require about that much training before you even get out in the fleet. 

I do appreciate the concept though. After those years people might have a better idea of what they want to do with their lives. Be more focused in college instead of doing the 5-6 year graduating plans that many do now.

definitely agree with this and i will compromise and split the difference and say it should be three years.  and if people decline to do it, we'll just tax them for not doing it!

It sounds like a good idea in theory but let's start with there are somewhere in the neighborhood of 40 million people in this country who are in the 18 to 20 yo catagory. You would have to pay them at the very least minimum wage, plus benefits. Add to that paying SS and Medicare tax. So lets say it costs you $22K a year for each of them and I think that is lowballing the cost. That is $880 Billion dollars for 2 years. That does not include the cost of administering the programs you would have to put nto place to deal with all the ins and outs such as waivers, the program itself, liabilities if any of them get injured, and the regular administration any government program entails. Now I doubt the military can absorb all of those people so you will have to find something for them to do... What will that be? Do you want to replace government workers in some areas with theses workers? What about the people already in those jobs who plan to make them a career even if it is as janitor at the pentagon? You have also pushed back the time when people begin their careers meaning they will have lower lifetime earning or will have to work an extra 2 to 4 years to catch up. What about the youths who have already gotten started on a criminal bent? How are you going to police them in your program so that they are not a danger to others in the program? What if a war breaks out are you going to exempt the ones forced into the military or will you consider it like the draft? These are just a few things one needs to think about with regard to such a program.

Edited to add. I believe I was mistaken on the number of 18 to 20 yos, the number is more like 1/2 that so adjust accordingly please.

I like this in concept, but in practice it would likely turn into make work programs  that would simply balloon our already bloated federal government.

Really, what jobs would they do?  Would they be taking work that others are already doing outside of those new programs?  Would the Gov be undercutting the local pay rates?  In the end they would likely end up paying people to sit around and do nothing.

It would be cool if it worked.  Not gonna work. First do no harm rule invoked.

I have often thought that this is a GREAT idea.   Everyone so far has made great points.  We have had conceptually a simular program in the past, during the Great Depression.   I think 3 years would be about the right ammount of time and would also echo that there are other options than the military.  There could be federal, state and community levels of application here.  I would also inject that the first 2-3 months of "service" be formatted like our military's basic training.  Not to create mindless drones who follow instructions but to learn that freedoms enjoyed were/are forged through service and sacrifice.  Once basic is done they can be sent to any number of agencies where they can get additional training for a specific job. 

Once completed that person could have an option to continue with that department or agency, take a second term to faclitate the training of upcoming individuals or move on with other ambitions...

As a more radical aspect to consider.  What if we made voting rights conditional to the successful completion of your 3 yr term of service.  

Imagine, our parks clean and maintained, roads in good condition, Cities clean of blight, shelter for the homeless, food for the hungry....Ask not what your country can do for you....

Radical indeed, especially when folks get riled up about the mere idea of having to show an ID to vote.

So wait you think replacing the more skilled worker who make higher wages thereby putting them on the unemployment and foodstamp rolls is going to somehow reduce the cost of foodstamps and unemployment?

Anyone in business knows that high turnover rates even in lowskilled positions is an economic drain on the company. A 3 year program is going to be the definition of high turnover

You really think just cause the young people are in your program they are going to stop having unprotected sex and getting pregnanat in any great numbers? really?? For some maybe for most no. Same goes for criminal activity.

More bodies does not make for a stronger military when those bodies do not particularly want to be there or see no great purpose to it. The draft has never been very popular and has created a gread deal of friction in our society for a very long time.

You may get cleaner parks and hiking trails out of it yes but those functions are already carried out often by volunteer groups but do you really want an unskilled 18 yo building the bridge you drive your family across on a daily basis? Most of those who would have gone on with their lives in trades and schools will be fine those who wouldn't have will continue to be and do just what they were before so your reduction in police and vandalism costs will be negligible at best and likly ofset by the increased training and administration costs you incurr.

"Ask not what your country can do for you, ask rather what your country is going to make you do for it."  Somehow doesn't have the same ring...

I believe public service is a good idea, and the government offering opportunities for public service might be a worthwhile use of public funds and help alleviate unemployment among the young, assuming you could organize it in such a way that meaningful work was offered and meaningful value was obtained.

But I don't think you could ever pass mandatory public service in the U.S..  There's no demonstrated, agreed-upon need as there is in, for instance, Israel.  And Americans just wouldn't go for it.

people have become privileged and entitled long before 18.  i don't think this will do anything to correct that problem.  i don't think it is a bad idea, just not a solution to the problem you state.

we seem to think we need to wait till people are 18 before they can do anything...i started volunteering where i had opportunities when i was 9 or 10 years old (serving in soup kitchens with my mom and aunt, reading newspapers to my blind neighbors).   i volunteered in hospitals from 8th grade through my sophomore year of college.  kids are smarter than we think at a younger age, a 10 year old can learn to appreciate what it means to work, what it means to have/have not.

The Israeli model is definitely driven by different needs. But I've read about their founding principles, and it was also intended to be a social leveler to integrate and build the social fabric of people from very different backgrounds, languages, and class. Seems like we're dealing with a lot of that here, too. Also if you've been to Israel, people in the army also fulfill a lot of community obligations related to education, healthcare, etc. Germany up until recently also had a conscription model in which you had a choice of military of public service.

Maybe there are too many people 18-21 in the US to support a program of this size, but maybe we could go back to the lottery system, even though that was fraught with abuse.

I'm just convinced that our political system (both parties) accelerated the divide within our nation. Our infrastructure, education system, and and global competitiveness are suffering. We spend more on healthcare than any nation, yet our rural healthcare system is a disaster. Why not train medics and send them into the communities? I'm sure that some of them would become much better physicians for the experience. Same for education, engineering, and many other fields.

I honestly have no idea how this could be implemented, if at all. But I really do love this country and it galls me to see so many takers and so few givers, and people griping about things but not doing anything to effect positive changes.

Good in theory, very difficult in practice. 

We have "compulsory" education already, and a peek under the hood shows a lot of completely disengaged "students" entertaining themselves by making life difficult for teachers, administrators, and other students.  How would compulsory public service be different? 

Someone on this thread mentioned the draft as an example of compulsory service, and I think both the pros and cons of the draft lead to the answer to this question in general. 

On the pro side, more people get exposed to different people, ideas, etc as a result of being forced to spend time with people they would otherwise never have met. They learn discipline and often a skill that translates directly into some employable area; if not, they take responsibility seriously and this shows later (a recent article on CEO's I read pointed out that CEO's of big companies who are veterans may make less money for the company, but also don't end up bankrupting the company with shady or poorly thought out plans).

On the con side, you get many people who have no interest in being there, and end up being a drag on the system, requiring more "babysitting"; and your overall force is less professional as a result. I have read many time that top brass is actually pretty much unified in their opposition to a draft for this reason.

In addition, the point was raised about trying to make 18 year olds more responsible. Not all 18 year olds need to become more responsible - both mrs gearboy and myself, as well as our kids would exemplify that if I went into detail. And for people who are planning a life course that involves training for nearly 15 years of post-high school education, an additional 3-4 is pretty unpleasant if not frankly repulsive.

Instead, I would propose a model on the military of making service voluntary (hearkening back to the "ask not..." speech). Military, civilian, what have you. You agree to a commitment in return for some privileges. I could see voting being made contingent on participation (voting was not always uniformly given to men at the time of the constitution - land owners only, on the theory that they had the greatest investment in the outcomes. Being active in the public sphere would be an extension of that idea). Or some form of higher education (I have previously mentioned the idea of getting medical schools paid for, in exchange for serving in under-served areas later in life). Much like the military decides how many people it needs in certain areas, the public service sector could do the same thing. We need more road work? More engineers, more people with shovels. We need translators? More language studies. The beauty of it is that whatever your aptitudes are, if you are inclined to serve, a place can be found (think of the CCC in the depression, funding arts as well as trail builders). Maybe you want a free education? Fine, in an area of study that we need as a nation. If you change your mind, you can buy back your debt at a rate that discourages people from doing so (say, 1.5-2x the amount we invested in your education?) Maybe you don't want college but a skill. Do we need more welders? Trade school and then work on our bridges for a couple of years. Need a place to live but no idea what to do? Basic dorm housing and training at whatever the aptitude tests say you should do.

This thread made me think about Selective Service.  I was curious if it was still the only place where Men were 'allowed'. 

Not to change topics, but why is this ok?  Why aren't women clamoring to be included?

Yep: (http://www.sss.gov/default.htm)

"If you are a man ages 18 through 25 and living in the U.S., then you must register with Selective Service. It’s the law. According to law, a man must register with Selective Service within 30 days of his 18th birthday. Selective Service will accept late registrations but not after a man has reached age 26. You may be denied benefits or a job if you have not registered."

Its a horrible idea - it totally flies in the face of liberty, upon which this country was founded.  From an economic standpoint, its balderdash - the government can no more direct mandatory labor in effective manner than it can mandatory taxes.   

Funny how many people seem to be in favor of this.  Conscription of the young people for the "greater good" was a hallmark of both fascist and communist dictatorships...

If I thought such a program would be effective in teaching self-reliance and such I might agree with you but those things are not instilled in people in 2-3 years. Those are the sort of values you are raised with and I do not believe forced service will magically turn turn sows ears into silk or even polyester purses. What you basically get is a jobs training program for low skilled labor at huge cost.

Not that I disagree with you on the OT, but you do not have to be raised with that. There are scores of people from all walks of life that have rose above their upbringing. They simply desire something better... they go find it. In that case, you will find what you seek... not making a argument that mandatory service would help those working on making their life better than what they were raised with.

they are still raised with those values, they may not have come from ones parents per se but from other role models. Do some people against all odds make the change? Yes they do, but those are few and far between. I am sure There are even those who will pick up those values in a short stint in" public service" but still those will be few and far between.

This is an interesting topic, as I read comments and go back to the OP, I still like this idea of public service but there is more to define and clarify.  First, what is the end state we would like to achieve and sustain?  How will success be measured? How commited is the nation to support something like this?  Where will an idea like this get a foothold and be able to grow?

I wonder what other ideas or programs could be developed, improved, decisions reversed etc. to achieve or at least move toward our collective ideal end state, not perfect but at least better than where we are now.