CDZ “National Service” Should we Consider It?

[longknife]

The question arises in my mind (again) after reading a piece on the Brookings website about the subject. In that case, the author suggests one year, military or other. I personally feel it should be two.

Bubba Clinton, when not busy chasing after skirts, established the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS), an agency overseeing AmeriCorps and other volunteer services. Read about it @ Corporation for National and Community Service It appears to be just another one of those agencies with lofty goals and little else.

But, the idea has always interested me. In order to fully appreciate this country, one needs to see what others have – here and abroad. How many are born and raised in a neighborhood and never see anywhere else but, perhaps, a college campus? How many have been to the gray areas of coal country? Or even the slums of your own hometown? How many have served in soup kitchens. Or community outreach programs. And, better yet, how many have served in uniform?

I don’t know how such a program would work. I do know that it should be for everyone – regardless of sex. Two years of ones choice after taking a sort of IQ test to determine skills and apptitudes.

What do you think?

Anyhow, the article that got me thinking is It’s time to make national service a universal commitment @ It’s time to make national service a universal commitment

 

[alang1216]

The question arises in my mind (again) after reading a piece on the Brookings website about the subject. In that case, the author suggests one year, military or other. I personally feel it should be two.

Bubba Clinton, when not busy chasing after skirts, established the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS), an agency overseeing AmeriCorps and other volunteer services. Read about it @ Corporation for National and Community Service It appears to be just another one of those agencies with lofty goals and little else.

But, the idea has always interested me. In order to fully appreciate this country, one needs to see what others have – here and abroad. How many are born and raised in a neighborhood and never see anywhere else but, perhaps, a college campus? How many have been to the gray areas of coal country? Or even the slums of your own hometown? How many have served in soup kitchens. Or community outreach programs. And, better yet, how many have served in uniform?

I don’t know how such a program would work. I do know that it should be for everyone – regardless of sex. Two years of ones choice after taking a sort of IQ test to determine skills and apptitudes.

What do you think?

Anyhow, the article that got me thinking is It’s time to make national service a universal commitment @ It’s time to make national service a universal commitment

I'm in. My son did AmeriCorps and it opened his eyes as to what career he wanted to pursue. One or two years after high school seems like a good way to grow up.

 

[Lysistrata]

This was/is a good idea. I almost entered national service because I had relatives in the military. Unfortunately, we had a skunk for a president then, Nixon, so I declined because he would have been my "leader." Now we have a whore in the Oval Office. It would be good for everyone to serve our nation, but we have to make sure that our leaders are decent and honorable first.

 

[depotoo]

My fear, in this politically charged atmosphere, would it end up being a form of indoctrination?

The question arises in my mind (again) after reading a piece on the Brookings website about the subject. In that case, the author suggests one year, military or other. I personally feel it should be two.

Bubba Clinton, when not busy chasing after skirts, established the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS), an agency overseeing AmeriCorps and other volunteer services. Read about it @ Corporation for National and Community Service It appears to be just another one of those agencies with lofty goals and little else.

But, the idea has always interested me. In order to fully appreciate this country, one needs to see what others have – here and abroad. How many are born and raised in a neighborhood and never see anywhere else but, perhaps, a college campus? How many have been to the gray areas of coal country? Or even the slums of your own hometown? How many have served in soup kitchens. Or community outreach programs. And, better yet, how many have served in uniform?

I don’t know how such a program would work. I do know that it should be for everyone – regardless of sex. Two years of ones choice after taking a sort of IQ test to determine skills and apptitudes.

What do you think?

Anyhow, the article that got me thinking is It’s time to make national service a universal commitment @ It’s time to make national service a universal commitment

 

[usmbguest5318]

the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS), an agency overseeing AmeriCorps and other volunteer services. Read about it @ Corporation for National and Community Service It appears to be just another one of those agencies with lofty goals and little else.

I suspect it appears that way to you because you've not researched what Americorps has accomplished.

• A Report on AmeriCorps’ Impact on Members and Nonprofit Organizations
  
• 2011-12 Kentucky AmeriCorps Programs Accomplishments
• Nevada
  
  
  

Of course, it's easy to deem that an initiative, one into which others have put their sweat and tears, "appears to be just another one of those agencies with lofty goals and little else" when nothing about it has fallen into one's lap and neither has one made any rigorous effort to find out what an initiative (agency) has accomplished and one is not of a mind to provide even the barest bit of corroboration for one's publicly aired supposition.

 

[usmbguest5318]

The question arises in my mind (again) after reading a piece on the Brookings website about the subject. In that case, the author suggests one year, military or other. I personally feel it should be two.

Bubba Clinton, when not busy chasing after skirts, established the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS), an agency overseeing AmeriCorps and other volunteer services. Read about it @ Corporation for National and Community Service It appears to be just another one of those agencies with lofty goals and little else.

But, the idea has always interested me. In order to fully appreciate this country, one needs to see what others have – here and abroad. How many are born and raised in a neighborhood and never see anywhere else but, perhaps, a college campus? How many have been to the gray areas of coal country? Or even the slums of your own hometown? How many have served in soup kitchens. Or community outreach programs. And, better yet, how many have served in uniform?

I don’t know how such a program would work. I do know that it should be for everyone – regardless of sex. Two years of ones choice after taking a sort of IQ test to determine skills and apptitudes.

What do you think?

Anyhow, the article that got me thinking is It’s time to make national service a universal commitment @ It’s time to make national service a universal commitment

In order to fully appreciate this country, one needs to see what others have – here and abroad. How many are born and raised in a neighborhood and never see anywhere else but, perhaps, a college campus? How many have been to the gray areas of coal country? Or even the slums of your own hometown? How many have served in soup kitchens. Or community outreach programs. And, better yet, how many have served in uniform?

Why doesn't the Peace Corps achieve the objectives you've noted?

There are other ways of gaining exposure of the sort you've described. Study and internships abroad are a fine way. Simply going on vacation outside the U.S. and OECD nations is another. For young people, doing a gap year and traveling is a fine means of getting that kind of exposure. And, yes, serving in the military will do it too.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Voluntary service organizations exist in a multitude. Involuntary or mandatory service is of course, involuntary servitude and unconstitutional. If someone tried to force me into involuntary servitude I would dedicate myself to making the lives of all around me as miserable as possible.

And, oh yes, the total failure of any project I was assigned to.

 

[jwoodie]

It’s time to make national service a universal commitment

Amusing oxymoron, but "universal" compulsory service is probably not feasible. Perhaps nonmilitary voluntary service should have its own GI Bill benefits: If you don't serve, don't complain.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

It really is just asking for big trouble in compelling people to a service they object to.

 

[Dekster]

Would be cheaper and easier just to require them to do X hours volunteer work to be eligible for financial aid.

 

[fncceo]

To be anything other than a federally funded baby-sitting service for post secondary students, a National Service would actually have to perform a useful service.

I see nothing to make me believe that today's youth are capable of providing any service to society.

Those who can are already making contributions through their work in the private sector. Why would I want to derail their efforts by sending them off to the urban peace corps to work for minimum wage against their wills?

 

[Alexanderful]

This was/is a good idea. I almost entered national service because I had relatives in the military. Unfortunately, we had a skunk for a president then, Nixon, so I declined because he would have been my "leader." Now we have a whore in the Oval Office. It would be good for everyone to serve our nation, but we have to make sure that our leaders are decent and honorable first.

Serving your country is bigger than whoever happens to be the elected leader at the time. Your mindset is you will serve IF you happen to like your President? If everyone thought like you that would be pretty sad. For the record, I'm a solid conservative and proudly served our country for 18 years and counting under Clinton, Bush, Obama, and Trump...makes no difference to me!

 

[Alexanderful]

Excellent idea! There are many great ways to serve and everyone could find an option that fit their values and goals. But maybe instead of compulsory (I'm a little averse to govt forcing people to do stuff) why not make it a condition of receiving social security or other govt benefits? If you choose not to serve fine nobody is going to lock you up...but you don't get the bonus benefits either

 

[MarathonMike]

I like the concept but I don't believe it would work very well given where our young generation is mentally. They appear to spend the majority of their waking hours on social media, even when they are at school or driving. Seriously do they ever put down their freaking phones? I can't imagine them "volunteering" for much of anything.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

We did away with slavery.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Excellent idea! There are many great ways to serve and everyone could find an option that fit their values and goals. But maybe instead of compulsory (I'm a little averse to govt forcing people to do stuff) why not make it a condition of receiving social security or other govt benefits? If you choose not to serve fine nobody is going to lock you up...but you don't get the bonus benefits either

why not make it a condition of receiving social security or other govt benefits?

Social Security:

Because implicit in doing so is a notion that SSI benefits are a gift, which they overwhelmingly are not.

Social insurance provides a method for addressing the problem of economic security in the context of modern industrial societies. The concept of social insurance is that individuals contribute to a central fund managed by governments, and this fund is then used to provide income to individuals when they become unable to support themselves through their own labors.​

• Social Security: A Program and Policy History
• The Development of Social Security in America
• Eligibility and Participation in SSI
• Social Security History

Moreover, adding the constraint you suggest is to effectively assert to workers that they must endure SSI being withheld from their wages, yet unless and until they perform some sort of national service, they will never recover that money. Who's going to cotton to such a thing? It's conceptually no different than depositing one's money in a CD or savings account and being told that one cannot withdraw the money until one meets a activity performance requirement.

​

Sure, the mission of the program can be changed, but I doubt there'd be much support for changing it as you've suggested.​

Other government benefits:

Without knowing what specific benefits you propose to constrain thus, I cannot say whether I think it acceptable to predicate receiving them on one's having performed national service.

• Do you mean some of the benefits listed here or perhaps here?
• Perhaps you mean the benefit of certain tax deductions?
• Do you exclusively mean entitlement benefits?

 

[Lysistrata]

Excellent idea! There are many great ways to serve and everyone could find an option that fit their values and goals. But maybe instead of compulsory (I'm a little averse to govt forcing people to do stuff) why not make it a condition of receiving social security or other govt benefits? If you choose not to serve fine nobody is going to lock you up...but you don't get the bonus benefits either

I paid into Social Security for many decades. Many thousands of dollars of my hard-earned money.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Excellent idea! There are many great ways to serve and everyone could find an option that fit their values and goals. But maybe instead of compulsory (I'm a little averse to govt forcing people to do stuff) why not make it a condition of receiving social security or other govt benefits? If you choose not to serve fine nobody is going to lock you up...but you don't get the bonus benefits either

I paid into Social Security for many decades. Many thousands of dollars of my hard-earned money.

OT:
Would you advocate that women deny sex to men were the other member's proposal seriously considered or implemented as s/he has thus described it?

why not make it a condition of receiving social security or other govt benefits

 

[Lysistrata]

This was/is a good idea. I almost entered national service because I had relatives in the military. Unfortunately, we had a skunk for a president then, Nixon, so I declined because he would have been my "leader." Now we have a whore in the Oval Office. It would be good for everyone to serve our nation, but we have to make sure that our leaders are decent and honorable first.

Serving your country is bigger than whoever happens to be the elected leader at the time. Your mindset is you will serve IF you happen to like your President? If everyone thought like you that would be pretty sad. For the record, I'm a solid conservative and proudly served our country for 18 years and counting under Clinton, Bush, Obama, and Trump...makes no difference to me!

I will NOT take orders from a reagan or a trump. I have better respect for myself and my fellow Americans.

 

[rightwinger]

I would like to see it

But as a carrot not a stick

Tie it to educational and job opportunities