I agree 100%.
jo6pac

Difficult to imagine a way to force wealthy kids into service in the military without a draft.

i dunno .. i’ve met some home-schooled kids who were raised in above average economic households who “got an education” i’d value at 40 cents or less ..

i agree in broad principle .. but in terms of education .. to some of the religious elite .. less is considered “more”.. who needs science and evolution .. eh ??

and the best way to get an education on “war” is to fight one .. and usually “one” will suffice ..

I would be hard enough WITH a draft don’t you think?

Wonder when the rich are going to realize that they do have some skin in the game re the environment? Their money won’t relieve them of dirty air, dirty water and no food.

Absolutely.

How about some sort of lifelong tax break for the wealthy if they serve under fire, not stateside somewhere? And to sweeten the pot, how about a lifelong tax penalty on any amount over $500,000 if they DON’T volunteer and serve under fire? And if that doesn’t work, then we go with the draft. It will be amazing how the Dept of Defense comes under control if that happens.

I would healthcare to the list. Americans should have the same access to healthcare and the same quality of healthcare as members of Congress. Their retirement plans too should be more in accord with those of ordinary Americans.

More difficulter (for me) to imagine kids being forced to go to public school. I ”opted out” of public schools and sent my kids to priovate schools that were better. I did the right thing.

Yes, exactly.

Bets on how many fewer private school kids vs. more public school kids in the coming year? Tuition bills can disappear.

People were paying for others to fight for them during the Civil War but during WWII it was a badge of shame if you could not serve.

Then you have Vietnam….. their were education deferments, all kinds of deferments and if you listen to any anti-war songs during that era Vietnam was fought mostly by blacks and the poor white from rural areas. They did not have a way to obtain a deferments until the lottery was put in place in the 70’s. Even during that period congress was a hairsbreath in putting in a draft for nurses and doctors….. the recruiter was in our nursing dorm….

Ya every American needs to have skin in the game…… but how do we level the playing field?

Another way to put it: you can’t run a system that you don’t use.

katymine: some people were paying others to take their draft spots in the civil war. A lot more people volunteered, though.

Ian, I love ya — but here’s another idea:

Hey, American public! Stop electing elites to rule over you!

Sorry I’m late please keep on this theme.

I believe that the Civil War draft only affected landowners, as they were in most places the only people who had ‘real’ citizens, ie, could vote, so were on polling lists that draftees were drawn from. Relatives on my dad’s side served in the stead of landowners for the $200 ’substitute money’. Two of them, teenagers, died at Andersonville.

You accomplish this through compulsory military service, not a draft. Not popular @ FDL I suspect.

Principle: when elites are not effected by a problem they have a lot less incentive to fix the problem.

Solution: eliminate elites through massively progressive taxation. If they want to stay, they’ll pay and everyone including them will be better off. If not, they’ll leave and not come back: good riddens.

“affected by”! Ian as long as I keep reading you I’m going to keep hounding you on your use of affected and effected.

Google: “are not effected by” 37,000 – “are not affected by” 3 million.

Your easiest solution is to always use “affected” since it is 5 times as common as “effected”.

Yeah, that’s the ticket. Never again use “effected” and you’ll decrease your mistakes by a factor of five!

Unfortunately “effect” is four times as common as “affect.” And since you have a usage block with the word, and now that you know to switch usage, you are going to not be able to remember which one to switch.

Oh brother, I don’t know why I bother.

Linguistics aside, what do you think of the post?

And welcome.

Ok here is idea. It is the money that makes those who are “elite” separate from us mortals. It will be short of impossible to get them to participate in the mortal life, if for no other reason than they have the means to avoid any “skin in the game”, regardless of what we legislate. So how do you level the playing field.

Now for the answer, though it might seem JUST A TAD extreme. Make everything free – but with a caveat – don’t work (with some obvious exceptions) and you don’t get it for free. In fact you don’t get anything but the very basics, if you decide not to work.

The problems you solve are too numerous to list, but an easy way to image it, is only to recall how many times you hear that the way to solve the “problem” what ever that might be, is to have the money. Be it a hugh stimulus package, or your kids education, or your health care.

I know, this sounds pretty silly. But staying the course, which right now in the midst of a global recession, would probably include every horror story you can imagine, is not only silly (in the most perverted sense of humor), but by all definitions, is insane.

They say movies are nothing more than a reflection of life. Or in the case of Star Trek, a reflection of the future, and they did not use money any more. How or when that happens is never really told, but who’s to say that the time isn’t now, and the way, well, I think we can come up with a way, don’t you. Food for thought.

PS: In seriousness, while this is not be seen as a realistic approach by most, if not all thinking “adults”, maybe starting a dialog will bring an interesting set of possibilities. The screenwriters of Star Trek thought it was a good idea when thinking up a possible futuristic world. What is to stop us from that considering that idea as a reality. Remember money is not a natural occurrence, it is man made, and therefore, man is capable of changing it or eliminating it altogether.

Pretty basic stuff and almost common wisdom. A good solid post but not spectacular.

I’m really waiting for a follow-on post about Canada. But then I suppose everyone is waiting for another shoe to drop there now that Mean Jean has sided with Harper.

Ok here’s a linkthat might have an effect on you Ian. Apparently we are dealing with five or so separate concepts.

http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/affect.html

(Note: the damn tilde is causing it not to work. Cut and paste it into the address bar manually)

There are five distinct words here. When “affect” is accented on the final syllable (a-FECT), it is usually a verb meaning “have an influence on”: “The million-dollar donation from the industrialist did not affect my vote against the Clean Air Act.” […]

Ok it’s just the preview mode that breaks the link.

You should try one yourself.

And I have the same deal with links on my Mac, too.

Ha! I’m a Canadian consumer not a Canadian producer.

Elites having skin in the game explains the different histories of Atlanta and Birmingham. Birmingham elites stayed in Pittsburg, so to them Birmingham was just a colony. Atlanta’s rulers live in the city, so we got things like the Olympics, CDC, Emory University and relentless commercial boosterism.

Of course lately we also got the most hardcore Republicans and so many real estate developers that Tom Wolfe came to town to study their excesses. It is still better than the deal Birmingham got, but just because big money monkeys care about your town doesn’t mean they have much sense or judgement.