4 ms·

I will never view military service as a bad thing in totality. Locally evaluated, it's a good option. Putting aside the more heady concepts of public service an

I will never view military service as a bad thing in totality. Locally evaluated, it's a good option. Putting aside the more heady concepts of public service and sacrifice, it is one of the last remaining conduits to change your stars and "make a man/woman/adult out of you," *although it is certainly not without faults and has certainly caused horrible experiences for people who served*. It is an imperfect organization that does its core mission well (fight and win wars), and it does its best beyond that. I know this can spark a lot of debate and "what about X" discussions, and I won't participate in those if they show up so I apologize in advance. The tragedy is that it's the only option to change one's stars for a lot of folks and this dynamic is present across the entire country - poor rural south, poor urban, poor rust belt. High schools and governments, local or otherwise, are failing these kids, and the military is the only semi-competent entity available to help. That's not a dynamic we want.

ethbr0 5y ago
As the son of a son of a father who wouldn't have gone to college without WWII-era tuition assistance, can confirm it changes entire family trajectories. My grandfather had the work ethic and intelligence in him, subsequently proven, but was born dirt poor with a snowball's chance in hell he could have afforded college without the GI Bill. The military is an option which largely accepts you if you say "Yes" and can pass a basic intelligence test. Those are the only requirements. Not your family name. Not your family wealth. Not (now) your race or gender or sexual orientation. And in trade for that, they open up benefits that change lives. It certainly shouldn't be the only option, but that it is an option is better than not existing.
- briffle 5y ago
  Same thing here. My grandfather was excited when his dad found some pallets 'that fell off the back of a truck' so they could have a floor for the tent they lived in outside Portland, and not see the rats. (funny when people in PDX complain about the homeless problem, my grandpa was in those cities in the 30's and 40s) GI bill put him into college, and set him up with an eductation that setup my mom and her 6 siblings with a 'normal' middle class life. Not too shabby for a man that literally grew up dirt poor.
  - dogman144 5y ago
    I knew a Soldier with a 32 ACT (yes, I double checked as that's a great score) from East St Louis. Guidance counselors and everything else failed them, so they joined the mil. How that kid (making an adult's decision by joining) wasn't scooped up by basically anyone other than their local recruiter blew my mind. If you spend some time around the military jobs that require smarts, these stories are very common. The non-high test score jobs tend to be staffed by very solid and smart people who just didn't have many other options at the time. Soldiers from enlisted to General can and often are idiots and by glorifying them one risks the same risk as glorifying a professional athlete or any other symbol, but in aggregate the above story is common.
    - jasonladuke0311 5y ago
      I was kind of like that. 30 ACT, barely graduated high school, joined the Marine Corps and chose infantry.
- micromacrofoot 5y ago
  It's rare that survivorship bias gets to be used quite so literally. Nearly 300,000 families also had their trajectories changed because their loved ones died. The military as a class on-ramp disproportionately harms the poor, and ethically that's wrong. It's almost literally a lottery where you're gambling your life in exchange for basic needs.
  - dogman144 5y ago
    Is that wrong-ness the responsibility of the military, or that of our govt/"society" not bothering to offer anything else as capable?
    - micromacrofoot 5y ago
      It's the responsibility of the government and by extension, the military. I suppose you could blame society at-large because we elect our representatives, but the majority of Americans already support single-payer healthcare and free or reduced college tuition. It's disturbing to me that it's normal to concentrate efforts on recruiting poor teenagers to fight wars. The focus on the poor also has the effect of disproportionately impacting minorities. Even if you survive, over the past decade hundreds of thousands of veterans have ended up with PTSD and even then they're left to fight for proper treatment under the VA. The VA has been failing veterans for decades and in some cases causes additional harm, including using experimental and ineffective treatment for covid while under their care (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7276049/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7276049/).
      - dogman144 5y ago
        Guess I'm unclear what policy you think the military could do. Not recruit?
        micromacrofoot 5y ago
        Specifically abandon recruiting methods that target the poor would be a start.
uoaei 5y ago
> Locally evaluated, it's a good option. Locally evaluated, it's a rational option. But I think you're going to lose a lot of people by framing it as "good". Rational decisions are not always good ones, and vice versa.
bobsmooth 5y ago
Military service should be done because you want to serve your country or because war. It shouldn't be a convenient option to escape poverty.

ethbr0 5y ago

As the son of a son of a father who wouldn't have gone to college without WWII-era tuition assistance, can confirm it changes entire family trajectories. My grandfather had the work ethic and intelligence in him, subsequently proven, but was born dirt poor with a snowball's chance in hell he could have afforded college without the GI Bill. The military is an option which largely accepts you if you say "Yes" and can pass a basic intelligence test. Those are the only requirements. Not your family name. Not your family wealth. Not (now) your race or gender or sexual orientation. And in trade for that, they open up benefits that change lives. It certainly shouldn't be the only option, but that it is an option is better than not existing.

briffle 5y ago
Same thing here. My grandfather was excited when his dad found some pallets 'that fell off the back of a truck' so they could have a floor for the tent they lived in outside Portland, and not see the rats. (funny when people in PDX complain about the homeless problem, my grandpa was in those cities in the 30's and 40s) GI bill put him into college, and set him up with an eductation that setup my mom and her 6 siblings with a 'normal' middle class life. Not too shabby for a man that literally grew up dirt poor.
- dogman144 5y ago
  I knew a Soldier with a 32 ACT (yes, I double checked as that's a great score) from East St Louis. Guidance counselors and everything else failed them, so they joined the mil. How that kid (making an adult's decision by joining) wasn't scooped up by basically anyone other than their local recruiter blew my mind. If you spend some time around the military jobs that require smarts, these stories are very common. The non-high test score jobs tend to be staffed by very solid and smart people who just didn't have many other options at the time. Soldiers from enlisted to General can and often are idiots and by glorifying them one risks the same risk as glorifying a professional athlete or any other symbol, but in aggregate the above story is common.
  - jasonladuke0311 5y ago
    I was kind of like that. 30 ACT, barely graduated high school, joined the Marine Corps and chose infantry.
micromacrofoot 5y ago
It's rare that survivorship bias gets to be used quite so literally. Nearly 300,000 families also had their trajectories changed because their loved ones died. The military as a class on-ramp disproportionately harms the poor, and ethically that's wrong. It's almost literally a lottery where you're gambling your life in exchange for basic needs.
- dogman144 5y ago
  Is that wrong-ness the responsibility of the military, or that of our govt/"society" not bothering to offer anything else as capable?
  - micromacrofoot 5y ago
    It's the responsibility of the government and by extension, the military. I suppose you could blame society at-large because we elect our representatives, but the majority of Americans already support single-payer healthcare and free or reduced college tuition. It's disturbing to me that it's normal to concentrate efforts on recruiting poor teenagers to fight wars. The focus on the poor also has the effect of disproportionately impacting minorities. Even if you survive, over the past decade hundreds of thousands of veterans have ended up with PTSD and even then they're left to fight for proper treatment under the VA. The VA has been failing veterans for decades and in some cases causes additional harm, including using experimental and ineffective treatment for covid while under their care (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7276049/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7276049/).
    - dogman144 5y ago
      Guess I'm unclear what policy you think the military could do. Not recruit?
      - micromacrofoot 5y ago
        Specifically abandon recruiting methods that target the poor would be a start.

uoaei 5y ago

> Locally evaluated, it's a good option. Locally evaluated, it's a rational option. But I think you're going to lose a lot of people by framing it as "good". Rational decisions are not always good ones, and vice versa.

bobsmooth 5y ago

Military service should be done because you want to serve your country or because war. It shouldn't be a convenient option to escape poverty.