|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On August 25 2018 06:18 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
Since I started the civil service thing, allow me a few moments. I was reading everything and gathering opinions and ideas. And since typing on phone is the worst, bare with me.
First, this isn't mandatory and it is not unpaid. It is voluntary and while the pay may be low, basically necessities are provided and you get a stipend. The largest goal of having some of your education paid for is what I was advocating. Maybe it is a certificate or license that you need to pay for. Done. And if you're a musician and want to practice while away doing your completely voluntary civil service, okay. Find a place after your work hours and go practice. Who is stopping you?
Second, there is a place in this society for people of all skill sets. You may not like the job, but there is something for you to do. Everyone has a role to play and while some seem more relevant than others and hold a better benefit, it doesn't detract from their choice in life. The civil service is to expose kids to other options that maybe going straight to higher education doesn't show them. There are a myriad of ways you accomplish this, but my idea of having them start freshman year summer, would be perfect. Early to see what they might be interested in and if they want to do similar work, tailor their education to it.
Third, the net benefit to society is that everyone understands how difficult some jobs are, what it takes to do them, and if anything ever happens where they need to step in, they have the basic understanding of the demands. This isn't the peace corps and it isn't military service. We already have those. This is to enrich the domestic issues and communities through having a more well rounded populace. They may not get through higher ed, but they now have options they can pursue than fast food, cashier, warehouse, or whatever you all deem lead than desireable jobs.
How it is to be managed and how we try to get everyone supervised and paid, is another story. Obviously it is state by state requesting said number of workers and other states filling those needs. States would also pay and feds would find a way to give states more autonomy. Or vice versa. I don't know.
This sounds reasonable; but it I'm not sure what it offers that isn't covered by the myriad existing programs; or just by various high school/college volunteering/internship programs.
@sermo the issue was already addressed via pm.
|
On August 25 2018 06:35 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2018 06:18 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
Since I started the civil service thing, allow me a few moments. I was reading everything and gathering opinions and ideas. And since typing on phone is the worst, bare with me.
First, this isn't mandatory and it is not unpaid. It is voluntary and while the pay may be low, basically necessities are provided and you get a stipend. The largest goal of having some of your education paid for is what I was advocating. Maybe it is a certificate or license that you need to pay for. Done. And if you're a musician and want to practice while away doing your completely voluntary civil service, okay. Find a place after your work hours and go practice. Who is stopping you?
Second, there is a place in this society for people of all skill sets. You may not like the job, but there is something for you to do. Everyone has a role to play and while some seem more relevant than others and hold a better benefit, it doesn't detract from their choice in life. The civil service is to expose kids to other options that maybe going straight to higher education doesn't show them. There are a myriad of ways you accomplish this, but my idea of having them start freshman year summer, would be perfect. Early to see what they might be interested in and if they want to do similar work, tailor their education to it.
Third, the net benefit to society is that everyone understands how difficult some jobs are, what it takes to do them, and if anything ever happens where they need to step in, they have the basic understanding of the demands. This isn't the peace corps and it isn't military service. We already have those. This is to enrich the domestic issues and communities through having a more well rounded populace. They may not get through higher ed, but they now have options they can pursue than fast food, cashier, warehouse, or whatever you all deem lead than desireable jobs.
How it is to be managed and how we try to get everyone supervised and paid, is another story. Obviously it is state by state requesting said number of workers and other states filling those needs. States would also pay and feds would find a way to give states more autonomy. Or vice versa. I don't know. This sounds reasonable; but it I'm not sure what it offers that isn't covered by the myriad existing programs; or just by various high school/college volunteering/internship programs.
That's what I wanted to know in order to figure out. How can we make this more accessible. How much of the pot do we need to sweeten? i think if it is open to everyone it would be received better, especially if you're not lucky enough to get the other options to pay.
|
On August 25 2018 06:40 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2018 06:35 zlefin wrote:On August 25 2018 06:18 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
Since I started the civil service thing, allow me a few moments. I was reading everything and gathering opinions and ideas. And since typing on phone is the worst, bare with me.
First, this isn't mandatory and it is not unpaid. It is voluntary and while the pay may be low, basically necessities are provided and you get a stipend. The largest goal of having some of your education paid for is what I was advocating. Maybe it is a certificate or license that you need to pay for. Done. And if you're a musician and want to practice while away doing your completely voluntary civil service, okay. Find a place after your work hours and go practice. Who is stopping you?
Second, there is a place in this society for people of all skill sets. You may not like the job, but there is something for you to do. Everyone has a role to play and while some seem more relevant than others and hold a better benefit, it doesn't detract from their choice in life. The civil service is to expose kids to other options that maybe going straight to higher education doesn't show them. There are a myriad of ways you accomplish this, but my idea of having them start freshman year summer, would be perfect. Early to see what they might be interested in and if they want to do similar work, tailor their education to it.
Third, the net benefit to society is that everyone understands how difficult some jobs are, what it takes to do them, and if anything ever happens where they need to step in, they have the basic understanding of the demands. This isn't the peace corps and it isn't military service. We already have those. This is to enrich the domestic issues and communities through having a more well rounded populace. They may not get through higher ed, but they now have options they can pursue than fast food, cashier, warehouse, or whatever you all deem lead than desireable jobs.
How it is to be managed and how we try to get everyone supervised and paid, is another story. Obviously it is state by state requesting said number of workers and other states filling those needs. States would also pay and feds would find a way to give states more autonomy. Or vice versa. I don't know. This sounds reasonable; but it I'm not sure what it offers that isn't covered by the myriad existing programs; or just by various high school/college volunteering/internship programs. That's what I wanted to know in order to figure out. How can we make this more accessible. How much of the pot do we need to sweeten? i think if it is open to everyone it would be received better, especially if you're not lucky enough to get the other options to pay.
What would make this a better way of spending than the various existing educational programs?
I don't know alot about the existing programs, but I know there's a lot of them out there.
sweetening the pot means you're paying people more han they'd be worth; which means the purpose of this is educational (or some other benefit?)
before addressing accessibility, I think a clearer sense of the purpose/objectives would be helpful. do you know how many pages ago your initial post was so I can review that to see what your stated objectives were?
|
On August 25 2018 06:44 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2018 06:40 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On August 25 2018 06:35 zlefin wrote:On August 25 2018 06:18 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
Since I started the civil service thing, allow me a few moments. I was reading everything and gathering opinions and ideas. And since typing on phone is the worst, bare with me.
First, this isn't mandatory and it is not unpaid. It is voluntary and while the pay may be low, basically necessities are provided and you get a stipend. The largest goal of having some of your education paid for is what I was advocating. Maybe it is a certificate or license that you need to pay for. Done. And if you're a musician and want to practice while away doing your completely voluntary civil service, okay. Find a place after your work hours and go practice. Who is stopping you?
Second, there is a place in this society for people of all skill sets. You may not like the job, but there is something for you to do. Everyone has a role to play and while some seem more relevant than others and hold a better benefit, it doesn't detract from their choice in life. The civil service is to expose kids to other options that maybe going straight to higher education doesn't show them. There are a myriad of ways you accomplish this, but my idea of having them start freshman year summer, would be perfect. Early to see what they might be interested in and if they want to do similar work, tailor their education to it.
Third, the net benefit to society is that everyone understands how difficult some jobs are, what it takes to do them, and if anything ever happens where they need to step in, they have the basic understanding of the demands. This isn't the peace corps and it isn't military service. We already have those. This is to enrich the domestic issues and communities through having a more well rounded populace. They may not get through higher ed, but they now have options they can pursue than fast food, cashier, warehouse, or whatever you all deem lead than desireable jobs.
How it is to be managed and how we try to get everyone supervised and paid, is another story. Obviously it is state by state requesting said number of workers and other states filling those needs. States would also pay and feds would find a way to give states more autonomy. Or vice versa. I don't know. This sounds reasonable; but it I'm not sure what it offers that isn't covered by the myriad existing programs; or just by various high school/college volunteering/internship programs. That's what I wanted to know in order to figure out. How can we make this more accessible. How much of the pot do we need to sweeten? i think if it is open to everyone it would be received better, especially if you're not lucky enough to get the other options to pay. What would make this a better way of spending than the various existing educational programs? I don't know alot about the existing programs, but I know there's a lot of them out there. sweetening the pot means you're paying people more han they'd be worth; which means the purpose of this is educational (or some other benefit?) before addressing accessibility, I think a clearer sense of the purpose/objectives would be helpful. do you know how many pages ago your initial post was so I can review that to see what your stated objectives were?
didn't have any objectives. I asked and open ended question to see what people thought. My objectives are a varying mix of farvs and p6 but they start around 639 or so?
And yeah, in a round about way, you are paying them more than what is necessary. These kids get all basic necessities paid for and a wage. Minimum wage since everything else is paid for. You just work the civil service. And you get 2 years free education, no matter what.
|
On August 25 2018 06:51 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2018 06:44 zlefin wrote:On August 25 2018 06:40 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On August 25 2018 06:35 zlefin wrote:On August 25 2018 06:18 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
Since I started the civil service thing, allow me a few moments. I was reading everything and gathering opinions and ideas. And since typing on phone is the worst, bare with me.
First, this isn't mandatory and it is not unpaid. It is voluntary and while the pay may be low, basically necessities are provided and you get a stipend. The largest goal of having some of your education paid for is what I was advocating. Maybe it is a certificate or license that you need to pay for. Done. And if you're a musician and want to practice while away doing your completely voluntary civil service, okay. Find a place after your work hours and go practice. Who is stopping you?
Second, there is a place in this society for people of all skill sets. You may not like the job, but there is something for you to do. Everyone has a role to play and while some seem more relevant than others and hold a better benefit, it doesn't detract from their choice in life. The civil service is to expose kids to other options that maybe going straight to higher education doesn't show them. There are a myriad of ways you accomplish this, but my idea of having them start freshman year summer, would be perfect. Early to see what they might be interested in and if they want to do similar work, tailor their education to it.
Third, the net benefit to society is that everyone understands how difficult some jobs are, what it takes to do them, and if anything ever happens where they need to step in, they have the basic understanding of the demands. This isn't the peace corps and it isn't military service. We already have those. This is to enrich the domestic issues and communities through having a more well rounded populace. They may not get through higher ed, but they now have options they can pursue than fast food, cashier, warehouse, or whatever you all deem lead than desireable jobs.
How it is to be managed and how we try to get everyone supervised and paid, is another story. Obviously it is state by state requesting said number of workers and other states filling those needs. States would also pay and feds would find a way to give states more autonomy. Or vice versa. I don't know. This sounds reasonable; but it I'm not sure what it offers that isn't covered by the myriad existing programs; or just by various high school/college volunteering/internship programs. That's what I wanted to know in order to figure out. How can we make this more accessible. How much of the pot do we need to sweeten? i think if it is open to everyone it would be received better, especially if you're not lucky enough to get the other options to pay. What would make this a better way of spending than the various existing educational programs? I don't know alot about the existing programs, but I know there's a lot of them out there. sweetening the pot means you're paying people more han they'd be worth; which means the purpose of this is educational (or some other benefit?) before addressing accessibility, I think a clearer sense of the purpose/objectives would be helpful. do you know how many pages ago your initial post was so I can review that to see what your stated objectives were? didn't have any objectives. I asked and open ended question to see what people thought. My objectives are a varying mix of farvs and p6 but they start around 639 or so? And yeah, in a round about way, you are paying them more than what is necessary. These kids get all basic necessities paid for and a wage. Minimum wage since everything else is paid for. You just work the civil service. And you get 2 years free education, no matter what.
this sounds like it could get very expensive. It also sounds like it might be simpler to just adjust the existing educational programs (which is what, 12-13 years free already) to achieve the objectives. adding more internship options and such.
Or it could just lead to most people leaving the program when they find out how unpleasant the jobs are; and if they were willing to do the jobs anyways why woudln't they just have taken those jobs in the first place?
giving away extra years of free education is usually done as compensation for people taking important/necessary but unpleasant/dangerous jobs.
|
On August 25 2018 07:00 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2018 06:51 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On August 25 2018 06:44 zlefin wrote:On August 25 2018 06:40 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On August 25 2018 06:35 zlefin wrote:On August 25 2018 06:18 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
Since I started the civil service thing, allow me a few moments. I was reading everything and gathering opinions and ideas. And since typing on phone is the worst, bare with me.
First, this isn't mandatory and it is not unpaid. It is voluntary and while the pay may be low, basically necessities are provided and you get a stipend. The largest goal of having some of your education paid for is what I was advocating. Maybe it is a certificate or license that you need to pay for. Done. And if you're a musician and want to practice while away doing your completely voluntary civil service, okay. Find a place after your work hours and go practice. Who is stopping you?
Second, there is a place in this society for people of all skill sets. You may not like the job, but there is something for you to do. Everyone has a role to play and while some seem more relevant than others and hold a better benefit, it doesn't detract from their choice in life. The civil service is to expose kids to other options that maybe going straight to higher education doesn't show them. There are a myriad of ways you accomplish this, but my idea of having them start freshman year summer, would be perfect. Early to see what they might be interested in and if they want to do similar work, tailor their education to it.
Third, the net benefit to society is that everyone understands how difficult some jobs are, what it takes to do them, and if anything ever happens where they need to step in, they have the basic understanding of the demands. This isn't the peace corps and it isn't military service. We already have those. This is to enrich the domestic issues and communities through having a more well rounded populace. They may not get through higher ed, but they now have options they can pursue than fast food, cashier, warehouse, or whatever you all deem lead than desireable jobs.
How it is to be managed and how we try to get everyone supervised and paid, is another story. Obviously it is state by state requesting said number of workers and other states filling those needs. States would also pay and feds would find a way to give states more autonomy. Or vice versa. I don't know. This sounds reasonable; but it I'm not sure what it offers that isn't covered by the myriad existing programs; or just by various high school/college volunteering/internship programs. That's what I wanted to know in order to figure out. How can we make this more accessible. How much of the pot do we need to sweeten? i think if it is open to everyone it would be received better, especially if you're not lucky enough to get the other options to pay. What would make this a better way of spending than the various existing educational programs? I don't know alot about the existing programs, but I know there's a lot of them out there. sweetening the pot means you're paying people more han they'd be worth; which means the purpose of this is educational (or some other benefit?) before addressing accessibility, I think a clearer sense of the purpose/objectives would be helpful. do you know how many pages ago your initial post was so I can review that to see what your stated objectives were? didn't have any objectives. I asked and open ended question to see what people thought. My objectives are a varying mix of farvs and p6 but they start around 639 or so? And yeah, in a round about way, you are paying them more than what is necessary. These kids get all basic necessities paid for and a wage. Minimum wage since everything else is paid for. You just work the civil service. And you get 2 years free education, no matter what. this sounds like it could get very expensive. It also sounds like it might be simpler to just adjust the existing educational programs (which is what, 12-13 years free already) to achieve the objectives. adding more internship options and such. Or it could just lead to most people leaving the program when they find out how unpleasant the jobs are; and if they were willing to do the jobs anyways why woudln't they just have taken those jobs in the first place? giving away extra years of free education is usually done as compensation for people taking important/necessary but unpleasant/dangerous jobs.
A lot of people don't know about these jobs and what the benefits are of working them. Getting them a taste is the most crucial part. If they don't like it and decide to go someplace else, that is fine. But hopefully they'll be less likely to look down their noses at musicians and artists or the people who cut the grass on highways.
And a lot of jobs are important/necessary. We need more park rangers. Freight workers and rail workers. More drillers, more people understanding infrastructure period. We need a lot of behind the scenes workers. We get those through the years with this. Doesn't need to be permanent. Just get people doing it and getting paid for it.
Does that make sense? I can try to clarify if it doesn't.
I was in the military. About 70% of my time was leisure in Okinawa. That is expensive. These are jobs being some on the domestic front. Offering jobs to kids and then those who need it. We can downsize the military to pay for it, if it comes to that.
|
I don't think this will work. As Simberto has already posted, the civil service was highly dreaded by every young man in germany.I would think that more women did a social year then men actually wanted to do civil service. Most people simply dodged both by the ways he already listed, only those stubborn or lazy went through with civil service. The problem was that the number of jobs that were actually desirable were really low. There was one part where you were an assistant groundkeper, one in medical care as cheap buffer for nurses and one in youth clubs and one in social institutions. None of those were appealing to anyone, with a very small amount of jobs where you actually could have fun and some insight. The learning was done by having to do them anyway. If you had actually had choice in the matter, no one had bothered. Might be different as well because germany has a long tradition of relativey high acceptance craftman education. Who doesn't study has a good option in learning an actual craft and start working with 18 or 19 (i think). As far as i know, the States don't have those everyoe can call himself an electrician. Maybe you need to simply stengthen this sector of the industry?
|
On August 25 2018 07:08 Broetchenholer wrote:
I don't think this will work. As Simberto has already posted, the civil service was highly dreaded by every young man in germany.I would think that more women did a social year then men actually wanted to do civil service. Most people simply dodged both by the ways he already listed, only those stubborn or lazy went through with civil service. The problem was that the number of jobs that were actually desirable were really low. There was one part where you were an assistant groundkeper, one in medical care as cheap buffer for nurses and one in youth clubs and one in social institutions. None of those were appealing to anyone, with a very small amount of jobs where you actually could have fun and some insight. The learning was done by having to do them anyway. If you had actually had choice in the matter, no one had bothered. Might be different as well because germany has a long tradition of relativey high acceptance craftman education. Who doesn't study has a good option in learning an actual craft and start working with 18 or 19 (i think). As far as i know, the States don't have those everyoe can call himself an electrician. Maybe you need to simply stengthen this sector of the industry?
Before I shipped out to Okinawa, I had to make a list of my most desireable locales. East coast, west coast, or overseas. Why not have the same? Choose 5 jobs/professions from the list and we'll try to fit you into your most desired one. Now, some might have to be "forced" into a service they don't like, but if you do it summer of freshman year, then you have 3 more chances to get that. Otherwise, you have one shitty year. That doesn't seem that bad at all, when you think about it. If america wants to stay "exceptional", we need everyone doing their part and taking those jobs that may suck. Even if only for a little while.
|
On August 25 2018 05:16 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2018 05:10 Plansix wrote:Trump is now calling for Sessions to investigate his political opponents. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/24/us/politics/jeff-sessions-donald-trump.htmlWASHINGTON — Undeterred by his attorney general’s pledge to keep politics out of the Justice Department, President Trump again attacked Jeff Sessions on Friday, urging him to look into “corruption” on the “other side” and offering a list of highly partisan issues.
The fresh jabs launched at Mr. Sessions in early morning Twitter posts came after an evening of what appeared to be restraint. Mr. Trump wanted to rebut Mr. Sessions’s comments on Thursday on Twitter, but his advisers stopped him, according to people briefed on the matter.
“Department of Justice will not be improperly influenced by political considerations.” Jeff, this is GREAT, what everyone wants, so look into all of the corruption on the “other side” including deleted Emails, Comey lies & leaks, Mueller conflicts, McCabe, Strzok, Page, Ohr......
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 24, 2018
....FISA abuse, Christopher Steele & his phony and corrupt Dossier, the Clinton Foundation, illegal surveillance of Trump Campaign, Russian collusion by Dems - and so much more. Open up the papers & documents without redaction? Come on Jeff, you can do it, the country is waiting!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 24, 2018 In the era of Trump it seems like the new normal, but I don’t think it should be over looked. This is the most overt call by Trump for law enforcement to “investigate” his critics. It is a form of attack and an escalation of Trumps rhetoric that the investigation merely a political tool, rather than independent oversight. Trump isn't talking to Sessions. He is talking to his followers and trying to distract them from what is going on. If he wanted these things investigated he would simply call Sessions and order him to do so. its baseless grand standing and Trump knows it. Still of course utterly retarded for a President to act like this.
Is it baseless or grandstanding if people eat it up and believe what he says absolutely, and the media - at least a certain part of it - reports it as truth?
|
On August 25 2018 07:58 iamthedave wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2018 05:16 Gorsameth wrote:On August 25 2018 05:10 Plansix wrote:Trump is now calling for Sessions to investigate his political opponents. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/24/us/politics/jeff-sessions-donald-trump.htmlWASHINGTON — Undeterred by his attorney general’s pledge to keep politics out of the Justice Department, President Trump again attacked Jeff Sessions on Friday, urging him to look into “corruption” on the “other side” and offering a list of highly partisan issues.
The fresh jabs launched at Mr. Sessions in early morning Twitter posts came after an evening of what appeared to be restraint. Mr. Trump wanted to rebut Mr. Sessions’s comments on Thursday on Twitter, but his advisers stopped him, according to people briefed on the matter.
“Department of Justice will not be improperly influenced by political considerations.” Jeff, this is GREAT, what everyone wants, so look into all of the corruption on the “other side” including deleted Emails, Comey lies & leaks, Mueller conflicts, McCabe, Strzok, Page, Ohr......
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 24, 2018
....FISA abuse, Christopher Steele & his phony and corrupt Dossier, the Clinton Foundation, illegal surveillance of Trump Campaign, Russian collusion by Dems - and so much more. Open up the papers & documents without redaction? Come on Jeff, you can do it, the country is waiting!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 24, 2018 In the era of Trump it seems like the new normal, but I don’t think it should be over looked. This is the most overt call by Trump for law enforcement to “investigate” his critics. It is a form of attack and an escalation of Trumps rhetoric that the investigation merely a political tool, rather than independent oversight. Trump isn't talking to Sessions. He is talking to his followers and trying to distract them from what is going on. If he wanted these things investigated he would simply call Sessions and order him to do so. its baseless grand standing and Trump knows it. Still of course utterly retarded for a President to act like this. Is it baseless or grandstanding if people eat it up and believe what he says absolutely, and the media - at least a certain part of it - reports it as truth?
It sure can be. It just reflects back on those people and institutions, and poorly. There's always gonna be a base that has their nose to Trump's ass. What matters is what the rest of us do about it.
|
On August 25 2018 07:06 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2018 07:00 zlefin wrote:On August 25 2018 06:51 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On August 25 2018 06:44 zlefin wrote:On August 25 2018 06:40 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On August 25 2018 06:35 zlefin wrote:On August 25 2018 06:18 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
Since I started the civil service thing, allow me a few moments. I was reading everything and gathering opinions and ideas. And since typing on phone is the worst, bare with me.
First, this isn't mandatory and it is not unpaid. It is voluntary and while the pay may be low, basically necessities are provided and you get a stipend. The largest goal of having some of your education paid for is what I was advocating. Maybe it is a certificate or license that you need to pay for. Done. And if you're a musician and want to practice while away doing your completely voluntary civil service, okay. Find a place after your work hours and go practice. Who is stopping you?
Second, there is a place in this society for people of all skill sets. You may not like the job, but there is something for you to do. Everyone has a role to play and while some seem more relevant than others and hold a better benefit, it doesn't detract from their choice in life. The civil service is to expose kids to other options that maybe going straight to higher education doesn't show them. There are a myriad of ways you accomplish this, but my idea of having them start freshman year summer, would be perfect. Early to see what they might be interested in and if they want to do similar work, tailor their education to it.
Third, the net benefit to society is that everyone understands how difficult some jobs are, what it takes to do them, and if anything ever happens where they need to step in, they have the basic understanding of the demands. This isn't the peace corps and it isn't military service. We already have those. This is to enrich the domestic issues and communities through having a more well rounded populace. They may not get through higher ed, but they now have options they can pursue than fast food, cashier, warehouse, or whatever you all deem lead than desireable jobs.
How it is to be managed and how we try to get everyone supervised and paid, is another story. Obviously it is state by state requesting said number of workers and other states filling those needs. States would also pay and feds would find a way to give states more autonomy. Or vice versa. I don't know. This sounds reasonable; but it I'm not sure what it offers that isn't covered by the myriad existing programs; or just by various high school/college volunteering/internship programs. That's what I wanted to know in order to figure out. How can we make this more accessible. How much of the pot do we need to sweeten? i think if it is open to everyone it would be received better, especially if you're not lucky enough to get the other options to pay. What would make this a better way of spending than the various existing educational programs? I don't know alot about the existing programs, but I know there's a lot of them out there. sweetening the pot means you're paying people more han they'd be worth; which means the purpose of this is educational (or some other benefit?) before addressing accessibility, I think a clearer sense of the purpose/objectives would be helpful. do you know how many pages ago your initial post was so I can review that to see what your stated objectives were? didn't have any objectives. I asked and open ended question to see what people thought. My objectives are a varying mix of farvs and p6 but they start around 639 or so? And yeah, in a round about way, you are paying them more than what is necessary. These kids get all basic necessities paid for and a wage. Minimum wage since everything else is paid for. You just work the civil service. And you get 2 years free education, no matter what. this sounds like it could get very expensive. It also sounds like it might be simpler to just adjust the existing educational programs (which is what, 12-13 years free already) to achieve the objectives. adding more internship options and such. Or it could just lead to most people leaving the program when they find out how unpleasant the jobs are; and if they were willing to do the jobs anyways why woudln't they just have taken those jobs in the first place? giving away extra years of free education is usually done as compensation for people taking important/necessary but unpleasant/dangerous jobs. A lot of people don't know about these jobs and what the benefits are of working them. Getting them a taste is the most crucial part. If they don't like it and decide to go someplace else, that is fine. But hopefully they'll be less likely to look down their noses at musicians and artists or the people who cut the grass on highways. And a lot of jobs are important/necessary. We need more park rangers. Freight workers and rail workers. More drillers, more people understanding infrastructure period. We need a lot of behind the scenes workers. We get those through the years with this. Doesn't need to be permanent. Just get people doing it and getting paid for it. Does that make sense? I can try to clarify if it doesn't. I was in the military. About 70% of my time was leisure in Okinawa. That is expensive. These are jobs being some on the domestic front. Offering jobs to kids and then those who need it. We can downsize the military to pay for it, if it comes to that.
People looking down their noses at various other occupations doesn't seem like a serious enough problem to spend the enormous amounts of money this could take. Also, people would still look down their noses; I'm not sure this would really cut down on that much. If it's a voluntary program, then the people well off enough to not need it would still look down on others cuz they didn't have the experience.
In terms of getting to try out different things, isn't that what summer jobs and internships are for? I'm pretty sure every high school and college has various programs to let people try out different jobs. We also don't really need more musicians/artists iirc, that's more an oversaturated field. Also just trying out lots of different classes is a way to get a taste for different kinds of work. There's plenty of community colleges/technical schools to help people get into some of the jobs. In terms of finding out possible josb and their benefits; isn't that what career days are for?
If things like this would be a benefit, why aren't they being done sufficiently during the existing 12 year period of free education where yoru expenses are covered by others (aka childhood/school)?
Some jobs require a particular set of skills/training to do; if people rotate around a lot to sample things they may not have the skills to do the job at a useful level. Especially if there's any safety issues to be mindful of.
Might there not be much cheaper, simpler ways to match up people needing work with whatever job openings there are? In today's computer age, it's not that hard to collect data on what jobs are available and where.
What is the cause of the shortage of park rangers, freight workers, and rail workers (I'm assuming you have a source to verify there is in fact a shortage of them)? Is that people are unaware that these jobs exist? or is it simply that the jobs are unpleasant/low pay? would having people do these jobs in some program to try them out really help with that? or would they simply just decide that the job is terrible, as they thought it was, and refuse to do it at the wages offered?
Another thing to keep in mind with programs like this is you have to be careful that these civil service jobs don't end up undercutting the wages for the regular jobs by being a source of cheaper labor.
Downsizing the military to pay for it doesn't seem like a good plan to me. 1) it's politically very difficult to do. 2) you could just downside the military period, and have less deficit spending.
|
On August 25 2018 08:11 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2018 07:06 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On August 25 2018 07:00 zlefin wrote:On August 25 2018 06:51 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On August 25 2018 06:44 zlefin wrote:On August 25 2018 06:40 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On August 25 2018 06:35 zlefin wrote:On August 25 2018 06:18 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
Since I started the civil service thing, allow me a few moments. I was reading everything and gathering opinions and ideas. And since typing on phone is the worst, bare with me.
First, this isn't mandatory and it is not unpaid. It is voluntary and while the pay may be low, basically necessities are provided and you get a stipend. The largest goal of having some of your education paid for is what I was advocating. Maybe it is a certificate or license that you need to pay for. Done. And if you're a musician and want to practice while away doing your completely voluntary civil service, okay. Find a place after your work hours and go practice. Who is stopping you?
Second, there is a place in this society for people of all skill sets. You may not like the job, but there is something for you to do. Everyone has a role to play and while some seem more relevant than others and hold a better benefit, it doesn't detract from their choice in life. The civil service is to expose kids to other options that maybe going straight to higher education doesn't show them. There are a myriad of ways you accomplish this, but my idea of having them start freshman year summer, would be perfect. Early to see what they might be interested in and if they want to do similar work, tailor their education to it.
Third, the net benefit to society is that everyone understands how difficult some jobs are, what it takes to do them, and if anything ever happens where they need to step in, they have the basic understanding of the demands. This isn't the peace corps and it isn't military service. We already have those. This is to enrich the domestic issues and communities through having a more well rounded populace. They may not get through higher ed, but they now have options they can pursue than fast food, cashier, warehouse, or whatever you all deem lead than desireable jobs.
How it is to be managed and how we try to get everyone supervised and paid, is another story. Obviously it is state by state requesting said number of workers and other states filling those needs. States would also pay and feds would find a way to give states more autonomy. Or vice versa. I don't know. This sounds reasonable; but it I'm not sure what it offers that isn't covered by the myriad existing programs; or just by various high school/college volunteering/internship programs. That's what I wanted to know in order to figure out. How can we make this more accessible. How much of the pot do we need to sweeten? i think if it is open to everyone it would be received better, especially if you're not lucky enough to get the other options to pay. What would make this a better way of spending than the various existing educational programs? I don't know alot about the existing programs, but I know there's a lot of them out there. sweetening the pot means you're paying people more han they'd be worth; which means the purpose of this is educational (or some other benefit?) before addressing accessibility, I think a clearer sense of the purpose/objectives would be helpful. do you know how many pages ago your initial post was so I can review that to see what your stated objectives were? didn't have any objectives. I asked and open ended question to see what people thought. My objectives are a varying mix of farvs and p6 but they start around 639 or so? And yeah, in a round about way, you are paying them more than what is necessary. These kids get all basic necessities paid for and a wage. Minimum wage since everything else is paid for. You just work the civil service. And you get 2 years free education, no matter what. this sounds like it could get very expensive. It also sounds like it might be simpler to just adjust the existing educational programs (which is what, 12-13 years free already) to achieve the objectives. adding more internship options and such. Or it could just lead to most people leaving the program when they find out how unpleasant the jobs are; and if they were willing to do the jobs anyways why woudln't they just have taken those jobs in the first place? giving away extra years of free education is usually done as compensation for people taking important/necessary but unpleasant/dangerous jobs. A lot of people don't know about these jobs and what the benefits are of working them. Getting them a taste is the most crucial part. If they don't like it and decide to go someplace else, that is fine. But hopefully they'll be less likely to look down their noses at musicians and artists or the people who cut the grass on highways. And a lot of jobs are important/necessary. We need more park rangers. Freight workers and rail workers. More drillers, more people understanding infrastructure period. We need a lot of behind the scenes workers. We get those through the years with this. Doesn't need to be permanent. Just get people doing it and getting paid for it. Does that make sense? I can try to clarify if it doesn't. I was in the military. About 70% of my time was leisure in Okinawa. That is expensive. These are jobs being some on the domestic front. Offering jobs to kids and then those who need it. We can downsize the military to pay for it, if it comes to that. People looking down their noses at various other occupations doesn't seem like a serious enough problem to spend the enormous amounts of money this could take. Also, people would still look down their noses; I'm not sure this would really cut down on that much. If it's a voluntary program, then the people well off enough to not need it would still look down on others cuz they didn't have the experience. In terms of getting to try out different things, isn't that what summer jobs and internships are for? I'm pretty sure every high school and college has various programs to let people try out different jobs. We also don't really need more musicians/artists iirc, that's more an oversaturated field. Also just trying out lots of different classes is a way to get a taste for different kinds of work. There's plenty of community colleges/technical schools to help people get into some of the jobs. If things like this would be a benefit, why aren't they being done sufficiently during the existing 12 year period of free education where yoru expenses are covered by others (aka childhood/school)? Some jobs require a particular set of skills/training to do; if people rotate around a lot to sample things they may not have the skills to do the job at a useful level. Especially if there's any safety issues to be mindful of. What is the cause of the shortage of park rangers, freight workers, and rail workers (I'm assuming you have a source to verify there is in fact a shortage of them)? Is that people are unaware that these jobs exist? or is it simply that the jobs are unpleasant/low pay? would having people do these jobs in some program to try them out really help with that? or would they simply just decide that the job is terrible, as they thought it was, and refuse to do it at the wages offered? Another thing to keep in mind with programs like this is you have to be careful that these civil service jobs don't end up undercutting the wages for the regular jobs by being a source of cheaper labor. Downsizing the military to pay for it doesn't seem like a good plan to me. 1) it's politically very difficult to do. 2) you could just downside the military period, and have less deficit spending.
First thing is to not think that everyone school has a program like this. My high school cut the vocational training we had next door because there wasn't enough people interested in drafting and other options. Some schools don't have the funding to provide this service to everyone who may need it, or want to experience it. So this covers that problem. If it doesn't work at one school, multiply by whatever number then do it again. It is a serious issue that the trades aren't getting enough people to fill positions.
And a lot of people, like I said, don't know a out theater jobs. What the day entails. What benefits there are. Working as a park ranger and seeing the national parks? Maybe get to travel on trains to different cities or building rails for new stations? There are benefits to these. You'll have to let me hit the BLS to get the data, but these are just examples of trades or jobs that people don't go to school for because they don't make the money doctors, lawyers, etc can make.
And if you get kids started early in their training and they decide to keep with it, then boom, more workers you train early to have the skills needed. How is that bad? And trying out colleges and tech schools require money. They may be from low income families where that isn't an option. Why not give them exposure early?
I see you looking for ways it won't work, instead of looking for ways to make it work. This isn't conducive to finding a solution to the problem. Devils advocate.
The jobs you need done aren't promoted or discussed as much as the high paying ones. And when those kids reach adulthood and see they had options that no one told them, how much has the economy lost out on?
|
On August 25 2018 08:23 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2018 08:11 zlefin wrote:On August 25 2018 07:06 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On August 25 2018 07:00 zlefin wrote:On August 25 2018 06:51 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On August 25 2018 06:44 zlefin wrote:On August 25 2018 06:40 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On August 25 2018 06:35 zlefin wrote:On August 25 2018 06:18 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
Since I started the civil service thing, allow me a few moments. I was reading everything and gathering opinions and ideas. And since typing on phone is the worst, bare with me.
First, this isn't mandatory and it is not unpaid. It is voluntary and while the pay may be low, basically necessities are provided and you get a stipend. The largest goal of having some of your education paid for is what I was advocating. Maybe it is a certificate or license that you need to pay for. Done. And if you're a musician and want to practice while away doing your completely voluntary civil service, okay. Find a place after your work hours and go practice. Who is stopping you?
Second, there is a place in this society for people of all skill sets. You may not like the job, but there is something for you to do. Everyone has a role to play and while some seem more relevant than others and hold a better benefit, it doesn't detract from their choice in life. The civil service is to expose kids to other options that maybe going straight to higher education doesn't show them. There are a myriad of ways you accomplish this, but my idea of having them start freshman year summer, would be perfect. Early to see what they might be interested in and if they want to do similar work, tailor their education to it.
Third, the net benefit to society is that everyone understands how difficult some jobs are, what it takes to do them, and if anything ever happens where they need to step in, they have the basic understanding of the demands. This isn't the peace corps and it isn't military service. We already have those. This is to enrich the domestic issues and communities through having a more well rounded populace. They may not get through higher ed, but they now have options they can pursue than fast food, cashier, warehouse, or whatever you all deem lead than desireable jobs.
How it is to be managed and how we try to get everyone supervised and paid, is another story. Obviously it is state by state requesting said number of workers and other states filling those needs. States would also pay and feds would find a way to give states more autonomy. Or vice versa. I don't know. This sounds reasonable; but it I'm not sure what it offers that isn't covered by the myriad existing programs; or just by various high school/college volunteering/internship programs. That's what I wanted to know in order to figure out. How can we make this more accessible. How much of the pot do we need to sweeten? i think if it is open to everyone it would be received better, especially if you're not lucky enough to get the other options to pay. What would make this a better way of spending than the various existing educational programs? I don't know alot about the existing programs, but I know there's a lot of them out there. sweetening the pot means you're paying people more han they'd be worth; which means the purpose of this is educational (or some other benefit?) before addressing accessibility, I think a clearer sense of the purpose/objectives would be helpful. do you know how many pages ago your initial post was so I can review that to see what your stated objectives were? didn't have any objectives. I asked and open ended question to see what people thought. My objectives are a varying mix of farvs and p6 but they start around 639 or so? And yeah, in a round about way, you are paying them more than what is necessary. These kids get all basic necessities paid for and a wage. Minimum wage since everything else is paid for. You just work the civil service. And you get 2 years free education, no matter what. this sounds like it could get very expensive. It also sounds like it might be simpler to just adjust the existing educational programs (which is what, 12-13 years free already) to achieve the objectives. adding more internship options and such. Or it could just lead to most people leaving the program when they find out how unpleasant the jobs are; and if they were willing to do the jobs anyways why woudln't they just have taken those jobs in the first place? giving away extra years of free education is usually done as compensation for people taking important/necessary but unpleasant/dangerous jobs. A lot of people don't know about these jobs and what the benefits are of working them. Getting them a taste is the most crucial part. If they don't like it and decide to go someplace else, that is fine. But hopefully they'll be less likely to look down their noses at musicians and artists or the people who cut the grass on highways. And a lot of jobs are important/necessary. We need more park rangers. Freight workers and rail workers. More drillers, more people understanding infrastructure period. We need a lot of behind the scenes workers. We get those through the years with this. Doesn't need to be permanent. Just get people doing it and getting paid for it. Does that make sense? I can try to clarify if it doesn't. I was in the military. About 70% of my time was leisure in Okinawa. That is expensive. These are jobs being some on the domestic front. Offering jobs to kids and then those who need it. We can downsize the military to pay for it, if it comes to that. People looking down their noses at various other occupations doesn't seem like a serious enough problem to spend the enormous amounts of money this could take. Also, people would still look down their noses; I'm not sure this would really cut down on that much. If it's a voluntary program, then the people well off enough to not need it would still look down on others cuz they didn't have the experience. In terms of getting to try out different things, isn't that what summer jobs and internships are for? I'm pretty sure every high school and college has various programs to let people try out different jobs. We also don't really need more musicians/artists iirc, that's more an oversaturated field. Also just trying out lots of different classes is a way to get a taste for different kinds of work. There's plenty of community colleges/technical schools to help people get into some of the jobs. If things like this would be a benefit, why aren't they being done sufficiently during the existing 12 year period of free education where yoru expenses are covered by others (aka childhood/school)? Some jobs require a particular set of skills/training to do; if people rotate around a lot to sample things they may not have the skills to do the job at a useful level. Especially if there's any safety issues to be mindful of. What is the cause of the shortage of park rangers, freight workers, and rail workers (I'm assuming you have a source to verify there is in fact a shortage of them)? Is that people are unaware that these jobs exist? or is it simply that the jobs are unpleasant/low pay? would having people do these jobs in some program to try them out really help with that? or would they simply just decide that the job is terrible, as they thought it was, and refuse to do it at the wages offered? Another thing to keep in mind with programs like this is you have to be careful that these civil service jobs don't end up undercutting the wages for the regular jobs by being a source of cheaper labor. Downsizing the military to pay for it doesn't seem like a good plan to me. 1) it's politically very difficult to do. 2) you could just downside the military period, and have less deficit spending. First thing is to not think that everyone school has a program like this. My high school cut the vocational training we had next door because there wasn't enough people interested in drafting and other options. Some schools don't have the funding to provide this service to everyone who may need it, or want to experience it. So this covers that problem. If it doesn't work at one school, multiply by whatever number then do it again. It is a serious issue that the trades aren't getting enough people to fill positions. And a lot of people, like I said, don't know a out theater jobs. What the day entails. What benefits there are. Working as a park ranger and seeing the national parks? Maybe get to travel on trains to different cities or building rails for new stations? There are benefits to these. You'll have to let me hit the BLS to get the data, but these are just examples of trades or jobs that people don't go to school for because they don't make the money doctors, lawyers, etc can make. And if you get kids started early in their training and they decide to keep with it, then boom, more workers you train early to have the skills needed. How is that bad? And trying out colleges and tech schools require money. They may be from low income families where that isn't an option. Why not give them exposure early? I see you looking for ways it won't work, instead of looking for ways to make it work. This isn't conducive to finding a solution to the problem. Devils advocate.
I disagree; devil's advocacy is very important. Finding good solutions to problems requires understanding them. And bad solutions don't help fix the real problems. The point of devil's advocacy is to help weed out bad/ineffective solutions. There's no reason to assume the underlying proposal is an inherent good. And if you're looking at stuff at a deeper level, then we're not talking about a civil service program, we're just talking about educational reform in general. Which changes the framing and purpose of the discussion. I've been focusing on a "civil service program" of some sort wherein people signup (or are mandated, but in your case it's voluntary) and are given some work, because that was the stated topic. If you want, we can shift to more general issues about educational reform and getting people ready for jobs and finding them careers.
as to the meat of your post:
If not every school has programs like this, wouldn't it be better to spend the money on ensuring every school DOES have vocational training for those who want them? rather than this far more expensive civil service program for trying things out? And likewise spend the money ensuring low income families can afford to send their kids to community colleges and tech schools?
If we have a shortage of park rangers, my guess would be that the reason is the government didn't spend enough money to hire more park rangers, rather than the positions being unfilled because noone's willing to take them. Also, people need money, if a job truly matters, you can raise wages to get more people to take it.
If trades aren't getting enough people to fill positions, then why aren't wages in them rising?
For people not knowing enough about various jobs; that can easily be covered for far less cost by simply having more career days, which tell you about the various josb that exist and how many of them are actually out there. Likewise you can have programs that let you shadow someone in a job for a day or 5 to get a feel for what the job is really like.
|
On August 25 2018 08:44 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2018 08:23 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On August 25 2018 08:11 zlefin wrote:On August 25 2018 07:06 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On August 25 2018 07:00 zlefin wrote:On August 25 2018 06:51 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On August 25 2018 06:44 zlefin wrote:On August 25 2018 06:40 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On August 25 2018 06:35 zlefin wrote:On August 25 2018 06:18 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
Since I started the civil service thing, allow me a few moments. I was reading everything and gathering opinions and ideas. And since typing on phone is the worst, bare with me.
First, this isn't mandatory and it is not unpaid. It is voluntary and while the pay may be low, basically necessities are provided and you get a stipend. The largest goal of having some of your education paid for is what I was advocating. Maybe it is a certificate or license that you need to pay for. Done. And if you're a musician and want to practice while away doing your completely voluntary civil service, okay. Find a place after your work hours and go practice. Who is stopping you?
Second, there is a place in this society for people of all skill sets. You may not like the job, but there is something for you to do. Everyone has a role to play and while some seem more relevant than others and hold a better benefit, it doesn't detract from their choice in life. The civil service is to expose kids to other options that maybe going straight to higher education doesn't show them. There are a myriad of ways you accomplish this, but my idea of having them start freshman year summer, would be perfect. Early to see what they might be interested in and if they want to do similar work, tailor their education to it.
Third, the net benefit to society is that everyone understands how difficult some jobs are, what it takes to do them, and if anything ever happens where they need to step in, they have the basic understanding of the demands. This isn't the peace corps and it isn't military service. We already have those. This is to enrich the domestic issues and communities through having a more well rounded populace. They may not get through higher ed, but they now have options they can pursue than fast food, cashier, warehouse, or whatever you all deem lead than desireable jobs.
How it is to be managed and how we try to get everyone supervised and paid, is another story. Obviously it is state by state requesting said number of workers and other states filling those needs. States would also pay and feds would find a way to give states more autonomy. Or vice versa. I don't know. This sounds reasonable; but it I'm not sure what it offers that isn't covered by the myriad existing programs; or just by various high school/college volunteering/internship programs. That's what I wanted to know in order to figure out. How can we make this more accessible. How much of the pot do we need to sweeten? i think if it is open to everyone it would be received better, especially if you're not lucky enough to get the other options to pay. What would make this a better way of spending than the various existing educational programs? I don't know alot about the existing programs, but I know there's a lot of them out there. sweetening the pot means you're paying people more han they'd be worth; which means the purpose of this is educational (or some other benefit?) before addressing accessibility, I think a clearer sense of the purpose/objectives would be helpful. do you know how many pages ago your initial post was so I can review that to see what your stated objectives were? didn't have any objectives. I asked and open ended question to see what people thought. My objectives are a varying mix of farvs and p6 but they start around 639 or so? And yeah, in a round about way, you are paying them more than what is necessary. These kids get all basic necessities paid for and a wage. Minimum wage since everything else is paid for. You just work the civil service. And you get 2 years free education, no matter what. this sounds like it could get very expensive. It also sounds like it might be simpler to just adjust the existing educational programs (which is what, 12-13 years free already) to achieve the objectives. adding more internship options and such. Or it could just lead to most people leaving the program when they find out how unpleasant the jobs are; and if they were willing to do the jobs anyways why woudln't they just have taken those jobs in the first place? giving away extra years of free education is usually done as compensation for people taking important/necessary but unpleasant/dangerous jobs. A lot of people don't know about these jobs and what the benefits are of working them. Getting them a taste is the most crucial part. If they don't like it and decide to go someplace else, that is fine. But hopefully they'll be less likely to look down their noses at musicians and artists or the people who cut the grass on highways. And a lot of jobs are important/necessary. We need more park rangers. Freight workers and rail workers. More drillers, more people understanding infrastructure period. We need a lot of behind the scenes workers. We get those through the years with this. Doesn't need to be permanent. Just get people doing it and getting paid for it. Does that make sense? I can try to clarify if it doesn't. I was in the military. About 70% of my time was leisure in Okinawa. That is expensive. These are jobs being some on the domestic front. Offering jobs to kids and then those who need it. We can downsize the military to pay for it, if it comes to that. People looking down their noses at various other occupations doesn't seem like a serious enough problem to spend the enormous amounts of money this could take. Also, people would still look down their noses; I'm not sure this would really cut down on that much. If it's a voluntary program, then the people well off enough to not need it would still look down on others cuz they didn't have the experience. In terms of getting to try out different things, isn't that what summer jobs and internships are for? I'm pretty sure every high school and college has various programs to let people try out different jobs. We also don't really need more musicians/artists iirc, that's more an oversaturated field. Also just trying out lots of different classes is a way to get a taste for different kinds of work. There's plenty of community colleges/technical schools to help people get into some of the jobs. If things like this would be a benefit, why aren't they being done sufficiently during the existing 12 year period of free education where yoru expenses are covered by others (aka childhood/school)? Some jobs require a particular set of skills/training to do; if people rotate around a lot to sample things they may not have the skills to do the job at a useful level. Especially if there's any safety issues to be mindful of. What is the cause of the shortage of park rangers, freight workers, and rail workers (I'm assuming you have a source to verify there is in fact a shortage of them)? Is that people are unaware that these jobs exist? or is it simply that the jobs are unpleasant/low pay? would having people do these jobs in some program to try them out really help with that? or would they simply just decide that the job is terrible, as they thought it was, and refuse to do it at the wages offered? Another thing to keep in mind with programs like this is you have to be careful that these civil service jobs don't end up undercutting the wages for the regular jobs by being a source of cheaper labor. Downsizing the military to pay for it doesn't seem like a good plan to me. 1) it's politically very difficult to do. 2) you could just downside the military period, and have less deficit spending. First thing is to not think that everyone school has a program like this. My high school cut the vocational training we had next door because there wasn't enough people interested in drafting and other options. Some schools don't have the funding to provide this service to everyone who may need it, or want to experience it. So this covers that problem. If it doesn't work at one school, multiply by whatever number then do it again. It is a serious issue that the trades aren't getting enough people to fill positions. And a lot of people, like I said, don't know a out theater jobs. What the day entails. What benefits there are. Working as a park ranger and seeing the national parks? Maybe get to travel on trains to different cities or building rails for new stations? There are benefits to these. You'll have to let me hit the BLS to get the data, but these are just examples of trades or jobs that people don't go to school for because they don't make the money doctors, lawyers, etc can make. And if you get kids started early in their training and they decide to keep with it, then boom, more workers you train early to have the skills needed. How is that bad? And trying out colleges and tech schools require money. They may be from low income families where that isn't an option. Why not give them exposure early? I see you looking for ways it won't work, instead of looking for ways to make it work. This isn't conducive to finding a solution to the problem. Devils advocate. I disagree; devil's advocacy is very important. Finding good solutions to problems requires understanding them. And bad solutions don't help fix the real problems. The point of devil's advocacy is to help weed out bad/ineffective solutions. There's no reason to assume the underlying proposal is an inherent good. And if you're looking at stuff at a deeper level, then we're not talking about a civil service program, we're just talking about educational reform in general. Which changes the framing and purpose of the discussion. I've been focusing on a "civil service program" of some sort wherein people signup (or are mandated, but in your case it's voluntary) and are given some work, because that was the stated topic. If you want, we can shift to more general issues about educational reform and getting people ready for jobs and finding them careers. as to the meat of your post: If not every school has programs like this, wouldn't it be better to spend the money on ensuring every school DOES have vocational training for those who want them? rather than this far more expensive civil service program for trying things out? And likewise spend the money ensuring low income families can afford to send their kids to community colleges and tech schools? If we have a shortage of park rangers, my guess would be that the reason is the government didn't spend enough money to hire more park rangers, rather than the positions being unfilled because noone's willing to take them. Also, people need money, if a job truly matters, you can raise wages to get more people to take it. If trades aren't getting enough people to fill positions, then why aren't wages in them rising? For people not knowing enough about various jobs; that can easily be covered for far less cost by simply having more career days, which tell you about the various josb that exist and how many of them are actually out there. Likewise you can have programs that let you shadow someone in a job for a day or 5 to get a feel for what the job is really like.
But these kids aren't trying these jobs out. They are helping complete work that needs more hands. It is educational reform in a way sure. But the jobs that need to be done, get some. Maybe cheap, but they get done. and the waves of regular workers aren't compromised because these kids are part time. Summer only in my vision.
And yes, we could expand the career days and classes taught. That would be preferred. But in the absence of that, why not another option on the table? Federally subsidized work? States expand programs, reimbursed by the feds, and we get the workers we need?
And if you shadow a doctor for 5 days, you have to be at the top of your class. While I recovered from Hodgkin's lymphoma, I had a literal fest of students come look at me. Why not for other trades? At the same time, those we're college kids. We're talking high school. We pay them and then they go where they feel their hearts lead them.
As for the devils advocate, I agree. i do it as well. Nothing wrong but we have to offer solid alternatives as well. Otherwise, we're just being asses. But in this case, fielding good ideas that we can move forward with are better than finding ways to stay the course. We've seen that action time and again. Let's try to focus on bettering the country through good ideas. If there is something inherently flawless, by all means. Otherwise, you're opinion k. good solutions is more highly valued. Would you agree?
|
On August 25 2018 09:03 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2018 08:44 zlefin wrote:On August 25 2018 08:23 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On August 25 2018 08:11 zlefin wrote:On August 25 2018 07:06 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On August 25 2018 07:00 zlefin wrote:On August 25 2018 06:51 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On August 25 2018 06:44 zlefin wrote:On August 25 2018 06:40 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On August 25 2018 06:35 zlefin wrote:
[quote]
This sounds reasonable; but it I'm not sure what it offers that isn't covered by the myriad existing programs; or just by various high school/college volunteering/internship programs. That's what I wanted to know in order to figure out. How can we make this more accessible. How much of the pot do we need to sweeten? i think if it is open to everyone it would be received better, especially if you're not lucky enough to get the other options to pay. What would make this a better way of spending than the various existing educational programs? I don't know alot about the existing programs, but I know there's a lot of them out there. sweetening the pot means you're paying people more han they'd be worth; which means the purpose of this is educational (or some other benefit?) before addressing accessibility, I think a clearer sense of the purpose/objectives would be helpful. do you know how many pages ago your initial post was so I can review that to see what your stated objectives were? didn't have any objectives. I asked and open ended question to see what people thought. My objectives are a varying mix of farvs and p6 but they start around 639 or so? And yeah, in a round about way, you are paying them more than what is necessary. These kids get all basic necessities paid for and a wage. Minimum wage since everything else is paid for. You just work the civil service. And you get 2 years free education, no matter what. this sounds like it could get very expensive. It also sounds like it might be simpler to just adjust the existing educational programs (which is what, 12-13 years free already) to achieve the objectives. adding more internship options and such. Or it could just lead to most people leaving the program when they find out how unpleasant the jobs are; and if they were willing to do the jobs anyways why woudln't they just have taken those jobs in the first place? giving away extra years of free education is usually done as compensation for people taking important/necessary but unpleasant/dangerous jobs. A lot of people don't know about these jobs and what the benefits are of working them. Getting them a taste is the most crucial part. If they don't like it and decide to go someplace else, that is fine. But hopefully they'll be less likely to look down their noses at musicians and artists or the people who cut the grass on highways. And a lot of jobs are important/necessary. We need more park rangers. Freight workers and rail workers. More drillers, more people understanding infrastructure period. We need a lot of behind the scenes workers. We get those through the years with this. Doesn't need to be permanent. Just get people doing it and getting paid for it. Does that make sense? I can try to clarify if it doesn't. I was in the military. About 70% of my time was leisure in Okinawa. That is expensive. These are jobs being some on the domestic front. Offering jobs to kids and then those who need it. We can downsize the military to pay for it, if it comes to that. People looking down their noses at various other occupations doesn't seem like a serious enough problem to spend the enormous amounts of money this could take. Also, people would still look down their noses; I'm not sure this would really cut down on that much. If it's a voluntary program, then the people well off enough to not need it would still look down on others cuz they didn't have the experience. In terms of getting to try out different things, isn't that what summer jobs and internships are for? I'm pretty sure every high school and college has various programs to let people try out different jobs. We also don't really need more musicians/artists iirc, that's more an oversaturated field. Also just trying out lots of different classes is a way to get a taste for different kinds of work. There's plenty of community colleges/technical schools to help people get into some of the jobs. If things like this would be a benefit, why aren't they being done sufficiently during the existing 12 year period of free education where yoru expenses are covered by others (aka childhood/school)? Some jobs require a particular set of skills/training to do; if people rotate around a lot to sample things they may not have the skills to do the job at a useful level. Especially if there's any safety issues to be mindful of. What is the cause of the shortage of park rangers, freight workers, and rail workers (I'm assuming you have a source to verify there is in fact a shortage of them)? Is that people are unaware that these jobs exist? or is it simply that the jobs are unpleasant/low pay? would having people do these jobs in some program to try them out really help with that? or would they simply just decide that the job is terrible, as they thought it was, and refuse to do it at the wages offered? Another thing to keep in mind with programs like this is you have to be careful that these civil service jobs don't end up undercutting the wages for the regular jobs by being a source of cheaper labor. Downsizing the military to pay for it doesn't seem like a good plan to me. 1) it's politically very difficult to do. 2) you could just downside the military period, and have less deficit spending. First thing is to not think that everyone school has a program like this. My high school cut the vocational training we had next door because there wasn't enough people interested in drafting and other options. Some schools don't have the funding to provide this service to everyone who may need it, or want to experience it. So this covers that problem. If it doesn't work at one school, multiply by whatever number then do it again. It is a serious issue that the trades aren't getting enough people to fill positions. And a lot of people, like I said, don't know a out theater jobs. What the day entails. What benefits there are. Working as a park ranger and seeing the national parks? Maybe get to travel on trains to different cities or building rails for new stations? There are benefits to these. You'll have to let me hit the BLS to get the data, but these are just examples of trades or jobs that people don't go to school for because they don't make the money doctors, lawyers, etc can make. And if you get kids started early in their training and they decide to keep with it, then boom, more workers you train early to have the skills needed. How is that bad? And trying out colleges and tech schools require money. They may be from low income families where that isn't an option. Why not give them exposure early? I see you looking for ways it won't work, instead of looking for ways to make it work. This isn't conducive to finding a solution to the problem. Devils advocate. I disagree; devil's advocacy is very important. Finding good solutions to problems requires understanding them. And bad solutions don't help fix the real problems. The point of devil's advocacy is to help weed out bad/ineffective solutions. There's no reason to assume the underlying proposal is an inherent good. And if you're looking at stuff at a deeper level, then we're not talking about a civil service program, we're just talking about educational reform in general. Which changes the framing and purpose of the discussion. I've been focusing on a "civil service program" of some sort wherein people signup (or are mandated, but in your case it's voluntary) and are given some work, because that was the stated topic. If you want, we can shift to more general issues about educational reform and getting people ready for jobs and finding them careers. as to the meat of your post: If not every school has programs like this, wouldn't it be better to spend the money on ensuring every school DOES have vocational training for those who want them? rather than this far more expensive civil service program for trying things out? And likewise spend the money ensuring low income families can afford to send their kids to community colleges and tech schools? If we have a shortage of park rangers, my guess would be that the reason is the government didn't spend enough money to hire more park rangers, rather than the positions being unfilled because noone's willing to take them. Also, people need money, if a job truly matters, you can raise wages to get more people to take it. If trades aren't getting enough people to fill positions, then why aren't wages in them rising? For people not knowing enough about various jobs; that can easily be covered for far less cost by simply having more career days, which tell you about the various josb that exist and how many of them are actually out there. Likewise you can have programs that let you shadow someone in a job for a day or 5 to get a feel for what the job is really like. But these kids aren't trying these jobs out. They are helping complete work that needs more hands. It is educational reform in a way sure. But the jobs that need to be done, get some. Maybe cheap, but they get done. and the waves of regular workers aren't compromised because these kids are part time. Summer only in my vision. And yes, we could expand the career days and classes taught. That would be preferred. But in the absence of that, why not another option on the table? Federally subsidized work? States expand programs, reimbursed by the feds, and we get the workers we need? And if you shadow a doctor for 5 days, you have to be at the top of your class. While I recovered from Hodgkin's lymphoma, I had a literal fest of students come look at me. Why not for other trades? At the same time, those we're college kids. We're talking high school. We pay them and then they go where they feel their hearts lead them. As for the devils advocate, I agree. i do it as well. Nothing wrong but we have to offer solid alternatives as well. Otherwise, we're just being asses. But in this case, fielding good ideas that we can move forward with are better than finding ways to stay the course. We've seen that action time and again. Let's try to focus on bettering the country through good ideas. If there is something inherently flawless, by all means. Otherwise, you're opinion k. good solutions is more highly valued. Would you agree?
on devil's advocate; I agree it's important to offer alternatives, and in each of these cases I have offered alternatives. I'm not advocating sloppily or stupidly staying the course; I'm trying to avoid crashing into an iceberg with an ill-thought out program. And I've been trying to dissect/analyze the flaws in it and compared it to other methods of achieving the same goals.
If the work needs more hands, why pay people more than they're worth to do it rather than simply pay more people to do it?
What jobs truly need to be done that aren't getting done, and would in fact get done by such a program as this? (that coudln't have been done by just spending the money directly on them)
The reason for "why not another option on the table"" is that the option you propose is EXPENSIVE, it'd run around 25k/year/person depending on the details; which is higher than the cost yearly cost for a high school student; and it's not clear you'd be providing a better rate of return than simply putting more money into the existing options.
Why should we pay people to "go where their hearts lead them"? It seems to make more sense to pay people to go "where the jobs actually exist and where they're needed" than to figure out what they want to do. Not everyone likes their job; not everyone has to. They do it because they're paid to, that's why it's something someone isn't doing for free already.
Your argument on wages isn't helped by the fact that the kids are part time; if hte kids are helping to do the real work, they're either being paid less than their worth, the same amount, or more. If they're being paid more, why not just pay people to do it directly, then it'd get done for less. If they're being paid the same amount as they're worth, then it's just a regular job anyways. If they're being paid less than they're worth, why wouldn't they just quit since they could necessarily get a better paying job. The fact that the kids are part time doesn't prevent the possibility of them result in depressed wages for regular workers during that time (depending on how suhc a program is implemented)
I think we may need to really get into the details more of some examples to better get a sense of this.
|
To be clear, I have zero problem with voluntary civil service. So long as it is voluntary.
There are arguments for compulsary military or civil service, e.g. nation building, cohesiveness etc but what happens is people find every reason in the book to dodge it if they don't want to do it, and if they don't want to do it and end up having to do it, they will do a shitty job so you just wasted money and time recruiting them.
South Korea's conscripts are routinely derided by their professional soldiers for being useless. Not everyone is good at fighting a war, and particularly in the modern ages where you can just drop more bombs to kill more people, having more incompetent soldiers doesn't help.
|
United States44242 Posts
Mandatory civil service is a dumb idea. We already have mandatory service in the public arena providing useful labour to people who need it performed, it's called a job, and it's incentivized by the desire to not go hungry. And as has already been established, the privileged will (and do) opt out of that all of the time.
|
McCain on his deathbed; Trump spoke at a Republican dinner tonight and has yet to mention him. On 9/11, as there was a blazing inferno in downtown Manhattan, Trump said in an interview on live TV that his building was the tallest now that the WTC had fallen, whereas previously it had been the second tallest. This is who Trump supporters look up to.
|
On August 25 2018 13:16 Doodsmack wrote:
McCain on his deathbed; Trump spoke at a Republican dinner tonight and has yet to mention him. On 9/11, as there was a blazing inferno in downtown Manhattan, Trump said in an interview on live TV that his building was the tallest now that the WTC had fallen, whereas previously it had been the second tallest. This is who Trump supporters look up to.
He 'tells it like it is'. Hadn't you heard?
|
I always come to this thread for a good laugh at the salt
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
