NationStates Jolt Archive

COMMENTARY: Say what you will about veterans, this is just plain wrong. :(


Vet's Unemployment Rate Skyrockets (http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,80320,00.html?ESRC=eb.nl)


Agence France-Presse | November 14, 2005
WASHINGTON - The return to civilian life for U.S. soldiers deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan is full of pitfalls, with an unemployment rate three times the national average.

The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics says that for the first three quarters of 2005, nearly 15 percent of veterans aged 20-24 are jobless -- three times the national average.

According to the website VeteransToday, published by veterans for veterans, the high unemployment rate is "partly because most service members seriously injured in Iraq and Afghanistan are in the early stages of their military careers and possess limited transferable job skills or very little civilian work experience".

The government is also worried about the number of veterans without a permanent address.

"The tragedy of homelessness among veterans persists, even when the economy is robust and unemployment is low," the California Department of Veterans Affairs said.

"Homeless veterans require remedial education, job-search and counseling assistance, medical services and transitional housing in order to re-enter the labor market," the agency said in a statement.

Some 200,000 persons leave active military service each year. The government wants to convince U.S. employers to hire them.

To tackle the problem, the U.S. government launched a series of initiatives to come to their aid. The U.S. Veterans Administration created in October a project titled, "Fulfilling the Commitment -- Coming Home to Work" a public-private effort so they "will have employment opportunities when they return home from the war on terrorism," the Veterans Administration said in a statement.

"The young men and women who protect our way of life need to know that they will have the opportunity to work and to take care of their families once they are discharged from military service," said James Nicholson, secretary of Veterans Affairs.

The Department of Labor announced Thursday a six-month public relations campaign aimed at veterans returning to work in civilian life.

The Veterans Administration also plans a web page, REALifelines, especially for veterans wounded in combat.

Job fairs for veterans are also being organized. One of them, earlier this month, was attended by thousands of vets. One of the organizations at the Veterans Job Fair and Career Expo in New York, the National Hire Veterans Committee, encourages employers to recruit veterans on its website www.HireVetsFirst.gov.

"Your organization depends on reliable, resilient human capital. Veterans of America's armed forces have the skills, training and character to meet your toughest challenges for today and tomorrow. That's why the President's National Hire Veterans Committee wants you to know that hiring veterans is not just goodwill. It's good business."

Its wrong that these people are not being helped?

Or do you mean that the article is wrong?

Or that they are atributing the wrong causes?

Im not sure where ya were going with this

Its wrong that these people are not being helped?

Or do you mean that the article is wrong?

Or that they are atributing the wrong causes?

Im not sure where ya were going with this
The fact that over 15% of veterans are unemployed, and that some are actually homeless is a national scandal. That's "where I'm going with this."

The fact that over 15% of veterans are unemployed, and that some are actually homeless is a national scandal. That's "where I'm going with this."
Alright they are un-employed ... what do you propose to do about it?

I guess what I am reading into the article is that because of a lot of their situation they did not get aplicable civilian market experience or training or skill learning done (because of how early in their career they are geting injured)

Are you proposing more civiian training for wounded soulders or soulders in general

Or are you proposing the state support them? or some cobination or neither?

I agree, it is unfair.

These guys head off, bust their asses and risk their lives, the least the government can do is assure a furture for these people. They aren't prisoners, and we shouldn't just release them back into the public without any form of aid. And whatever we as people can do is definately worthwhile.

Regardless of how you feel about war or this war in particular, vets deserve some help.

I think he's just trying to draw attention to it, he doesn't have all the answers.

I think he's just trying to draw attention to it, he doesn't have all the answers.
I understand ... I dont know for some reason I was expecting some form or proposition or arguement to follow rather then a "this is bad" sort of statement and thats it.

I think he's just trying to draw attention to it, he doesn't have all the answers.

Sometimes you just need to get something off your chest. The first step is dealing with how you feel about an issue, the next step is action.

The fact that over 15% of veterans are unemployed, and that some are actually homeless is a national scandal. That's "where I'm going with this."
So... they make up how much of the overall national unemployment rate?

Next... they are probably looking for jobs in the wrong place.

And... I'm sure that the aboriginal and immigrant unemloyment rates are just as high, if not higher, and yet, you're not talking about those as "scandals".

Yes, it is unfortunate that these veterans can't find work, but, if everyone had a job, there should be a labour shortage.

The fact that over 15% of veterans are unemployed, and that some are actually homeless is a national scandal. That's "where I'm going with this."

The fact that ANYONE is unemployed, or actually homeless is a national scandal.

Veterans deserve no different treatment on that score.

I actually work with a Vet who is utterly incompetent... even a DANGER... (which is a BIG deal, considering our job puts thousands of people's LIVES in our responsibility EVERY day)... and yet he is unlikely to ever get sacked, and it's JUST because he's a Vet.

I agree, it is unfair.

These guys head off, bust their asses and risk their lives, the least the government can do is assure a furture for these people. They aren't prisoners, and we shouldn't just release them back into the public without any form of aid. And whatever we as people can do is definately worthwhile.

Regardless of how you feel about war or this war in particular, vets deserve some help.

Why does a Veteran deserve preferential aid?

Why should a Vet get a job easier than a single mom?

The fact that ANYONE is unemployed, or actually homeless is a national scandal.



Capitalism doesn't work if we do not have a portion of the population unemployed.

For starters I've found most of the basic army are uneducated people who slacked off in school and saw the army as an easy way out.

Waaaay too much funding is put into the army (especially in America) and billions more on research into wepons we'll never use (unless we want to blow up half a continent).

So these people who shipped themselves off to the army to avoid dealing with the prospect of further education come back, don't get a job and moan they have it so tough. What happened to the days of self determinism where it was down to yourself to work hard and make something of yourself.

I can possibly understand the injured vets wanting some compensation and help, but to me they are just screaming we should hire private armys from now on to save the cost and ethics of sending our own cry baby men.

Capitalism doesn't work if we do not have a portion of the population unemployed.

Yep. In Britain around the 70's when the fear of being sacked and unemployed was virtually gone trade unions were able to demand wage rises so much it inflated the economy.

Capitalism doesn't work if we do not have a portion of the population unemployed.

Indeed.

Which is it's biggest failing.

You MUST have some people starving to death, to guarantee that some people can become the fatcats.

For starters I've found most of the basic army are uneducated people who slacked off in school and saw the army as an easy way out.

Waaaay too much funding is put into the army (especially in America) and billions more on research into wepons we'll never use (unless we want to blow up half a continent).

So these people who shipped themselves off to the army to avoid dealing with the prospect of further education come back, don't get a job and moan they have it so tough. What happened to the days of self determinism where it was down to yourself to work hard and make something of yourself.

I can possibly understand the injured vets wanting some compensation and help, but to me they are just screaming we should hire private armys from now on to save the cost and ethics of sending our own cry baby men.

Care to show any stats on the education level of military people supporting your claim?

From everything I have seen they have a higher percentage of higschool graduates then the general population

But feel free to show us differently with some hard stats

Indeed.

Which is it's biggest failing.

You MUST have some people starving to death, to guarantee that some people can become the fatcats.

Or to guarentee a good standard of living for most of the population.

Until someone invents something better, we're stuck with capitalism.

Why does a Veteran deserve preferential aid?

Why should a Vet get a job easier than a single mom?

I didn't say that...nor would I ever, seeing as my mother is divorced. Please don't put words in my mouth.

And I agree with your previous statement that any unemployment is a tragedy.

Personally, I don't know what to do about it. Do you have any ideas?

For starters I've found most of the basic army are uneducated people who slacked off in school and saw the army as an easy way out.

Half of enlisted infantrymen already have a college degree. Like me.

Easy way out? I guess staying at home and having your mother make your bed is the easy way out.

Half of enlisted infantrymen already have a college degree. Like me.

Easy way out? I guess staying at home and having your mother make your bed is the easy way out.
Yes because all that dont go into the millitary live with their mothers :rolleyes: I know what this person said was bating but sheesh be the bigger man and not insult all of us who made a different choice then you.

I didn't say that...nor would I ever, seeing as my mother is divorced. Please don't put words in my mouth.

And I agree with your previous statement that any unemployment is a tragedy.

Personally, I don't know what to do about it. Do you have any ideas?

Well, my father was an ex-serviceman... and he served, then he did what every OTHER person has to do... he got on with his life, and made it, or didn't, on his OWN strengths.

These strange ideas that a group of people should be given EXTRA 'rights', ensures that SOME people must be losing something.

I realise you didn't mention 'single moms'... but that was kind of the point I was making... if we ARE 'rewarding' Vets with preferential treatment, we might be taking a job away from an unsupported mom, with children to feed.

Respect is not a Zero-Sum institution.

Half of enlisted infantrymen already have a college degree.

Really? You have a source for that?

(Also... if they already HAVE a degree, why do we need to give them EXTRA help getting employed?)

Really? You have a source for that?

(Also... if they already HAVE a degree, why do we need to give them EXTRA help getting employed?)
Was thinking the same thing ... I knew they had a high highschool graduate level compared to the population but had not heard about collage graduates

This is just wrong. Especially since the military recruiters who always come to my high school painted the military as a no-fail set for life program for all involved. Sure, the government takes care for you while you're in, but then once they've used you up, they cut you lose.

Was thinking the same thing ... I knew they had a high highschool graduate level compared to the population but had not heard about collage graduates

I wonder how much of the 'statistical' evidence being offered is entirely anecdotal.

Perhaps, the other poster means that infantrymen get college scholarships, or get degrees THROUGH the army?

Or, maybe many Infantrymen go to college AFTER they serve, with the money they saved up?

Without seeing a source, it's hard to tell how much faith to place in the statistic, or assess what is being included/excluded in the numbers.

This is just wrong. Especially since the military recruiters who always come to my high school painted the military as a no-fail set for life program for all involved. Sure, the government takes care for you while you're in, but then once they've used you up, they cut you lose.
And yet people still choose this career and expect them to coddle them after they get out rather then competing with the rest of us in the market

Maybe they need a bit of education before leaving ... that I can understand

But I would not support any attempt to give them prefferential market treatment

Well, my father was an ex-serviceman... and he served, then he did what every OTHER person has to do... he got on with his life, and made it, or didn't, on his OWN strengths.

These strange ideas that a group of people should be given EXTRA 'rights', ensures that SOME people must be losing something.

I realise you didn't mention 'single moms'... but that was kind of the point I was making... if we ARE 'rewarding' Vets with preferential treatment, we might be taking a job away from an unsupported mom, with children to feed.

Alright. In this case the strength of the veteran is in question. In your case your father was strong.

I realise that not all join the military for good reasons, but when the military constantly preaches benefits given to soldiers for their services, I think they should follow through.

Alright. In this case the strength of the veteran is in question. In your case your father was strong.

I realise that not all join the military for good reasons, but when the military constantly preaches benefits given to soldiers for their services, I think they should follow through.
That or they should be required to be more truthfull about the costs/benifits

That or they should be required to be more truthfull about the costs/benifits

Aye...

Aye...
To be fair the recruters is doing the same thing any other salesman in history does

Emphasize the benifits and try to de-empphasize the costs

They are a salesman for a life-style

And to some extent people have to be responsable when they buy into the salespitch without verifying the facts or geting a more objective picture of their choice

Alright. In this case the strength of the veteran is in question. In your case your father was strong.

I realise that not all join the military for good reasons, but when the military constantly preaches benefits given to soldiers for their services, I think they should follow through.

My father was only 'strong' to the same extent that any OTHER (non-veteran) member of the workforce must be.

Soldiers get paid for their job, just like anyone else. They also get MUCH better medical care, insurance coverage and retirement plans than the average joe/joanne.

It ISN'T like they are being left out in the cold... merely given all that they get given, then expected to compete in the workforce.

And, remember, in a lot of cases, Veterans still DON'T have to compete on equal footing... for example, 'Veterans Points' on State Licensing.

That or they should be required to be more truthfull about the costs/benifits

Exactly! The recruiters get really pissed when you try to bring some of that to the kid they're talking to :)

I think he's just trying to draw attention to it, he doesn't have all the answers.
Of course I do! I'm just sitting here waiting for a call from the White House, or Congress, or some think tank so I can go resolve all the problems of the world for them. There's always someone who doesn't get the memo! SIGH! :rolleyes:

So... they make up how much of the overall national unemployment rate?

Next... they are probably looking for jobs in the wrong place.

And... I'm sure that the aboriginal and immigrant unemloyment rates are just as high, if not higher, and yet, you're not talking about those as "scandals".

Yes, it is unfortunate that these veterans can't find work, but, if everyone had a job, there should be a labour shortage.
**SWISH** Right over your head, wasn't it. :(

Why does a Veteran deserve preferential aid?

Why should a Vet get a job easier than a single mom?
I suppose this is pointless, but I'm going to try anyway. Call me an eternal optomist!

Veterans have served the rest of us by putting themselves voluntarily in harm's way. Single moms, generall speaking, have not. Clear enough for ya?

**SWISH** Right over your head, wasn't it. :(
To be fair a lot of it has gone over mine as well ... so their un-employment is high ... so is a lot of other demographics

In the end what is so horrible about vetrans in specific that makes it a "scandal of the first order"

I suppose this is pointless, but I'm going to try anyway. Call me an eternal optomist!

Veterans have served the rest of us by putting themselves voluntarily in harm's way. Single moms, generall speaking, have not. Clear enough for ya?
And what prefferential treatment does that entitle them to?

For starters I've found most of the basic army are uneducated people who slacked off in school and saw the army as an easy way out.

Waaaay too much funding is put into the army (especially in America) and billions more on research into wepons we'll never use (unless we want to blow up half a continent).

So these people who shipped themselves off to the army to avoid dealing with the prospect of further education come back, don't get a job and moan they have it so tough. What happened to the days of self determinism where it was down to yourself to work hard and make something of yourself.

I can possibly understand the injured vets wanting some compensation and help, but to me they are just screaming we should hire private armys from now on to save the cost and ethics of sending our own cry baby men.
Your "facts" are wrong, your reasoning is specious, and you come across as being resentful for some strange reason. Get your act together, then come back and post, then we may take you seriously.

Indeed.

Which is it's biggest failing.

You MUST have some people starving to death, to guarantee that some people can become the fatcats.
I want you to show me anyone in the United States of American who is "starving to death." Please enlighten me.

I want you to show me anyone in the United States of American who is "starving to death." Please enlighten me.
We are not implementing true capatalism ... we regulate it to mitigate some of the downfalls (one of them being grave_N-idles comment)

there are many. I live in DC, I see them everyday. I've passed a dead homeless man on the street. So yes, there are people starving to death in America, right here in the nation's capital.

And what prefferential treatment does that entitle them to?
Whatever we can reasonably do.

there are many. I live in DC, I see them everyday. I've passed a dead homeless man on the street. So yes, there are people starving to death in America, right here in the nation's capital.
And the reasons why there were in that circumstance when there was help just down the road?

Whatever we can reasonably do.
Any specific ideas? I mean things like having an option for civilian life training or some such thing I am all for (I generaly am for education)

But how far does "reasonably" go

Do we start forcing prefferential hiring ?
Market modification and or hiring bonuses?

Do we setup special increased welfare benifits?

Thoes I dont support, these people made the decision to go in the field that has its costs ... we can do our best to make sure what they need to know before they go back into general population but some of it is them taking responsibility for their life decisions

And the reasons why there were in that circumstance when there was help just down the road?

You mean the shelters Tony Williams closed down? You mean understaffed and underfunded soup kictians that can't be everywhere in the city? That help?

We weren't talking about the reason. You don't know the reason, neither do I. You said that people don't starve to death in America, I proved you wrong.

I suppose this is pointless, but I'm going to try anyway. Call me an eternal optomist!

Veterans have served the rest of us by putting themselves voluntarily in harm's way. Single moms, generall speaking, have not. Clear enough for ya?


Ahem! My single mother has done more for me than anyone in the military (who has never done anything for me except kill people because our govt. told them to) ever has since I was born in 1974 (in which time our freedoms have not been challeneged by anyone but our own govt.), as well as many other people with very little (since we grew up in poor areas and my mother worked two jobs whenever they were available, she would help others even though she had little to give). I would like to see her get a job before a veteran and you would like to see the veteran get the job first. In reality the person who has the best skill should get it, but I am betting the veteran would get it first just because of his vet status.

I can't believe you actually think that mothers do less for this country than military people.

I suppose this is pointless, but I'm going to try anyway. Call me an eternal optomist!

Veterans have served the rest of us by putting themselves voluntarily in harm's way. Single moms, generall speaking, have not. Clear enough for ya?

Veterans got paid for it. Veterans got active duty bonuses while they were in warzones. Veterans often have pensions, special healthcare packages, and 'bonus' schemes in employment that single mothers don't.

And, of course, most veterans chose to serve. I'm not sure they get to bitch and whine about how sad they are now, when they signed up for a job killing people in the first place.

Not to mention, of course, that any vet that served in Vietnam did NOTHING to 'serve' anything except a government agenda... which is, let's face it, true again in Iraq.


Maybe it's just me, but I would prefer to reward those who are staying at home, making a family, than those who are off screwing or shooting foreigners.

(It MIGHT be different if we were talking about Veterans who actually protected THIS country....)

I'd vouch for support for those men (No matter how unfair was the reason they fought, the politicians are to blame, not them), but that would make me a leftist :rolleyes:

Seriously, if we agree that everyone is equal, then the percentage of people that are unemployed for being lazy should be equal in all ranks, races, etc..

If is is higher, it is because they are being descriminated in some sort, and there should be an intervention about it. Before they start rioting on the streets :p

I want you to show me anyone in the United States of American who is "starving to death." Please enlighten me.

Try walking through pretty much ANY of the big cities, after the crowds are gone.

Just because YOU choose not to see it, doesn't mean it isn't there.

The fact that over 15% of veterans are unemployed, and that some are actually homeless is a national scandal. That's "where I'm going with this."

Since many of these people were not qualified to perfrom jobs higher than Burger flipping prior to their enrolling in the armed services I see no problem with that unemployement rate.

Why should they be given benefits when more than 15% had no marketable skills prior to going to war?

I'd vouch for support for those men (No matter how unfair was the reason they fought, the politicians are to blame, not them), but that would make me a leftist :rolleyes:

Seriously, if we agree that everyone is equal, then the percentage of people that are unemployed for being lazy should be equal in all ranks, races, etc..

If is is higher, it is because they are being descriminated in some sort, and there should be an intervention about it. Before they start rioting on the streets :p

There IS discrimination. Veterans actually get POSITIVE discrimination.

Wait wait wait... let me get this straight.

People are bitching about the fact that when soldiers return home they find that someone else has either taken their job while they were away... or their skills aren't as applicable in the civilian world as they'd of hoped....

Well, shoot. Blow me down if a capitalist society doesn't does this all the time anyway!
Business A: Hmmm... hold a job for the guy that might be back in 5 years and make a loss.... or give it to the next qualified guy that walks in and DON'T make a loss..... business sense, business sense, speak to me.

Business B: So young man, what can you do skill wise?
Young Vet: Well, I can snap your neck like a twig in unarmed combat...gut you like a fish from behind before you even knew I was in the same room... shoot a hazelnut off of your head at 80 yards....
Business B:Ok..... well, why don't you REJOIN THE ARMY IF THATS WHAT YOU'RE GOOD AT!?

Join the Army- cure unemployment today!

I'd vouch for support for those men (No matter how unfair was the reason they fought, the politicians are to blame, not them), but that would make me a leftist :rolleyes:

Seriously, if we agree that everyone is equal, then the percentage of people that are unemployed for being lazy should be equal in all ranks, races, etc..

If is is higher, it is because they are being descriminated in some sort, and there should be an intervention about it. Before they start rioting on the streets :p
How do you know the cause of non employment is because of discrimination?

Maybe the military does not adaquetly prepare them for the civilian market (which the quoted article makes clear is at least part of the reason)

Since many of these people were not qualified to perfrom jobs higher than Burger flipping prior to their enrolling in the armed services I see no problem with that unemployement rate.

Why should they be given benefits when more than 15% had no marketable skills prior to going to war?
Exactly they chose to go into a field that did not nessisarily improve their civilian market value

While some of the rest of us stayed home and worked on that (you know like doing thoes crap jobs to gain experience while we still young enough to get thoes jobs)
Not to mention worked on our education level ... people networking skills and overall adapting to the system

They come back not nessisarily improving their value into a system that people of the same social scale have years of civilian job experience built up

(Now I say not nessisarily because obviously some of the training they get in the military may be of great benifit depending on their focus and choice of civilian employment)

Wait wait wait... let me get this straight.

People are bitching about the fact that when soldiers return home they find that someone else has either taken their job while they were away... or their skills aren't as applicable in the civilian world as they'd of hoped....

Well, shoot. Blow me down if a capitalist society doesn't does this all the time anyway!
Business A: Hmmm... hold a job for the guy that might be back in 5 years and make a loss.... or give it to the next qualified guy that walks in and DON'T make a loss..... business sense, business sense, speak to me.

Business B: So young man, what can you do skill wise?
Young Vet: Well, I can snap your neck like a twig in unarmed combat...gut you like a fish from behind before you even knew I was in the same room... shoot a hazelnut off of your head at 80 yards....
Business B:Ok..... well, why don't you REJOIN THE ARMY IF THATS WHAT YOU'RE GOOD AT!?

Join the Army- cure unemployment today!
To be fair some of their training would be absolutly awsome to have ... but sometimes it is not enough to overcome lack of experience or wrong job placement or one of a thousand factors that we have to account for when trying to get hired.

I mean some of the training the support personell is top knotch (everything from vehicle repair to tellacommunications)

But not all of it is appliciable to civilian life

And not all training the armed forces provides is good for civlilian market as well like you pointed out a lot of the "front line" type solders training time is spent on things that may or may not be nessisary for civilian life

There IS discrimination. Veterans actually get POSITIVE discrimination.
I have seen it too ... but sometimes it is a mixed bag

I have seen it too ... but sometimes it is a mixed bag

Well, I'm looking at the example of my workplace... which is one of those 'state-licensed' ones.

In order to do my job, you have to have one of three different levels of licensing... for which the pass grade is a flat rate 70%.

So - theoretically, nobody in Georgia can do my job, without being well enough acquainted with the material to score 70% in standardised testing.

Except Veterans - who get 10% automatically... just for being veterans.

there are many. I live in DC, I see them everyday. I've passed a dead homeless man on the street. So yes, there are people starving to death in America, right here in the nation's capital.

Indeed, the guy I bought a sandwich for in DC looked like he was starving. He also looked like he had mange, or something related.

I've seen vets (and non-vets) in Atlanta who are homeless, and who look like they're starving.

As for possible reasons that vets might get some special consideration: Physical injuries sustained while enlisted. Mental injuries sustained while enlisted (PTSD, etc.), thanks for serving....

Now, I don't think that vets should automatically get a job before a more qualified person (ie. the way they do it at the post office, where a vet who passes the test gets top priority, even if he scored lower than other applicants). And I don't think a vet should get any special consideration if he does anything that would get anyone else fired.

However, I would have no problem with government-funded programs to get them job-training and job interviews or government-funded healthcare (including psychological care, if necessary).


Veterans got paid for it. Veterans got active duty bonuses while they were in warzones. Veterans often have pensions, special healthcare packages, and 'bonus' schemes in employment that single mothers don't.

Those pensions, healthcare packages, etc. are blown way out of proportion. It's not like they really pay for much. The VA gets cut year after year after year.

And, of course, most veterans chose to serve. I'm not sure they get to bitch and whine about how sad they are now, when they signed up for a job killing people in the first place.

Not to mention, of course, that any vet that served in Vietnam did NOTHING to 'serve' anything except a government agenda... which is, let's face it, true again in Iraq.

You do realize that there was a draft in Vietnam? A lot of the vets, especially the grunts did not volunteer?

Those pensions, healthcare packages, etc. are blown way out of proportion. It's not like they really pay for much. The VA gets cut year after year after year.


This I know.. as I said, I work with a Vet... I doubt if there's anyone who ever comes NEAR our workplace, that doesn't know ALL ABOUT the cuts to the VA, in great detail.

However... the healthcare, pensions, etc... while not being enough to buy your own private island, are still better than what a lot of people are getting.


You do realize that there was a draft in Vietnam? A lot of the vets, especially the grunts did not volunteer?

Well - they COULD have objected... but, yes, I know that. And, they have been recompensed for their service. Why should we be depriving THIS generation of equal access to work, though?

As I mentioned... I could see some justification if they had served to protect THIS country... but Vietnam, Iraq, et al... have been political agenda... not self-defense.

I can't believe you actually think that mothers do less for this country than military people.
Of all the words that have been put into my mouth since I have been posting on this forum, these have to take the cake. Where, pray tell, did I ever in any way, manner, shape or form indicte that I thought "mothers do less for this country than military people?"

Maybe it's just me, but I would prefer to reward those who are staying at home, making a family, than those who are off screwing or shooting foreigners.
Raising a family is a voluntary activity which carries with it it's own reward. REAL parents don't raise their children with the expectation of any reward other than seeing them grow up to be good people.

So I guess it's just you. :)

Exactly they chose to go into a field that did not nessisarily improve their civilian market value

While some of the rest of us stayed home and worked on that (you know like doing thoes crap jobs to gain experience while we still young enough to get thoes jobs)
Not to mention worked on our education level ... people networking skills and overall adapting to the system

They come back not nessisarily improving their value into a system that people of the same social scale have years of civilian job experience built up

(Now I say not nessisarily because obviously some of the training they get in the military may be of great benifit depending on their focus and choice of civilian employment)
So because they chose to do the right thing and go defend their country, they should suffer? What's wrong with this picture???

BTW ... careful, your arrogance is showing. :(

So because they chose to do the right thing and go defend their country, they should suffer? What's wrong with this picture???

BTW ... careful, your arrogance is showing. :(

Right thing? Is there a constant to which that is met? Does a reservist count? Or is it only active duty servicemen that are doing 'the right thing'? Or is it only those who get sent abroad? Or is it only those on the front line?

We live in a society which, like it or not, is run on business. It doesn't make business sense to hire someone without the correct qualifications.

Now the specialists should have no bother in finding civilian jobs. If they others do... rejoin the army. Its still a job after all.

Underneath is all, a soldier is just a person wearing a uniform. They deserve no more, and no less then any other law abiding citizen.

So because they chose to do the right thing and go defend their country, they should suffer? What's wrong with this picture???

BTW ... careful, your arrogance is showing. :(
You are right they choose to go into the military
That decision like any decision in life carries benifits and consequences

Some of the consequences is the possiblity of short changing yourself on civilian training depending on your position in the military and the post military career choice

For example
I chose to go to school for networking ... I would hardly cry if that job did not prepare me for ending up in the music industry
But it was my choice ... I felt like networking was the right choice for me and I carried through with it
But the cost was that my training in networking may not be applicable to music

I like how you call me arrogent for expecting people to deal with the life choices they make

Edit:

Rather then trying to adjust the market maybe you should be looking at increasing training for post-civilan life

I am all for educating them and reducing the impact of their decision ... but that sort of thing comes with a price cost for increasing their training time AND paying for that training

if it is a cost you find nessisary by all means I am all for education

However... the healthcare, pensions, etc... while not being enough to buy your own private island, are still better than what a lot of people are getting.

"A lot of people" haven't given portions of their lives to the military. Despite how you think politicians have used it, a lot of the men and women there whole-heartedly believe that the way the military is and has been used is "protecting the US." These are people who were willing to be put in harm's way in order to serve the rest of us, whether you think they did anything to serve us or not.

Well - they COULD have objected... but, yes, I know that.

And many of them did, and still got conscripted. Do you know what the burden of proof for a conscientious objector is in this country?

And, they have been recompensed for their service.

Have they? How exactly do you recompense for a lost limb? For PTSD?

Why should we be depriving THIS generation of equal access to work, though?

At what point did I advocate this? In fact, did I not say the exact opposite when I said that no one, not even a vet, should get a job before a more qualified applicant?

As I mentioned... I could see some justification if they had served to protect THIS country... but Vietnam, Iraq, et al... have been political agenda... not self-defense.

That is a matter of opinion. It is an opinion I agree with, to a large degree, but is still opinion. Does the fact that many of the vets truly believe themselves to be serving to protect this country mean nothing?

Sadly, there were quite many sick and heartless responses. :(

Sadly, there were quite many sick and heartless responses. So what? Why should I care about some former state gangsters?

Care to show any stats on the education level of military people supporting your claim?

From everything I have seen they have a higher percentage of higschool graduates then the general population

But feel free to show us differently with some hard stats

1. No kidding.
2. Of course, for quite some time Diploma or GED has been mandatory [where ever this guy got his statistics from, if anywhere, they would have to be dated no later than the Vietnam Conflict...]
3. No kidding...

Really? You have a source for that?

(Also... if they already HAVE a degree, why do we need to give them EXTRA help getting employed?)

I imagine, from experience, quite of few of them are adverse to doing any kind of menial labor jobs [lacking any transferable experience from their military training]... They should probably swallow their pride, get some basic job, and use the services they [and the rest of us vets] already have access to, to get some real-world training for a career.

I'm not asking them to do any different than I had to, when I ended my military service...

I imagine, from experience, quite of few of them are adverse to doing any kind of menial labor jobs [lacking any transferable experience from their military training]... They should probably swallow their pride, get some basic job, and use the services they [and the rest of us vets] already have access to, to get some real-world training for a career.

I'm not asking them to do any different than I had to, when I ended my military service...
:fluffle: I agree

You sound just like what I have been trying to say but for some reason I think people keep misinterpreting it lol

1. No kidding.
2. Of course, for quite some time Diploma or GED has been mandatory [where ever this guy got his statistics from, if anywhere, they would have to be dated no later than the Vietnam Conflict...]
3. No kidding...
Lol I have to ask just to make sure I understood ... you were agreeing with me right? :) lol

Lol I have to ask just to make sure I understood ... you were agreeing with me right? :) lol

Yeah...

Raising a family is a voluntary activity which carries with it it's own reward. REAL parents don't raise their children with the expectation of any reward other than seeing them grow up to be good people.

So I guess it's just you. :)

I didn't say they should EXPECT reward, did I?

Way to put words in another's mouth.... were you not just complaining about that?

However - faced with the choice of the government giving EXTRA help to Veterans, or extra help to those (who MIGHT BE veterans) with children to support... I'd be more for the money to feed the babies.

I imagine, from experience, quite of few of them are adverse to doing any kind of menial labor jobs [lacking any transferable experience from their military training]... They should probably swallow their pride, get some basic job, and use the services they [and the rest of us vets] already have access to, to get some real-world training for a career.

I'm not asking them to do any different than I had to, when I ended my military service...

That could be it, on the money.

They have served in the military, so now they refuse to sweep-streets, wait tables, work the register at Wal-Mart, or whatever. Like.... now that they have been in the military, they are too 'good' for the jobs other Americans might be forced to accept.

And many of them did, and still got conscripted. Do you know what the burden of proof for a conscientious objector is in this country?


Just a question. If they conscript you, and they send you to training, and you refuse to train. Refuse to participate... what do they do?


Have they? How exactly do you recompense for a lost limb? For PTSD?


The same way anyone else get's recompensed... but at least a soldier gets that medical treatment free.


At what point did I advocate this? In fact, did I not say the exact opposite when I said that no one, not even a vet, should get a job before a more qualified applicant?


I didn't say YOU did say this... I was reiterating that THAT was my point in the debate 'in toto'.


That is a matter of opinion. It is an opinion I agree with, to a large degree, but is still opinion. Does the fact that many of the vets truly believe themselves to be serving to protect this country mean nothing?

Pretty much, yes.

An extremist 'jihadi' flies a plane into the WTC. He TRULY believes himself to be serving something greater than himself.

If he survived (by some fluke, or the Hand of Allah, or whatever)... should we give him preferential employment rights?

Since many of these people were not qualified to perfrom jobs higher than Burger flipping prior to their enrolling in the armed services I see no problem with that unemployement rate.

Why should they be given benefits when more than 15% had no marketable skills prior to going to war?
1. This is a pretty damned bigoted view of enlistees.

2. The enlistees were trained to use some pretty complicated equipment. That bodes well for their potential to learn new things.

3. There isn't any good reason why the VA shouldn't pick up the tab for housing while these veterans are being retrained. But you can't force everyone into a VA -approved program.

4. Cash grants would pick up the slack. They might be wasted, but that's free will for you.

1. This is a pretty damned bigoted view of enlistees.

2. The enlistees were trained to use some pretty complicated equipment. That bodes well for their potential to learn new things.

3. There isn't any good reason why the VA shouldn't pick up the tab for housing while these veterans are being retrained. But you can't force everyone into a VA -approved program.

4. Cash grants would pick up the slack. They might be wasted, but that's free will for you.
But sometimes the truth ... they may be able to learn but so can hundreds of other people ... and thoes other people potentialy have more relivent job experience

Thats how busniess goes

AS for the housing and such so be it
IF you feel like the governemnt should pick up a special tab for them go for it just dont take that money out of civilian style programs ... use that massive millitary budget on something good for the troups.

What a vet needs to do to suceed in real life.

Get a job... (Doesn't matter how menial it is... Don't expect to be supported by others).... There is no shame in working at McDonald's while going through more school (You won't need to go through as much as someone comming right out of High School, it'll be shorter).

Not all of your training translates to civilian life... Use the existing programs to bulk up your training in some field (or another) for work in civilian industry. Some of your military training can be directly translated into college credits. The rest you need to earn on your own. An Army foot-soldier is not going to have many if any job oportunities based from that experience.

Now you can actuall look for some career work.

What a vet needs to do to suceed in real life.

Get a job... (Doesn't matter how menial it is... Don't expect to be supported by others).... There is no shame in working at McDonald's while going through more school (You won't need to go through as much as someone comming right out of High School, it'll be shorter).

Not all of your training translates to civilian life... Use the existing programs to bulk up your training in some field (or another) for work in civilian industry. Some of your military training can be directly translated into college credits. The rest you need to earn on your own. An Army foot-soldier is not going to have many if any job oportunities based from that experience.

Now you can actuall look for some career work.
I know I have put in my time doing crap jobs like that

Just a question. If they conscript you, and they send you to training, and you refuse to train. Refuse to participate... what do they do?

Jail time, most likely. Dishonorable discharge (which means that you won't get a decent job anywhere in the country). Technically, they could try you as a deserter and execute you, but I don't think they'd go that route...

If he survived (by some fluke, or the Hand of Allah, or whatever)... should we give him preferential employment rights?

No, but then again he didn't think he was helping us.

I really don't see what the problem is. It doesn't make sense.

Take a bunch of civilians as a control group. Some left high school and started looking for work straight away, if they're lucky, helping out with the family business. Others go to university, and enter the job market from there, aiming for the managerial ladder or specialised professional work. Unemployment is always going to be there. The job market is a very competitive place, particularly in the service industries which are all the West is being left with.

Now let's see, doing a few years in the army somehow puts you at a disadvantage? Educational institutions discriminate? A construction company is going to hire a guy with a civil qualification rather than a guy who learned to drive bulldozers in the Army? Because obviously it makes sense to do so?

I think maybe the observed effects are less to do with economic realities than with amount of effort put in. I wouldn't be surprised if the average graduating student was more motivated in his approach than someone whose starting point is marred by frustration and disillusionment with society. Maybe it's all just a false perception which becomes self-fulfilling? You can hardly blame the schools and employers for applicants' negative attitudes.

I really don't see what the problem is. It doesn't make sense.

Take a bunch of civilians as a control group. Some left high school and started looking for work straight away, if they're lucky, helping out with the family business. Others go to university, and enter the job market from there, aiming for the managerial ladder or specialised professional work. Unemployment is always going to be there. The job market is a very competitive place, particularly in the service industries which are all the West is being left with.

Now let's see, doing a few years in the army somehow puts you at a disadvantage? Educational institutions discriminate? A construction company is going to hire a guy with a civil qualification rather than a guy who learned to drive bulldozers in the Army? Because obviously it makes sense to do so?

I think maybe the observed effects are less to do with economic realities than with amount of effort put in. I wouldn't be surprised if the average graduating student was more motivated in his approach than someone whose starting point is marred by frustration and disillusionment with society. Maybe it's all just a false perception which becomes self-fulfilling? You can hardly blame the schools and employers for applicants' negative attitudes.

Perhaps it's a sense of entitlement that drives them to be too lazy to compete properly for the jobs they are losing out on.

I think maybe the observed effects are less to do with economic realities than with amount of effort put in. I wouldn't be surprised if the average graduating student was more motivated in his approach than someone whose starting point is marred by frustration and disillusionment with society. Maybe it's all just a false perception which becomes self-fulfilling? You can hardly blame the schools and employers for applicants' negative attitudes.
And your supporting evidence for saying this???

Perhaps it's a sense of entitlement that drives them to be too lazy to compete properly for the jobs they are losing out on.
And perhaps you have no frakking idea what you're talking about! :headbang:

And perhaps you have no frakking idea what you're talking about! :headbang:

Well you yourself seem to think that vets should be given priority above others just because they served in the military. Don't make me go back and get quotes. I'm far too lazy.

And your supporting evidence for saying this???
None is necessary, since it is a speculative opinion rather than an assertion of fact. I did begin the paragraph with "I think..." It simply makes more sense to me than a vast labour conspiracy.

I suppose this is pointless, but I'm going to try anyway. Call me an eternal optomist!

Veterans have served the rest of us by putting themselves voluntarily in harm's way. Single moms, generall speaking, have not. Clear enough for ya?


+


Of all the words that have been put into my mouth since I have been posting on this forum, these have to take the cake. Where, pray tell, did I ever in any way, manner, shape or form indicte that I thought "mothers do less for this country than military people?"


=

You indicating that Single mothers do less for this country than military people. :D

Just thought I'd answer his question.

Well you yourself seem to think that vets should be given priority above others just because they served in the military. Don't make me go back and get quotes. I'm far too lazy.

The thing is, Vets already have several priorities granted them. The flip side is, you may need to exercize more of your own labor to make the transition.

Some vets can move right into a good career field coming out of service [Generally, a Naval Nuclear ELT, is going to be better off in translating his particular field into civilian work.... A foot-soldier, on the other hand, has little "real-world" training... And will need to spend more time in study before they will become of much use in any well-paying career field]...

There are tons of advantages vets can use... College Tuition programs, credit transfer from military training, and the whole like... But, for the most part, most are not going to walk away from the military with a silver spoon in their mouth, and an easy-clear road before them. It's going to take further education, and alot of pride swallowing as you make this transition. Any good career, takes hard work to get there.

But, for the most part, most are not going to walk away from the military with a silver spoon in their mouth, and an easy-clear road before them. It's going to take further education, and alot of pride swallowing as you make this transition. Any good career, takes hard work to get there.
I don't see how this is different from any ordinary guy who had to move from one temporary job to another after finishing school. Yeah, without formal professional qualifications it's a tough world out there, but it is for everyone. This victim mentality I can't understand.

I don't see how this is different from any ordinary guy who had to move from one temporary job to another after finishing school. Yeah, without formal professional qualifications it's a tough world out there, but it is for everyone. This victim mentality I can't understand.

It isn't any different. Nor should it be.

[And I'm a veteran]...

Sadly, there were quite many sick and heartless responses. :(
( shrug ) About what I expected. :(

However - faced with the choice of the government giving EXTRA help to Veterans, or extra help to those (who MIGHT BE veterans) with children to support... I'd be more for the money to feed the babies.
I would too, as long as it didn't encourage them to have even more babies, just for the extra handouts. :(

They have served in the military, so now they refuse to sweep-streets, wait tables, work the register at Wal-Mart, or whatever. Like.... now that they have been in the military, they are too 'good' for the jobs other Americans might be forced to accept.
I don't know any veterans like that. Most are perfectly willing to take whatever job is available.

I know I have put in my time doing crap jobs like that
As have I, and lots of other veterans as well. And your point?

You indicating that Single mothers do less for this country than military people. :D

Just thought I'd answer his question.
Bullshit.

As have I, and lots of other veterans as well. And your point?
That thoes that do possibly gain a benifit from doing so in the civilian world ... I know I did

I just got started a bit earlier and did not take a 4+ year hiatus from ploding along on the path nessisary to gain civilian experience and gain reputability in employers eyes

( shrug ) About what I expected. :(
Kind of like I expected pandering from the group that thinks that doing a certian job automaticaly qualifies people from being excempt from the consequences of thoes choices

Perhaps it's a sense of entitlement that drives them to be too lazy to compete properly for the jobs they are losing out on.

I've met some vets with a sense of entitlement, but they are far from the majority, at least in my experience.

Of course, I've met some people from pretty much every group you can think of with that kind of sense of entitlement. I've met people with college degrees who think they shouldn't have to work to get a job, just because they have a degree. I've met people who think they should get a job (or grades) because of who daddy is. I've met people who think they should be handed life on a silver platter because of their ethnicity. And so on....

Thing is, I haven't seen any evidence for any difference in percentage among vets.

Now, the main differences I might list among vets (especially those who went in right after high school) and civilians would be the following:

1) Possible physical and mental disabilities at a young age. (not nearly as common among civilians as among those who have served - especially those who served as grunts).
2) Lack of civilian job experience (well, duh.)
3) Lack of experience in financial planning, etc. This one is a tough one. Young soldiers are often housed on base, for little or no money, and get meals there, etc. They get paid less than those on the outside, but, if they take advantage of all the stuff on base, they could probably save money. Thing is, they don't have to, and many seem to get used to buying things they don't need, because they don't have to pay for a lot of the things they do, even if they get married and have children. This doesn't apply to people who are career-soldiers, as they generaly move off the base and end up living in what we might call the "real world". But those who are in for 4 years or so may not have the experience most of us would by that point at managing finances, and they may need some instruction on that.
4) Lack of resume skills, interview skills, etc.

Now, I would never advocate getting past these difficulties by just giving someone a job based on their vet status. For someone to get a job, I think they need to qualify for it, plain and simple. The most qualified should get the job.

However, I think that we could take some of the huge amounts of money being pumped into the defense budget (hell, we could probably do most of this by buying one or two less planes) and we could fund programs for these sorts of things. As a soldier leaves the army, put him in a job-training/job-placement program. This is especially necessary with those who now have disabilities, as you have to make sure they have training in a field in which they can possibly work. Teach him how to put together a resume and how best to interview. Give him the therapy/medical treatment he needs. If necessary, put him in a course on budgeting/financial planning.

If our soldiers can't compete in the market, why shouldn't the government make sure they are marketable?

Bullshit.
Explain those two posts I quoted than. What were you implying?

I've met some vets with a sense of entitlement, but they are far from the majority, at least in my experience.
...

However, I think that we could take some of the huge amounts of money being pumped into the defense budget (hell, we could probably do most of this by buying one or two less planes) and we could fund programs for these sorts of things. As a soldier leaves the army, put him in a job-training/job-placement program. This is especially necessary with those who now have disabilities, as you have to make sure they have training in a field in which they can possibly work. Teach him how to put together a resume and how best to interview. Give him the therapy/medical treatment he needs. If necessary, put him in a course on budgeting/financial planning.

If our soldiers can't compete in the market, why shouldn't the government make sure they are marketable?


I didn't mean to say all vets had that sense of entitlement, just that perhaps some of the ones who couldnt get a job did.

Also I think you are correct on the reasons why they might be having a tough time in the world of civilian life and the actions needed to help them.

I'd liek to see a program like that offered to every USian though.

1. This is a pretty damned bigoted view of enlistees.

2. The enlistees were trained to use some pretty complicated equipment. That bodes well for their potential to learn new things.

3. There isn't any good reason why the VA shouldn't pick up the tab for housing while these veterans are being retrained. But you can't force everyone into a VA -approved program.

4. Cash grants would pick up the slack. They might be wasted, but that's free will for you.

1) It isn't a view of all the enlistees... but it is certainly true of some. I KNOW recent enlistees that literally WERE only capable of getting burger-bar jobs (literally - one worked in the Hardee's Kitchen), before they went in.

2) A monkey can learn to use tools. I'm not saying that the infantry are monkeys, merely that learning to use equipment may not mean much.

3) The VA doesn't have (and SHOULDN'T have) unlimited coffers.

4) Where are these 'cash grants' going to come from?

Jail time, most likely. Dishonorable discharge (which means that you won't get a decent job anywhere in the country). Technically, they could try you as a deserter and execute you, but I don't think they'd go that route...


And, if you were firm enough in your belief to risk jail, then it would be no big deal.

Especially if ALL those who now say they 'only went in because of the draft', had simply refused to get off the bus.

They can't jail EVERYONE.

The same goes for the dishonourable discharge. Okay - you might not get to be president (although, military records being as 'opne to interpretation and interference as they apparently ARE), but a 'dishonourable discharge for refusing to serve' would carry much less stigma, if more people had refused.

I hate to use it - but, people jump all over how German soldiers in WW2 SHOULD have 'stood up for what was right', and refused to take orders from above... and yet, they excuse it in their OWN military.



No, but then again he didn't think he was helping us.

The point was subjective perception, was it not?