Enough of this. State your best guys. Good Debate. I’ll cut any answers short and get back to talking trains. And yes, your opinion does count as much as mine.
Having lived with a teacher for 15 years (14 of them married to her) I THINK I can make a few comments.
FIRST, Being a teacher is NOT a cushy job. Not only do you have to deal with other people’s half trained brats all day, any more you will probably get called on the carpet for ATTEMPTING any sort of discipline. The kids of today aren’t the same as the ones on “Father Knows Best”… They know that if they get in trouble eight times out of ten mom and pop will scream bloody murder because THEIR angel couldn’t possibly be a troublemaker (it was that OTHER kid who put them up to it)…that is if they even care.
SECOND, teachers aren’t valued by our society. Oh, sure we pay lip service to the value of having “an education”, but then b#tch and moan because our taxes have to pay for it…I think you used the word “parasite”. BTW- Apprenticeships are fine…as long as the technology doesn’t change very much, or you never have to change careers…otherwise you never know when a few bits of “useless fodor” might come in handy.
THIRD, military service does not ALWAYS make one “worth their salt”… I’ve known quite a few veterans who were, to put it mildly… eccentric. (barking loony would probably better describe several of them) Using “an officer and a gentleman” in the same sentence with their name would be an oxymoron at best. Also, my ex’s son is in the reserves. His military specialty is being a cannon loader… in “civilian life” he is a career Wally-Wurld stockboy, and not very good even at that. Next year he’s supposed to go to Iraq… I pray for everybody he comes in contact with.
A LOT has changed from 40 some odd years ago
Ric, I have nothing but the highest level of respect for the sacrifice those who choose to wear the uniform of this country make. I’ve seen them leave, I’ve seen them come home, I’ve talked to their families when they didn’t. That level of sacrifice cannot be measured. Every single one of us owes them a debt of gratitude, which we show by giving them proper care, benefits, and respectful treatment upon their return. (We can debate the efficacy of our current ability to do this at a later time, suffice to say “it’s broke and sorely needs to be fixed.”) But their service gives them no further benefit than that. If our servicemen and women truly give selflessly, then it stands to reason they expect no preferential treatment farther down the road. We owe them what we promise them, nothing more.
There are many ways to serve our country, and a vast majority of them do not involve uniforms. I come from a long line of government employees. My grandfather worked as a mechanical engineer at the US Naval Shipyard in Washington DC–a civilian job. My dad spent 35 years working for NASA, also a civilian job. Neither ever donned a uniform, but their contributions helped us secure victory during World War 2, laid the foundation for our ballistic missile program, sent man to the moon and back, and developed computers that allowed satellites to see through clouds (among other contributions with purely scientific intentions). Great Granddad worked for the railroad during the war years; work so vital to the war effort that employees were given deferments. So, he served in a capacity needed by the government, just not in uniform. Each one of them did their bit for country, and deserve no less respect than those in uniform. No, their lives were never directly on the line, but it’s only through their efforts that our soldiers came home.
Those examples are still tied at least loosely to the military. What about purely scientific arenas? How do they serve country? The Constitution guarantees three things–life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Certainly biomedical research goes a long way to protecting lives. Take my own profession. The Bill of Rights guarantees a free press, because the founding fathers saw that as vital for a free society. Am I not serving my country by working towards the truth, uncovering corruption, and telling all sides of the story? I would argue that I make a significant contribution to that which keeps us free.
Arts and language as “useless fodder?” What about the “pursuit of happiness?” Are we not artists when we sit down at our workbenches to create that next model? Clearly, building models makes us happy, or we wouldn’t do it. Where did we learn to paint? My daughter’s only two, and my fridge is already covered with her paintings. Since our constitution guarantees us the ability to look for happiness, then those who help in that quest (i.e. art teachers) are serving their country. What about music? Isn’t listening to the radio today enough of an indication that we really need to teach our kids what music is supposed to sound like?
Language? The english-speaking countries of the world are absolutely pathetic when it comes to language. Go to europe or the far east, and you’ll find the rates of multi-lingualism exceed our own exponentially. Want to succeed in the global economy? You’re going to have to learn another language. Our troops certainly are; their survival depends on it.
Bottom line, there are many, many ways we all can serve our country without putting on a uniform. While that is certainly a very noble way to do so, it is not the only way. I’ll have to go back and listen to the speech again, but I seem to recall a certain liberal presidential candidate mention that he believed every American should have to serve his/her country via compulsory military or community service. Essentially he’s saying every American owes something to his/her country, and it’s high time America collect on that. Seems another prominent liberal made comments to that effect once upon a time…
Later,
K
Two young men (or women) leave high school, one goes to college, one serves 8 years in the military protecting the one that goes to college and the rest of us. Upon returning, the one going in the military uses the GI Bill to obtain his or her college degree. After 12 years, they both have equal educations and quite different life experiences. I believe the one that served their Country has earned the right to a good civil services job or a job that is paid for with public funds, like a public school teacher. I think if you look back to World War II, there were laws written to provide for this. Affirmative action has put people, that have not served, in those positions that should have been reserved for the veteran because of race or gender. If the race or gender crowd feel slighted, they could serve in the Reserves or National Guard, since they certainly don’t want to interrupt their lives for their Country. I’ll stand by my definition of “parasite”. At 60 years old, I’m comfortable with my opinion and will use it to cast my vote. Yes, it is the silly season.
Veterans do receive preference in Federal jobs. Always have.
Veterans also receive preference with many companies. I don’t have a problem with either.
There are jobs where military training is beneficial.
And you didn’t use the word superior…you said … " trusts his butt to some idiot that never served?"… “but hardly trusted.”… “but I feel they would have done a better job with military training.”
So, if one hasn’t served, they are not to be trusted.
If one has served, they do a better job.
No, you didn’t use the word superior…but everything you said certainly implies superiority.
Ralph
Citizenship, in the united states, was never connected to military service, ever, and it was never imagined as something connected to military service. Citizenship is conferred at birth, and the Constitution is quite clear about this–it says that all citizens are equal, they enjoy the same rights.* It doesn’t create a separate class of citizens with a separate set of entitlements based on military service, or any other kind of service.
Over time the US has adapted various ways of recognizing and rewarding military service. We have two national holidays and a very generous package of benefits–which is as it should be.
Private employers are free to prefer veterans if they like. But the idea that veterans should be entitled to a federal job, and given automatic preference over non veterans, is ridiculous. Sure, their experience matters and counts and it’s what makes them who they are, and it’s something the employer should be weighing in making a hiring decision.
But as a taxpayer, i want my money going to the best man for the job , regardless of military service. I’ve know many many vets and they are, in fact, just like other people. Some of them are great, some of them are terrible, most of them are average. The idea that because a guy spends three years in the motor pool at Ft.Belvoir, he’s forever entitled to a federal job, in addition to the financial and symbolic and personal recognition the US already grants, is absurd. I mean just imagine this scenario: a young man of ambition and talent, who can’t join the army because he’s diabetic. His job would go to a less qualified vet? Not on my tax dollars, thank you
And your further argument, that the family members of vets should be hired first, is equally absurd. You’d have to have a hierarchy: “These two guys are both good, but candidate B has an uncle who served in reserves–he gets preference.”
You are assuming a superior class of citizens based on the fact of military service–a caste. It’s an un-americaan idea
*True, the notion of equality was not applied to black people or women. But it was never imagined as something connected to military service. There were often local militia obligations, but they were connected to state and local citizenship, NOT federal citizenship
mike omalley said:I agree. Very un-American. As to Military service making one a "better" person.........it can. I also know people who were not "better" people after Military service. It might be good for many people.....but not necessarily good for everyone.
You are assuming a superior class of citizens based on the fact of military service--a caste. It's an un-americaan idea
Two years “in the service” of your country for young people is a good idea. However, I would not limit the “service” to military duty.
Ralph
Ralph Berg said:mike omalley said:I agree. Very un-American. As to Military service making one a "better" person.........it can. I also know people who were not "better" people after Military service. It might be good for many people.....but not necessarily good for everyone.
You are assuming a superior class of citizens based on the fact of military service--a caste. It's an un-americaan ideaTwo years “in the service” of your country for young people is a good idea. However, I would not limit the “service” to military duty.
Ralph
Ralph,
I agree with all that you stated above. All military service is not fighting the enemy, in fact there is a large number of support personnel for each person in battle or deployed. The military structure has worked for many centuries, long before this Country was created. I think it is a good training platform for life.
For the record - I never implied or stated a “superior class of citizen”. I stated who I trust and feel will do a better job in a general category. It is my opinion and observation after many years in and out of uniform. You guys are certianly welcome to not share my opinion, but are you ready to not allow me to have my opinion or to think less of me because I openly expressed how I feel? Most of you guys don’t know me. Those that do know me, choose to like my company or not. So be it. This is the United States of America and I’ll vote and express my thoughts as I desire.
I’ve got to go work on the railroad. It is a beautiful day here and I’ve got buildings to paint.
“This is the United States of America and I’ll vote and express my thoughts as I desire.”
Bravo Ric,
I wouldn’t have it any other way.
And I never said I didn’t like you. I like many people I don’t agree with. Some friends I know not to speak politics. I have several more that have opposing views and we can talk politics.
You have the fortitude to speak up for what you believe. A redeeming quality in any person…whether I agree with their opinion or not.
If I was to limit my friends to those that agree with me…I would probably be very lonely :lol:
Ralph
Ric, you describe the word “parasite” as such: “Something living off the blood, work and sacrifice of a life giving body.” In terms of a society living freely off of the sacrifices of a select group dedicated to preserving that freedom, I can see how it fits. It’s not a word I would use because it carries such strong negative connotations, but it does, under a certain light, fit. But by that definition, all who did not serve should be termed such, since all are living off the blood sacrifice of the select few. However, in your view, you apply the term only to those who enter civil service. How do you justify that? Why do those who work outside the federal government get a free pass?
Let’s take an example of two engineering students fresh out of grad school. Neither has military experience. One goes to work for XYZ electronics, designing supercomputers. The other goes to work for the government designing supercomputers. Same education, same background, same job. One is in the private sector, one not. The graduate in the private sector makes easily twice, if not more, than the government employee for the same work. Why–relative to your definition of the word “parasite”–does only the government employee get this label? What makes the private sector worker different?
As a corollary, what if a vet with only a 4-year degree applied for the same government job? Should he get it over the more qualified non-military applicant? If so, how do you justify it? How does his military experience counter an advanced college degree?
Let’s use me as an example. Around the time I graduated from college, my dad’s division at NASA was looking for video producers. Why did my decision to head into TV news instead cleanse me of that unfortunate stigma of being a parasite? (Most would argue quite the opposite, actually.)
You wrote, “I stated who I trust and feel will do a better job in a general category. It is my opinion and observation after many years in and out of uniform.”
No argument there. But you’ve so far failed to explain why your preferences apply solely to those in civil service. Until you can defend why you single out a small group of the greater society for this label, I can’t even understand your opinion, much less respect it. I will probably not agree with it, but I would like to at least respect it.
Later,
K
Kevin,
Please excuse my delay in responding to this. I have worked hard to form an answer that might justify my position.
I work with City, County, State and Federal employees of all categories on a daily basis running a marina on a Federal reservior. I’ve done this for 18 years. Before this I worked in private business and served in both the regular military and finished up a 20 year career in the reserves. I see extremely dedicated government employees and some that you wonder how they figure out how to get to work each day. Some have a very good understanding of what it takes to be a small businessman and survive in the world of regulations. Some couldn’t balance a check book.
A senior manager within one of the organization, that I have a great deal of respect for though we are on opposite sides on many projects, stated that within governement the object to complete any project is never the goal. The government’s goal is to follow the exact letter of the process, no matter what the outcome. This thought pattern has stayed with me a long time. I find it disturbing and yet I’ve come to accept it.
Somehow in long endless meetings that many times provide nothing, experience and education sometimes enter the casual conversations. During these times I’ve noted who has served in the military and who have not. I’ve applied this obtained knowledge to evaluating how well the people perform their functions and have observed that those who have some military experience understand the reason we are meeting. The others seem only to understand that we need to have another meeting.
Maybe I’ll never be able to explain how I have come to my conclusions. I don’t know if that is even worthwhile.
Everyone has to form their own opinions and I have formed my own thoughts that I want to be governed by people that have some military experience in their back ground. I want my children influenced and taught by people that have some form of military training in their background, not just out of the classroom and into a job of teaching in a classroom. I guess I’m tired of explaining to people, that come in looking for a job, that I will not hire them with 5 rings in their lip and tatoos like Mike Tyson on their faces. That the consequences of what they have done in their life does matter and does influence other’s opinions of them.
Thank you for taking the time to read my thoughts, whether you agree with them or not. I’m very much aware that others don’t agree with my thoughts. I like model railroad operations, others like to watch a toy train run in a circle, some never take them out of the box. Some will change their feelings as they go through life, some will do it one way because they have always done it that way. We live in a Country where all this exists because young men and women put their lives on the line. I can’t ever forget this, but enjoy the time I get to think about model railroads instead of heavier subjects. Enjoy the Labor Day Weekend, others are allowing that to happen.
I think what Ric is saying (pardon me, Ric, if I am putting words in your mouth) is that almost all who have military experience will be able to “Take a Message to Garcia,” and that only some who do not have military experience will be able to carry the message in the same way. Obviously, there are exceptions, but it has been my observation, having lived in both communities for the same amount of time as an adult, that the observation rings true nearly universally. Even the “Cat 4” will understand, because he has been taught that from the first day of boot camp.
From Wiki-pedia- “The essay celebrates the initiative of a soldier who is assigned and accomplishes a daunting mission. He asks no questions, makes no objections, requests no help, but accomplishes the mission. The essay exhorts the reader to apply this attitude to his own life as an avenue to success. Its wide popularity reflected the general appeal of self-reliance and energetic problem solving in American culture. Its “don’t ask questions, get the job done” message (is) often used by business leaders as a motivational message to their employees.”
When I interview a potential employee, I can tell a lot about the individual by his or her response to reading the essay.
Steve Featherkile said:
I think what Ric is saying (pardon me, Ric, if I am putting words in your mouth) is that almost all who have military experience will be able to [url=http://www.birdsnest.com/garcia.htm]"Take a Message to Garcia,"[/url] and that only some who do not have military experience will be able to carry the message in the same way. Obviously, there are exceptions, but it has been my observation, having lived in both communities for the same amount of time as an adult, that the observation rings true nearly universally. Even the "Cat 4" will understand, because he has been taught that from the first day of boot camp.From Wiki-pedia- “The essay celebrates the initiative of a soldier who is assigned and accomplishes a daunting mission. He asks no questions, makes no objections, requests no help, but accomplishes the mission. The essay exhorts the reader to apply this attitude to his own life as an avenue to success. Its wide popularity reflected the general appeal of self-reliance and energetic problem solving in American culture. Its “don’t ask questions, get the job done” message (is) often used by business leaders as a motivational message to their employees.”
When I interview a potential employee, I can tell a lot about the individual by his or her response to reading the essay.
That was interesting Steve.
Having worked in several parts of the country for years…I have seen both types of people. Some people need close supervision. Some can work without any supervision at all.
Is it military training, or is that “type” of person just more inclined to join the military? Because I really don’t think some of these people that require close supervision can be “trained”. If they don’t have that quality by adulthood, they never will.
As for “ask no questions, get the job done”…sometimes the “right” questions can save time, money and duplication of effort.
I don’t want to answer any stupid questions. At the same time…I’d rather you ask than do the job incorrectly.
Ralph
Steve,
You don’t have to apologize, your example makes a good point. I think you can understand or respect my viewpoint even if you don’t agree with it.
Ralph,
I want my crew to challenge me with strong questions and I want them to make decisions on their own, knowing that I will back their decision whether it was the right one or not. They were there, I wasn’t. I am available 24/7 to answer any question for them, no matter how small. They all know when to call and when to make the decision and do the job.
You asked is it military training or do those type of people join the military. I don’t know that answer. I currently don’t have a single employee that was ever in the military, but I do train them the way I was trained and I’ll put my work force up against anyone. They are my friends, my extended family and my fellow employees.
But my statement and theory about people that work for the public having some military training is still how I feel. It took 60 years to form this opinion. It is not going to be changed by someone writing a paragraph on a model railroad forum. I still believe Veterans deserve civil service jobs over people that have never been in uniform and I believe students educated in a public school system would be better served and educated if their teachers above the 3rd or 4th grade had an understanding of history, patriotism, loyalty and service above self.
After all, it is our tax dollars that are paying their salaries.
Thank you for listening to how I feel. Please just listen to my side and accept that that is the way I believe. Or don’t. I certainly accept your view points and truely think no less of you if you disagree with me.
"I want my crew to challenge me with strong questions and I want them to make decisions on their own, knowing that I will back their decision whether it was the right one or not. They were there, I wasn’t. I am available 24/7 to answer any question for them, no matter how small. They all know when to call and when to make the decision and do the job.
Well said, Ric.
Those are the qualities of my “boss”. Wouldn’t be there if it wasn’t so.
“I currently don’t have a single employee that was ever in the military, but I do train them the way I was trained and I’ll put my work force up against anyone”
I’m sure you “weed out” those that can’t think for themselves and take responsibility. The fact that you will put your workers up against anyone…seems to go against your argument.
Ralph
Ralph, you said - I’m sure you “weed out” those that can’t think for themselves and take responsibility. The fact that you will put your workers up against anyone…seems to go against your argument."
I run a private business, none of my employees are civil service. I will say two equally qualified applicants, the veteran will get the job. I owe that to him/her and I owe that to this Country that has given me so much.
The guy who will “Take a Message to Garcia,” will be able to make decisions on his own. He will not have to wring his hands and ask a thousand senseless questions to the point where it would be easier for me to do it myself.
I guess it is the difference between the Sergeant on Omaha Beach saying, “C’mon, you bastards, do you want to live forever?” and then leading the charge up the ravine and off the beach; and the Wermacht generals who were afraid to wake der Furher to get the Panzers freed up. The difference between the guy on the factory floor who says “We can make it better and cheaper if we do this,” and the guy who says “It’s not my job.”
Interesting point about the type of person who might joint the military. I’m not so sure. Back in the days of the draft, it was an almost universal trait among those who had served. Certainly, it was a universal trait in those who came back from “Big 2,” frontline troops and REMFs alike.
Ric Golding said:
Ralph, you said - I'm sure you "weed out" those that can't think for themselves and take responsibility. The fact that you will put your workers up against anyone..........seems to go against your argument."I run a private business, none of my employees are civil service. I will say two equally qualified applicants, the veteran will get the job. I owe that to him/her and I owe that to this Country that has given me so much.
That’s cool, Ric
I think that is a good policy and I know many business’ with similar policies.
Ralph
I understand your thoughts towards those with military experience. There’s no arguing that it does instill character (though whether it sticks once some leave the service…) But the fundamental question of why one’s singular choice of employer makes him a “parasite” or not still remains unanswered. The weakness lies–if I’m understanding correctly–in a person’s inability to think for himself or take action without prodding. If a person is of that mindset, he’ll be of that mindset in whatever environment he is ultimately employed. There are plenty of these types in many lines of work, frustrating the begeezes out of us whenever we encounter them. Likewise, a strong-minded, self-sufficient individual will be so in whichever environment he finds himself.
I’ll not argue that the governmental process is mired in red tape. And it could even be argued that such an environment is well-suited for those who prefer ducking behind “process.” However, that does not mean that every civil servant who lacks military background falls into that category. In my experience, there’s a good mixture of both in government, and no correlation between whether they ever wore a uniform. I think it has far more to do with the specific environment in which the work is being done. Strong people can excel in a suitable environment. If the environment itself is the reason for slow progress, then that’s hardly the fault of the individual. Even the most forward-thinking people hit brick walls.
(I’ll also say that the military itself is chock full of its own idiosyncrasies, including some buck-passing and ducking that makes the DMV look well-oiled. There’s a reason “military intelligence” is joked about being an oxymoron. Again, not necessarily germane to the discussion at hand, just my observation.)
You wrote, “I still believe Veterans deserve civil service jobs over people that have never been in uniform…”
If that assumes equal qualifications, there’s no argument. But my corollary question remains unanswered; if there’s a clear level of competency required for the job (i.e., an advanced degree or specialized training), and the vet’s education and military training do not meet that requirement, do you feel the job should still go to the vet, and if so, why? If you agree that the job should go to the qualified applicant, how can he be considered a “parasite” when there are no vets in contention?
Truth is, Ric, we agree on many premises relative to vets, their treatment, and the perspective they bring that would do well to be instilled in others. My only disagreement is to why one who isn’t gets a rather derogatory label affixed to him simply because he wants to feed his family, and chooses to do so by devoting his time, education, energy and efforts to the same government that’s given him so much (typically with a financial sacrifice relative to what he could earn in the private sector). I’m glad you don’t think I’m a parasite, but, geez, had I pursued that government job instead…
Later,
K
The miltitary, at least the fringe branch I served in, strengthened my innate ability to think on my feet, to locate and solve problems, RAPIDLY, and NOT to take any horseshit from anybody.
11-1/2 years of fighting “The Regime” showed I could do it in the face of all sorts of opposition.
Not all can, not all are helped my Military Involuntary Servitude (well, when we had the Draft), biggest issue is some who as lifers, when they retire cannot handle the stresses of not being able to order folks around.
I know someone quite well who is a foreman in construction.
Purposefully vague.
They do a LOT of State contracts.
The statement that the goal is to do it exactly by the book, or plans, is correct.
His company finally decided to quit fighting the 90-day-wonder engineers who knew they were right and how dare a blue-collar-worker tell him he’s wrong?
So, instead of fighting for days, weeks and months to get it "right’, they built it by the blueprints, had it signed off, then when it fell apart before even being placed in service, they tore it all out (time and materials), and rebuilt it right (time and materials).
I see another outfit doing the same.
Had a MAJOR highway project that cracked apart before they opened it.
State had to pay to have it ripped out and rebuilt…this time correctly.