[agildeta]

In an interview; Barney Frank suggested we bring all the troops home and employ their use similar to the old WPA to build or rebuild public works or other projects.

We have a volunteer Military of those young people who have enlisted to FIGHT FOR OUR COUNTRY NOT DO CONSTRUCTION WORK.

There are times related to military actions/needs where it is necessary some of their duties may be far afield of combat even in our own country BUT if labor is wanted it would be insulting to force our fighting men/women into positions they had not volunteered for.

Duscharge them and if they desire they could join a reestablished WPA (Works Project Administration or CCC (Civilian Conservation Corps). Not Military Controled !

[brandiweb]

I like a modified form of that idea.

We dont need soldiers home building things, we need Americans who are out of work home building things. What we should have is our soldiers back to help in places where they're needed with disaster relief, community improvement, etc etc.

And making every male over the age of 18 sign a statement saying they'll show up if they're drafted is not what I call a "volunteer" military.

[Oppofeescom]

I like a modified form of that idea.

We dont need soldiers home building things, we need Americans who are out of work home building things. What we should have is our soldiers back to help in places where they're needed with disaster relief, community improvement, etc etc.

And making every male over the age of 18 sign a statement saying they'll show up if they're drafted is not what I call a "volunteer" military.

I like a modified form of that idea.

Instead of using our military for building or disaster relief they should either be warfighting or training for warfighting.

Since we need things built, and we need folks to help with disaster relief, we should have anyone collecting welfare or unemployment insurance pitch in and lend a hand.

I understand that folks who are collecting unemployment insurance payments have paid (relatively small) premiums for that coverage and I don't look at them as getting "something for nothing" the way I do welfare recipients.

That said, some of the folks we have on unemployment (10% of the country +/-) have been there all year. Some have been there longer. Some who just started collecting last month will be on those rolls for several months to a year.

Not having a job to go to is crippling. It's just no good for a grown man to sit on his couch all day wishing he had something productive to do with his day. By matching unemployed people with jobs that need done we'll better America and we'll give these folks something to do with themselves.

As for our welfare recipients, fuck you, grab a shovel and go fill sandbags or something. We can always use sandbags.

[Cheeniandab]

In an interview; Barney Frank suggested we bring all the troops home and employ their use similar to the old WPA to build or rebuild public works or other projects.

We have a volunteer Military of those young people who have enlisted to FIGHT FOR OUR COUNTRY NOT DO CONSTRUCTION WORK.

There are times related to military actions/needs where it is necessary some of their duties may be far afield of combat even in our own country BUT if labor is wanted it would be insulting to force our fighting men/women into positions they had not volunteered for.

Duscharge them and if they desire they could join a reestablished WPA (Works Project Administration or CCC (Civilian Conservation Corps). Not Military Controled !

Absolutely agree. I actually think it would be much worse if it was not a volunteer army and they were forced to do those things.

[ambientambien]

Why are we talking about "using" the military to do start employment in government dictated careers? Seems somewhat like an attempt to obligate even more of our soldiers than we already do these days. Have they not been through enough without adding more demand from politicians (no matter how nice or potentially usefull the request is?) Now if those coming out of the military are asking for this path, so be it we should help the transition. But a politician coming up with the idea does not come across that way.

[Stappipsy]

I think Frank and the rest of you are raising good ideas and concerns. It's exactly what the country ought to be doing from politician to citizens to get some results...discuss and put our collective thoughts out there and see if we can get a plan going after review and consideration of them because there are things to do, need to be done, and things that can get them done.

Using the military has some merit to it if done properly and efficiently. Citizens can get more bang for their buck with these employees if that is done, and such employees can get additional pride, experience and training that benefits them and the country in the short and long term.

For example, infrastructure is obviously an area in great need of improvement. Guess who has done good work there and could do more in such a hybrid use? The Army Corp of Engineers. There's some cracker jack types in there who have the abilities to do many good things, the tax payers helped them achieve that potential, and both them and the country can continue to harness that for everyone's benefit. They already do play key roles, e.g.,

. . . The Corps' mission is to provide vital public engineering services in peace and war to strengthen the nation's security, energize the economy, and reduce risks from disasters.[3]

Their most visible missions include:

Planning, designing, building, and operating locks and dams. Other civil engineering projects include flood control, beach nourishment, and dredging for waterway navigation.

Design and construction of flood protection systems through various federal mandates (see Public Laws below).

Design and construction management of military facilities for the Army and Air Force and other Defense and Federal agencies.

Environmental regulation and ecosystem restoration. . . . United States Army Corps of Engineers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There's plenty of people out there who want to work but have trouble finding it. Solution oriented people ought to see who can do what with them. How many road projects can unemployed concrete and pavers get put to work to do for example. What's the skills of white collar types and how and where can they be put to a task, etc.

[VUzgOhgv]

I think there is some merit to this idea but I believe there could be much more practicable uses for the military. One of the main things I can see is securing our boarders.

[Dokescoonse]

I think there is some merit to this idea but I believe there could be much more practicable uses for the military. One of the main things I can see is securing our boarders.

Absolutely...just beat me to that thought as I was going to reply to Sluggo.

I think these days in the country we're waaaay into too much 'can't do' mode, finger pointing, excuses, etc. That stuff really has grown old with me, especially in politics and public discussion in politics, etc. The effective result of that is zero.

Where's the 'can do' spirit these days? We even have too much 'that's beyond my pay grade' or 'outside my job description' stuff...it's so limiting. Nobody can or should attempt to be a 'jack of all trades' because someone concentrating everywhere is concentrating nowhere, but that's no an excuse IMO for self-limiting the potential one can do with their skill sets and talents for being productive and getting the pride--and pay--that ought to come with it.

For example, the border is precisely a place where trained troops can do plenty of good. It's no secret that we have loads of drug dealers around there--some military trained or given military style training like Los Zetas--and the military is trained in things like how to conduct day and night patrols. Some have that for desert areas and there's plenty of that--and a problem area for border trafficking--in the US like the Sonoran Desert border area.

But, you'll hear 'can't do' types raising wild-eyed bogeymen fears of troops going jihad on immigrants and other nonsense, or someone citing the Posse Comitatus Act and ending discussion without thinking any deeper as to whether or not it can be amended to do reasonable things without destroying the original purpose of why it was enacted, etc.

[Celeliamend]

I think Frank and the rest of you are raising good ideas and concerns. It's exactly what the country ought to be doing from politician to citizens to get some results...discuss and put our collective thoughts out there and see if we can get a plan going after review and consideration of them because there are things to do, need to be done, and things that can get them done.

Using the military has some merit to it if done properly and efficiently. Citizens can get more bang for their buck with these employees if that is done, and such employees can get additional pride, experience and training that benefits them and the country in the short and long term.

For example, infrastructure is obviously an area in great need of improvement. Guess who has done good work there and could do more in such a hybrid use? The Army Corp of Engineers. There's some cracker jack types in there who have the abilities to do many good things, the tax payers helped them achieve that potential, and both them and the country can continue to harness that for everyone's benefit. They already do play key roles, e.g.,



United States Army Corps of Engineers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There's plenty of people out there who want to work but have trouble finding it. Solution oriented people ought to see who can do what with them. How many road projects can unemployed concrete and pavers get put to work to do for example. What's the skills of white collar types and how and where can they be put to a task, etc.

Without some long dissertation let me just inject this:

Durring WWII there was a song with the lyrics about their wages; "21 dollars a day .....once a month" This posed little problem when you shipped out and there was little or nothing to spend it on. In WWII there was NO Rotation home it was like the WWI song ; "And we won't be back 'till it's over over there". Even as a (17in/19out + reserve) year old when we were in an out going unit in San Francisco it was obvious that the civilians were enjoying a high time and the gobs did the same ....for the one liberty they could afford at a $ 100 per month wage. The point is "don't mix civilians with Military ! Other than family and women they are sometimes looked upon as inferiors or resented because of the money they were making as others suffered.

The Corp of Engineers is a different situation. Military and rescue fine. Other duties.... make them civilians and pay them as such.

[Stetbrate]

I have doubts the military is the best suited organization for building renovating civil infrastructure. Maybe the part of it which is trained for disaster relief might have the best suited of all for these things. But they hardly are deployed anywhere abroad anyway, are they?

[9V42h1eT]

Absolutely...just beat me to that thought as I was going to reply to Sluggo.

I can't help it if I'm younger, faster, and better looking....it's a curse, sometimes.

[Xlkl9SFd]

I have doubts the military is the best suited organization for building renovating civil infrastructure. Maybe the part of it which is trained for disaster relief might have the best suited of all for these things. But they hardly are deployed anywhere abroad anyway, are they?

Sometimes all you need is many able and warm bodies to get the job done.

[invest7manager]

I have doubts the military is the best suited organization for building renovating civil infrastructure. Maybe the part of it which is trained for disaster relief might have the best suited of all for these things. But they hardly are deployed anywhere abroad anyway, are they?

just a fyi
everyone in the military is trained for disaster relief and it is the us military that are usaly the first responders over seas, in fact they are usally theri days if not weeks beofre anyone else in teh world can get there

[OvDojQXN]

The military is an instrument of foreign policy, not a domestic labor force.

However, note that we have a two tiered military, the active duty military consisting of the Marines, Navy, Army, Air force that exist to defend our sovereignty and interests beyond our borders, and the Army National Guard, Air National Guard, and Coast Guard, which exists to stand guard on the walls. All are understaffed for their missions.

We need to revamp both, starting with the combined National Guard. It needs to be compulsory, with every able bodied young adult serving two to three years, starting with basic training, logistical support for the active duty military, logistical and civil emergency preparedness and law and order, guarding the border, and then in supporting roles in the various departments as affordable short term labor to support the nations infrastructure without the long term fiscal liabilities of civil government workers.

The active duty military exist to defend our sovereignty and interests beyond our borders. It should be expanded to at least Cold War levels, particularly the Navy and Air Forces to move, supply, and support troops ashore. We shouldn't a vast number of peacetime overseas bases. Our naval and air fleets should be able to support our divisions on station, and then land them whenever needed, be in in the littorals or by air far inland, and then support them with logistical, fire and air support. It needs to be reformed to be more self sufficient on the battlefield, and to be more flexible in our strategies, both offensive and defensive. Specifically, we need a Corp of Engineers as a separate service that focuses on fortifications and logistical needs of the other services. We also need a full fledged Space Command to not only protect our orbital infrastructure from foreign nations, but to survey and monitor natural threats from within our corner of the galaxy.

I would also add that the State Department should have it's own force of aid workers to provide direct aid to people around the world in need, to eliminate the checks we are writing to dictators, and to free our soldiers from bureaucratic nonsense.

[kennyguitar]

I can't help it if I'm younger, faster, and better looking....it's a curse, sometimes.

Oh you're cursed.

"The ageing process will get you my pretty...and your little dog too...ehEHehehehehehe."

[bribiaLaubysdggf]

I think there is some merit to this idea but I believe there could be much more practicable uses for the military. One of the main things I can see is securing our boarders.

I'm not entirely comfortable with that idea. There's a reason why our police and our military are separate; the military should not be doing a job meant for law enforcement.

Additionally, I dont think that would square well with the Posse Comitatus act.

[AdipexAdipex]

just a fyi
everyone in the military is trained for disaster relief and it is the us military that are usaly the first responders over seas, in fact they are usally theri days if not weeks beofre anyone else in teh world can get there

I honestly don't know how the US military is organized but i would expect that you have specialized groups who really who are not just trained a bit but really know what they are doing, pioneers or something like that.

Germany for example has a civilian disaster relief organization, the THW (Technisches Hilfswerk). But in any case, disaster relief is something different than an infrastructure construction business. Maybe that business can still do along with unskilled construction workers but I would be hard pressed to think that skilled full time workers are a lot more efficient.

[HilaryNidierer]

Absolutely...just beat me to that thought as I was going to reply to Sluggo.

I think these days in the country we're waaaay into too much 'can't do' mode, finger pointing, excuses, etc. That stuff really has grown old with me, especially in politics and public discussion in politics, etc. The effective result of that is zero.

Where's the 'can do' spirit these days? We even have too much 'that's beyond my pay grade' or 'outside my job description' stuff...it's so limiting. Nobody can or should attempt to be a 'jack of all trades' because someone concentrating everywhere is concentrating nowhere, but that's no an excuse IMO for self-limiting the potential one can do with their skill sets and talents for being productive and getting the pride--and pay--that ought to come with it.

For example, the border is precisely a place where trained troops can do plenty of good. It's no secret that we have loads of drug dealers around there--some military trained or given military style training like Los Zetas--and the military is trained in things like how to conduct day and night patrols. Some have that for desert areas and there's plenty of that--and a problem area for border trafficking--in the US like the Sonoran Desert border area.

But, you'll hear 'can't do' types raising wild-eyed bogeymen fears of troops going jihad on immigrants and other nonsense, or someone citing the Posse Comitatus Act and ending discussion without thinking any deeper as to whether or not it can be amended to do reasonable things without destroying the original purpose of why it was enacted, etc.

Nothing in my post contradicts what you have said, or results in "zero."

My issue, exclusively, is with whom came up with the idea and how it would be implemented. Barney Frank has been running around for a while now suggesting that our spending on the military is the reason for the S&P Downgrade. Now he is making suggestion, which I am admitting to having a hard time finding text of as the OP did not include a link, that we "use" the military to rebuild infrastructure. Granted I do not have the context of the comment to reference but that sounds more like "you will do" instruction over "can do" spirit. In my post, you suggested you were going to respond to, I said I have zero issue with those coming out of the military wanting thus getting a desired help to transition into the workforce. If some want to go into planing to engineering to construction of infrastructure projects, be my guest. Again, my issue is help for the "can to" spirit becoming "you will do" from the one guy on the hill suggesting our military spending is responsible for our downgrade. He being right or wrong on that, well that is another topic. The point is, my concern is reasonable given whom we are talking about given his political interests I am not so sure are based on your commented "can do" spirit.

[Petwrenny]

In an interview; Barney Frank suggested we bring all the troops home and employ their use similar to the old WPA to build or rebuild public works or other projects.

We have a volunteer Military of those young people who have enlisted to FIGHT FOR OUR COUNTRY NOT DO CONSTRUCTION WORK.

There are times related to military actions/needs where it is necessary some of their duties may be far afield of combat even in our own country BUT if labor is wanted it would be insulting to force our fighting men/women into positions they had not volunteered for.

I see what you're saying, but if they were sent to do labor, there's a chance they might actually do something useful unlike what they're doing now in Iraq for example, which is downright detrimental and a monstrous waste of money.

[RicardoHun]

Nothing in my post contradicts what you have said, or results in "zero."

My issue, exclusively, is with whom came up with the idea and how it would be implemented. Barney Frank has been running around for a while now suggesting that our spending on the military is the reason for the S&P Downgrade. Now he is making suggestion, which I am admitting to having a hard time finding text of as the OP did not include a link, that we "use" the military to rebuild infrastructure. Granted I do not have the context of the comment to reference but that sounds more like "you will do" instruction over "can do" spirit. In my post, you suggested you were going to respond to, I said I have zero issue with those coming out of the military wanting thus getting a desired help to transition into the workforce. If some want to go into planing to engineering to construction of infrastructure projects, be my guest. Again, my issue is help for the "can to" spirit becoming "you will do" from the one guy on the hill suggesting our military spending is responsible for our downgrade. He being right or wrong on that, well that is another topic. The point is, my concern is reasonable given whom we are talking about given his political interests I am not so sure are based on your commented "can do" spirit.

!. Although the need to supply a link is IMO bullshit and conrta educational (Does not stimulate the need to verify on one's own Ala Skeptic1) I after many chastisements try to do so. However; His remark was made on a "TV interview". One who thinks of our military "not" as a flesh and blood group of our sons and daughters in its use but rather an entity as such as a corporation subject to our command is misguided in their thinking. That roll is rightly reserved for their military risk sharing commanders.

(