General Chat

pablo, you've done it again - I've just sided with you on your other thread (Kids), and now National Service.... NOTHING WRONG with it.. Did 12 years in the 'Andrew' (RN), had many national service ratings, they didn't seem to mind, many quite enjoyed it, and some, even JOINED the RN... Mind you I can't speak for the Army !! In those days it was all shouting, not quite as bad these days. You know, PC, Human Rights etc.... John

Im also baffled by this NS suggestion...it implies that all young people need sorting out and they dont. The media only ever highlights the bad ones and there are plenty of good ones out there.
For the ones who are going off the rails I think it would be far better to set up boot camp type things (asbo's are a total waste of time) rather than them ending up in our already overcrowded prison systems.
I certainly dont think ALL young people should be blamed.

Ah but Devon, it isn't about 'sorting kids out', at least it should'nt be.. It never was.. two years out of a young persons life to help teach and train them isn't really going to do them any harm. And if the Powers That Be, came up with the idea that these young men/women would NOT be combatant, then no real probs.... John

It always is though.....whenever bad teenagers are highlighted on the tv someone somewhere shouts bring back national service.

I often think, Devon Dweller, that the conscientious in my generation can't do anything right.

The government wants more people to go into higher education. If you get a job straight from school (and this is assuming you've passed your "dumbed down" exams and read the newspaper headlines about some commentator saying, "An A Level isn't worth what it was worth in our day) you might get a half-decent one. If you fail your exams, you'll probably end up stacking shelves on 10p more per hour than the minimium wage.

Then you get to university - pick a course like Sociology or Art (I did Art) and "it isn't a proper degree". You graduate with a degree that "isn't worth the paper it's written on" and then you might not be able to get a job, because all the graduate jobs wants someone "with experience in the industry". I knew a lot of people who finished uni, went back to stacking shelves to tide them over and ended up staying for a year or more while they tried to get another job.

And - going back to school - if you are a good kid, sitting there quietly, you have to watch some smart-alec in your form doing their best to wind up your teacher. They get more attention from the teacher for behaving badly than you do for keeping your head down and getting on with your work. So what does that teach you - that causing a disruption gets you attention but doing your work doesn't.

Thankyou John.
For all you others out there I was not just saying that all of the younger generation (kate) are a waste and cause trouble.
As john has alluded National Service could help some people find a trade and gain emplyoment after thier NS.
Not everyone who did NS was a good person nor was everyone a bad person. Every man between the ages of 18 and 40 had to do it, with some exceptions i.e. those in reserved occupations such as ploice, Drs, Nurses and miners to name but a few.
NS could be good for this country if it was properly organised.
Paul

and that's a YES from me, it could solve a lot of problems
Janet

What do you mean Island?

any form of compulsory service - military or otherwise - has too many cons and not enough pros.

Firstly - taxation. You are taking a generation out of the equation - they need to be paid and equipped and fed. Higher taxes and no productivity.

Secondly - why should my son suffer for the sins of others?

Thirdly - to what point? Why do we need a large conscript military? We don't.

Fourthly - would you vote for any government who wanted to take all our children away and put them in the military ( I presume that National Service would include both male and females.....it being the year 2008?) I certainly wouldn't!


I can think of loads more cons and no pros.

But did you vote for the government who sent us to war illegally?

no i didnt.

most certainly absolutely not.

The sad thing is though Devon Dweller, NS should never have been 'thrown out' in the first place..Then maybe, ,just maybe, we wouldn't have as many 'street' problems which we have now.. And as previously said, these young people do not have to be combatant...John

But who would pay for it John....I pay enough tax now as it is!

It could come out of the benefits that the government would no longer be paying to the workshy and lazy!!

Good point, Eldrick. As I mentioned before, I'm nearly 24 now and have spent six of the past 7 years (it will be 7 in June) since finishing compulsory education ie. secondary school in further educational courses.

Also, regarding the military, the first thing I thought of when reading your post were the anti-Iraq war protestors. Do they (or their children) get put in a situation where they would be compelled to go to war when it conflicts with their idea of right and wrong? I don't often hold with people bringing up "human rights" left, right and centre but I think they would have something to say about that.

I do feel sometimes that the young are blamed for things that aren't their fault - we didn't ask exam boards to manipulate grade boundaries so that more people would appear to have passed 5 or more GCSEs, for instance, but yet we seem to get blamed for "not working hard enough" to achieve truly good grades. Surely if exam results are "massaged" that is down to moderators and examiners. I remember when I got my GCSEs, all I could think of was that I'd got an A*, 3 As and 6 Bs - it never occurred to me that my "A"s were not A standard etc. I just accepted what I'd got.

John
There are lots of reasons why there are so many (not all) kids going off the rails and to me it's all these wishy washy rights.
Schools went from Victorian standards to the point that teachers cant even comfort a child who is crying.
Parents can't let kids out in the streets because they are accused of not knowing where they are or what they are doing but on the other hand if we keep them in we are wrapping them in cotton wool and stopping them from essential street know how.
What we actually need it something inbetween Victorian standards and 2008 and giving back some rights to parents and teachers would solve a lot of problems.

pablo, that wouldn't even begin to cover the cost.

think it through and think what percentage of the claimants that you are branding as all being the same are teenagers who would be eligible. WHat do they get in benefits...?

I dont know - less than £100 a week...?

multiply that by maybe 10 and you will get something like the cost of training and equipping a soldier, sailor or airman. A guess, but I would suggest that is on the side of caution.....

the argument doesnt stand up Im afraid,

Point Taken Eldrick, will try and consult with the oracle and try to come up with another answer

So what would you prefer Eldrick - youngsters on the streets being payed to be on the streets (by your taxes)... Or being given some kind of trade. (They are not going to get it in Civvy St)..
And as I said, if these youngsters are not included in any combatant theatre, no harm. Surely a bit discipline wouldn't go astray and no one really 'suffers'.
If on the other hand, God forbid, that this country is attacked/invaded then most of these young people would have had some kind of military training to help 'bail' us out..
If you wouldn't vote for any government who would take this country to war, guess you wouldn't be voting, period..

It's not just the unemployment benefit they recieve, they also get housing benefit, council tax benefit and free prescriptions.

If they are aged 18 and over and not in education, have no physical or mental disabilities and have no dependents then why should they be paid to sit on their arses all day.

Yes bring back national service for the work shy.