Personally, I take more issue with the idea of having a draft than the gender inequality of the current system. If you need to draft people, you're fighting the wrong war(s).
Entirely different issue but agree with this as well. It's antiquated and I can't even imagine the backlash if the government tried to call for a draft in this day and age.
I couldn't even imagine the type of war we would be in if we needed to institute the draft this day in age. If we have to draft people, the world is fucked.
Well that's why you have to register for the draft. It's basically a last stand, fate of the country hangs in the balance type thing. The odds of us ever having to institute a draft again will be minimal.
There's nothing big business hates more than the idea of paying no taxes and having no regulatory oversight on their business practices
The present monopoly parties' cronyism is a far greater benefit to multinationals than reducing taxes would be You might've missed it but the tax rates are irrelevant to corporations based in Ireland and the Caymans
no it isn't. It's better to have layers of regulation that corporations are forced to try to subvert than to allow them carte blanche to do whatever see: the gilded age/standard oil/ etc
Why do you think "big business" donates only to Republicans and Democrats and virtually nothing to libertarians? This is comedy
And funneling of huge amounts of money wouldn't change that? Big business supports the policies it wants, just as any interest group does. All that big business money that got Bush elected sure did roll back corporate taxes
because businessmen aren't in the business of losing? also, the tea party is basically a disgusting fusion of the worst parts of libertarianism and evangelical republicanism and the tea party is built entirely on koch money.
Guys, obviously Libertarians = Gun-toting, law-breaking, racist, misogynist, homophobic, xenophobic, no-tax- paying white devil men.... Let's all be honest here
The TEA party started as a grass roots libertarianesque movement based on one issue (Taxed Enough Already). It got co-opted in to being something entirely different because it was a leaderless grass roots movement. What claims to be tea party at this point is pretty far from libertarian ideals.
I would think that at some point voters would either object since the wrong wars are still a waste of tax money or more likely people would stop volunteering for military service.
Look at Iraq and Afghanistan: "They knew what they signed up for" Also an all-volunteer military means that the children of rich and powerful people aren't getting drafted.
Way to control for the fact that the corporate form has taken over all economic activity, increasingly over time. Like, barber shops and house cleaners are incorporated now. The graph I presented adjusts for GDP [QUOTE="bricktop, post: 11037299, member: 11665] also, the tea party is basically a disgusting fusion of the worst parts of libertarianism and evangelical republicanism and the tea party is built entirely on koch money.[/QUOTE] Don't think we really disagree on much here
I certainly don't disagree with anything you said. Those, particularly Iraq,are what I would consider the wrong wars. As somebody that believes in personal liberty, I do definitely take more issue with drafting people to die against their will than sending volunteers. I'm still skeptical of foreign intervention so it is just degrees of dislike/outrage over involvement rather than agreement with foreign policy.
Problem here is that advertising of patriotic messages has confused a lot of poor young kids in middle and southern states into thinking they were saving democracy and freedom by heading over to a desert and getting blown up
There was some piece of proposed legislation that was narrowly defeated around the WWII era that would have put the draft to a popular vote, I believe. I can't remember the name, though.
I think it's bizarre that we tolerate the military using television commercials to make it seem like joining up is going to be all glory and Call of Duty
Sickens me. Bastardization of patriotism. Same thing has cropped up with this anthem stuff. Lol why does the kneeling for the anthem have anything to do with the military? Oh wait, it was a concerted strategy of the military since after WWI to rope sports and military jingoism together.
Volunteer isn't perfect, but if you're going to field a military, it's about the most honest way of staffing it
Oh boy. Lower taxes higher profits since 2000 equals a similar tax amount. The chart you linked was lying with stats ro make a bad argument. There is a percentage of gdp chart in this article. It shows the same trend. Lol at thinking barber shop incorporation is what is driving record profits. Read the article. http://www.economist.com/news/brief...ds-giant-dose-competition-too-much-good-thing
Just ignore the infirmities of your presented graph and move on to other arguments, no problem. Never said "barber shop incorporation" was "driving record profits" but nice strawman. It's still an irrelevant metric.
Honest is a weird description in this context because if we were to look at the actual results of moving to an all-volunteer force, one could get the impression that the underclasses being overly represented among its ranks is the honest way to run a military.
I'll add that much of that article seems solid, and it supports a great deal of what I originally said: government-corporate cronyism is a problem. Whether you want to believe the Democratic Party has to pander to MNEs just as much as the Republicans do is your own problem and I'll leave you to it.
So we're back to either mandatory or not fielding a military and appealing to the kindness of other nations... I guess we could hire mercenaries, but that's a whole other list of issues that compounds on the ones you currently hold so it's safe to say you're just arguing just for the sake of...right?
I don't accept that all or nothing premise. Mostly I'm talking about the morality of an all-volunteer military. "It's not perfect, but..." is a pretty weak line of reasoning, to me.
I don't think I'm going to solve one of the fundamental moral questions of the state on this message board
If the choices are: some kind of direct democratic method for instituting a draft, mandatory service, and voluntary service Mandatory service seems like the most moral, considering what the results of been with our all-volunteer force. This is hard for me to reconcile with my belief that large standing armies are bad for a number of reasons. This isn't something I feel strongly about. My opinion comes from being willing to sacrifice some abstract argument about freedom when faced with the results of who actually enlists in our military.
As an aside, I'd be happy to discuss the morality of various libertarian-held ideals with you should you ever want to. Doesn't even need to be an argument! Voluntaryism Non aggression Egalitarianism Freedom of contract Free migration LGBT rights Classical liberalism Minarchy Lockean Labor Theory
I can't decide if this is more of a hot take or ice burn but it is shit tier posting. You're capable of so much better. The rest of this page was actually interesting discussion.