PDA

View Full Version : OT-Bad economy leads to bigger/better military?


PaintballCLE
01-27-2009, 09:56 PM
Think about it........

What is the one "company" out there right now that is begging for people to come work for them but everyone is refusing?

Yes the US Military.

SO is it just possible that the Gov't wanted the economy to collapse to leave people with no where else to turn to survive other than to join the military?

People that were once skilled, are now without jobs and have no where to turn.

So the military will not only be getting new bodies, but skilled bodies at that.

Just curious if you guys think this is a real possibility (please check the Bush, Obama, Dem, Rep at the door lol)

I was watching some foreign channel on time warner as i was flipping through and some guy from England was on there and this was his view as to what they were doing.

Rock Chalk
01-27-2009, 10:01 PM
*sigh* So very shortsighted.

A strong military is a result of a bad economy but in no way does a government push a bad economy to boost the military.

I guess something like 7% of the US is now in unemployment.

1% of teh US population is 3 million people. So lets assume that 3% of the unemployed go to the military. that still leaves 4% unemployed. Too high. And no way in hell is 3% of the unemployed population going to the military. Fact is, most of the unemployed are late 20s, 30s and 40s and not good candidates for the military. Military wants young people that are not set in their ways so they can break them down and mold them in the military fashion. Its been that way for 2 thousand years.

And we will not have a standing increase in the military of 9 million people. That's more people than were drafted for Vietnam. Thats 3% of the population.

Its a ridiculous concept.

LongDongJohnson
01-27-2009, 10:02 PM
well maybe. after getting laid off from yack in the box i might not have a choice but to join the army

PaintballCLE
01-27-2009, 10:05 PM
well it makes more sense if they have their sights on Iran/N.Korea in the near future.

Popps
01-27-2009, 10:08 PM
A strong military only flourishes with a strong economy. One is no use without the other. Run the numbers. You'll come to the same conclusion.

The economy was ****ed up as a result of greed and a lack of oversight on the part of the government (all parties, not one or the other and please don't make me explain it) ... and the American people. Yes, the American people willfully participated in the money-party and good times of the economic boom we've seen since 9-11.

So, the fiddler AND the piper are here and they're going to be paid one way or the other. We can stimulus ourselves until we have another big credit-orgasm, but eventually, we'll pay... or our kids will.

So, save the conspiracy theories. They're the easiest way out of very complicated discussions. We're all grown-ups and hence should be able to recognize that there's not one boogie-man here... there are many.

Ourselves included.

tsiguy96
01-27-2009, 10:16 PM
no, dont let republican fear mongering tell you differently either.

Popps
01-27-2009, 10:29 PM
no, dont let republican fear mongering tell you differently either.

Again, blaming this all on one party is exactly why this country is in real trouble.

Mind-numbingly stupid, party-robots are driving this country into the ground.

I love this country with everything in my soul, but I honestly think there's a good chance it's in real trouble. Not because we can't pick ourselves up, but because we won't. It's too easy to point fingers at the boogie man rather than having to really think your way around issues.

Look at the stimulus plan. It's an abomination, and not because of Obama... it just is. It's loaded with absolute ****ing garbage. GARBAGE.

We had **** about archery legislation in our bank bailout (TARP) package.... and the new economic stimulus includes funds to pass out free rubbers.

Again, you all can just keep pointing fingers at the boogie man while the ship goes down, but when unemployment hits 10% and **** is hitting the fan, we'll only have ourselves to blame.

We're on the verge of economic armageddon and our elected officials are voting down bills because some ****-brain had to attach a condom-bill to it.

Yea, we're really serious about this economic crisis, aren't we?

Mk69
01-27-2009, 10:56 PM
It's a bogus scenario. All branches of the service are meeting or exceeding recruiting goals.

SportinOne
01-27-2009, 11:26 PM
There's already enough people in the military sitting around doing absolutely nothing all day.. i just got out last summer. And to tell you the truth about the age thing, the older people that come in are often the best recruits. They are much more responsible and end up ranking up much faster.... in most cases... and it DOES have a lot to do with the fact that they have either fallen flat on their face and are very humbled to have the chance to survive, or they are supporting their family and are very serious about it. Then you have the idiots who just never got it.. come in at 30 years old and bitch and complain every day and end up getting passed up in rank by 19 year olds. It's quite funny, and sad, but it doesn't happen very often.

cutthemdown
01-27-2009, 11:38 PM
I mentioned this a long time ago in another thread but i was just joking. People are re-enlisting because it's a smart decision. People are turning to the military because it's a decent job for someone who only has a HS diploma and can handle the discipline.

UberBroncoMan
01-27-2009, 11:51 PM
The last thing Obama wants is to grow our military.

In fact this administration is highly (anti-military) in comparison to most. On top of that, they have practically no one to my knowledge in the entire cabinet that has any previous military experience etc etc.

I've studied military history, and lived around the military for 19 years.

If Obama recruits people into ANYTHING at all.

It's going to be some crazy ass green industry run by the government, or that civil defense agency that he talked about earlier in his campaign. The idea of a CDA scares the crap out of me though... the first one just seems silly.

Personally, I want the government to make tons of huge budget cuts, lower taxes, and let the free market correct itself. I just see the opposite happening (bigger government, higher taxes, people FORCED to work for the government because of lack of jobs = even bigger government etc).

I actually went to college to run government agencies so, at least I'm safe if that's what happens hahaha... god that would suck.

Really funny about the military though lol.

Oh... had to add this. As for joining the military for a job? It's a kick ass career choice. You get to see the world, don't have much taxes to play... free housing, killer retirement, good medical (private is far superior though), adventures (depending on your job), etc etc.

If I didn't want to do what I was doing, I'd defiantly be in the military right now.

cutthemdown
01-28-2009, 12:32 AM
The last thing Obama wants is to grow our military.

In fact this administration is highly (anti-military) in comparison to most. On top of that, they have practically no one to my knowledge in the entire cabinet that has any previous military experience etc etc.

I've studied military history, and lived around the military for 19 years.

If Obama recruits people into ANYTHING at all.

It's going to be some crazy ass green industry run by the government, or that civil defense agency that he talked about earlier in his campaign. The idea of a CDA scares the crap out of me though... the first one just seems silly.

Personally, I want the government to make tons of huge budget cuts, lower taxes, and let the free market correct itself. I just see the opposite happening (bigger government, higher taxes, people FORCED to work for the government because of lack of jobs = even bigger government etc).

I actually went to college to run government agencies so, at least I'm safe if that's what happens hahaha... god that would suck.

Really funny about the military though lol.

Oh... had to add this. As for joining the military for a job? It's a kick ass career choice. You get to see the world, don't have much taxes to play... free housing, killer retirement, good medical (private is far superior though), adventures (depending on your job), etc etc.

If I didn't want to do what I was doing, I'd defiantly be in the military right now.


I think you're wrong about Obama. He will grow the military in terms of manpower, but probably lesson some big budget programs and save a ton of money there.

I for one would like to see more Stryker vehicles, drones, less big ticket items like missile defense etc. I also don't see this administration as anti-military. I do think though big contractors can expect less dollars.

For the rank and file though it may work out well under Obama.

watermock
01-28-2009, 01:20 AM
You forgot Obama's 3 million man workforce.

Dark Helmet
01-28-2009, 01:46 AM
Don't forget that the military/government make money from the economy by way of taxes. By the time our checks are spent, 60% of the money has gone to Fed, State and sales tax among others. The stronger the economy (money earned and spent), the stronger the military. In addition, if they need soldiers that bad, they will draft and there isn't much we can do about it.

Popps
01-28-2009, 01:50 AM
C'mon, guys... you don't retain power with military might alone... you retain power with economic and strategic positioning.

Again, if people want something to be worried about, it's not our military... it's our global-economic influence that's waning.

serfrocker
01-28-2009, 04:27 AM
Personally, I want the government to make tons of huge budget cuts, lower taxes, and let the free market correct itself. I just see the opposite happening (bigger government, higher taxes, people FORCED to work for the government because of lack of jobs = even bigger government etc).


why do you trust for-profit companies whose concern is squeezing as much money as possible out of the every endeavor more than you trust elected gov officials who have to worry about re-election? as long as there are mechanisms to force all legislative decisions to be made above-the-table, i'll take the person whose job depends on getting it done for the most people possible (and getting re-elected), not the one the one from the "greed is good for society" school.

last time we let the "free" market correct itself, Carnegie, Ford, DuPont, Rockafeller, and others drove us into the Great Depression. it's a myth, and a dangerous one. Milton Friedman was a punk. :thumbs:

UberBroncoMan
01-28-2009, 06:57 AM
why do you trust for-profit companies whose concern is squeezing as much money as possible out of the every endeavor more than you trust elected gov officials who have to worry about re-election? as long as there are mechanisms to force all legislative decisions to be made above-the-table, i'll take the person whose job depends on getting it done for the most people possible (and getting re-elected), not the one the one from the "greed is good for society" school.

last time we let the "free" market correct itself, Carnegie, Ford, DuPont, Rockafeller, and others drove us into the Great Depression. it's a myth, and a dangerous one. Milton Friedman was a punk. :thumbs:

Because I can chose to not buy from a corporation. I have NO power over the government and the just as dirty and snake like politicians (to executives) from there. Also you're talking about MONOPOLIES and the mega billionaires of the early 1900's... it's much different now. The mega corporations back there had vastly more power than they do now, as much as people want to hate on them... and believe me I wish we never did that bailout and told the banks/auto companies to go to hell. So I won't take the person who's JOB is to get RE-ELECTED so that THEY MAINTAIN POWER, over the corporation that I can reject of my own freewill. Politics around the plant is a pool of filth, this country included. I want a small federal government who takes care of our defense, infrastructure etc... and that's about it. Stay the hell out of my life and stop getting so damn big. I hope I live to see the day where we actually have elected selfless officials in mass who care about us.

rugbythug
01-28-2009, 07:01 AM
why do you trust for-profit companies whose concern is squeezing as much money as possible out of the every endeavor more than you trust elected gov officials who have to worry about re-election? as long as there are mechanisms to force all legislative decisions to be made above-the-table, i'll take the person whose job depends on getting it done for the most people possible (and getting re-elected), not the one the one from the "greed is good for society" school.

last time we let the "free" market correct itself, Carnegie, Ford, DuPont, Rockafeller, and others drove us into the Great Depression. it's a myth, and a dangerous one. Milton Friedman was a punk. :thumbs:

This is just wrong. You need to retake economics.

cutthemdown
01-28-2009, 07:08 AM
C'mon, guys... you don't retain power with military might alone... you retain power with economic and strategic positioning.

Again, if people want something to be worried about, it's not our military... it's our global-economic influence that's waning.

One reason China trying to build a Navy that can operate in the blue water away from China is because they know in any conflict you have to be able to protect shipping. At this point only America and possibly Russia have that capability.

Economic might leads to military might so China will be asserting itself in a big way.

I really do think we will get economy rolling again in 18 months, but I have been saying that for about 18 months.........

The longer we go without things totally blowing up the more I think we will eventually start to grow the economy in small steps soon.

You are 100 percent right though that without a strong economy you can forget having a strong military.

Kaylore
01-28-2009, 07:09 AM
Yeah the government "made" the economy go bad so they could force all those forty year old men and women with kids to be soldiers. They make the best warriors/. It's not like the economy has gone bad because of poor investment strategies before. No no, the economy is totally at the control of the government. They probably just flicked the switch that says "bad economy" under the President's desk and now we'll have a ten million man army in now time!:tinfoilha

Kaylore
01-28-2009, 07:10 AM
This is just wrong. You need to take economics.

FYP

bronco militia
01-28-2009, 07:11 AM
the current US militay isn't for everyone....but don't worry, The Messiah will a have place for your broke fat ass in the Civilian National Security Force.

look it up

gyldenlove
01-28-2009, 07:14 AM
Growing the military in this economy is a catastrophically bad idea. How much does the army generate in terms of export? how much in terms of off-shoot industry?

The only thing you are going to achieve by significantly increasing the amount of people employed as soldiers is lowering unemployment and increasing the cost to keep the military running.

You need people to work for private industry to increase the amount of money circulating in the private sector which will increase liquidity, increase investments, increase revenue and thus increase tax returns for the government so they will be able to pay off some of the trillions of dollars handed out to the banks who are using it on jets.

broncofan7
01-28-2009, 07:16 AM
the current US militay isn't for everyone....but don't worry, The Messiah will a have place for your broke fat ass in the Civilian National Security Force.

look it up

I voted for McCain but I don't get this venom for Obama already. Are you one of Rush's minions?

bronco militia
01-28-2009, 07:20 AM
I voted for McCain but I don't get this venom for Obama already. Are you one of Rush's minions?

former Minion...I can think for myself.

Rush deserves everything he's getting for publically supporting luke warm conservatives the last 8 years.

now back to the subject:

Change b****es!

PaintballCLE
01-28-2009, 07:34 AM
before you kill the messenger, i agree with most of you.

However, with the thought of tension getting worse between us and iran, us and n. korea, and of course who knows whats going on in the middle east with gaza........i think there is a 1 percent chance that in some weird twisted way this makes sense. All of the recent candidates both rep and dem have been against a draft, and they know if they instituted one they would not get reelected. What better way to avoid a draft than to force people into the military without actually having a draft.

I agree that 40 yr olds are not going to the military, but if they take the jobs that would normally get passed over and given to 18/19 yr olds.....then it could shift everything.

bronco militia
01-28-2009, 07:36 AM
before you kill the messenger, i agree with most of you.

However, with the thought of tension getting worse between us and iran, us and n. korea, and of course who knows whats going on in the middle east with gaza........i think there is a 1 percent chance that in some weird twisted way this makes sense. All of the recent candidates both rep and dem have been against a draft, and they know if they instituted one they would not get reelected. What better way to avoid a draft than to force people into the military without actually having a draft.

I agree that 40 yr olds are not going to the military, but if they take the jobs that would normally get passed over and given to 18/19 yr olds.....then it could shift everything.


<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Tt2yGzHfy7s&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Tt2yGzHfy7s&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

PaintballCLE
01-28-2009, 07:46 AM
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Tt2yGzHfy7s&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Tt2yGzHfy7s&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

lie number 12389212391827321973193712 of the campaign.....LOL JK

bronco militia
01-28-2009, 07:49 AM
lie number 12389212391827321973193712 of the campaign.....LOL JK

it probably is.....but that kind of crap makes the hair on the back of my neck stand up.

Archer81
01-28-2009, 08:31 AM
Yes. Military is an extension of government, as goverment expands to compensate for a shrinking private workforce, the military naturally will increase in size...


:Broncos:

WolfpackGuy
01-28-2009, 08:45 AM
Hey, not condoning what he did, but it almost worked for Hitler.

serfrocker
01-28-2009, 08:59 AM
This is just wrong. You need to (re)take economics.

don't trust anybody who has. :afro: i'm just a working guy who likes to read history.

oh, but your Market is a vengeful deity, requiring regular sacrifices of hourly jobs to appease it... :notworthy

Broncos_OTM
01-28-2009, 09:31 AM
Again, blaming this all on one party is exactly why this country is in real trouble.

Mind-numbingly stupid, party-robots are driving this country into the ground.

I love this country with everything in my soul, but I honestly think there's a good chance it's in real trouble. Not because we can't pick ourselves up, but because we won't. It's too easy to point fingers at the boogie man rather than having to really think your way around issues.

Look at the stimulus plan. It's an abomination, and not because of Obama... it just is. It's loaded with absolute ****ing garbage. GARBAGE.

We had **** about archery legislation in our bank bailout (TARP) package.... and the new economic stimulus includes funds to pass out free rubbers.

Again, you all can just keep pointing fingers at the boogie man while the ship goes down, but when unemployment hits 10% and **** is hitting the fan, we'll only have ourselves to blame.

We're on the verge of economic armageddon and our elected officials are voting down bills because some ****-brain had to attach a condom-bill to it.

Yea, we're really serious about this economic crisis, aren't we?

This post is pure beauty

Archer81
01-28-2009, 09:32 AM
why do you trust for-profit companies whose concern is squeezing as much money as possible out of the every endeavor more than you trust elected gov officials who have to worry about re-election? as long as there are mechanisms to force all legislative decisions to be made above-the-table, i'll take the person whose job depends on getting it done for the most people possible (and getting re-elected), not the one the one from the "greed is good for society" school.

last time we let the "free" market correct itself, Carnegie, Ford, DuPont, Rockafeller, and others drove us into the Great Depression. it's a myth, and a dangerous one. Milton Friedman was a punk. :thumbs:


Not to burst your bubble, but FDR didnt yank us out of the depression, spending billions didnt help anything. A world war and the consequential rebuilding period aided American economic recovery.

:Broncos:

Mk69
01-28-2009, 09:33 AM
don't trust anybody who has. :afro: i'm just a working guy who likes to read history.

oh, but your Government is a vengeful deity, requiring regular sacrifices of your wages to appease it... :notworthy

Fixed it.

STBumpkin
01-28-2009, 09:48 AM
There is no more room in the Navy, Marine Corps or the Air Force, I don't know about the Army, but I don't think there is much room there. People aren't getting out right now (bad economy), so they don't need as many recruits. The idea that the govt ruined the economy to increase recruitment is ludicrous.