Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (176638)	12/1/2005 6:05:14 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

You and Geode are such liberal sissies. Boy.. you really know how to hurt a guy.. ;0) Actually, I've been a fan of mandatory national service for some time now, but I hardly consider it "liberal". And though I'm not quite at the level of a "Starship Troopers" Heinlein belief that national military service should be required in order to be able to vote, I do believe that mandatory service would start everyone off from a common foundation and no one could be able to unjustly acuse someone else of not having "done their part" in providing a service to their country. If anything, I believe mandatory service would create self-respect, self-worth, and self-confidence for young people who are often directionless, insecure, and unsure as to what they are capable of achieving. Along those lines, in the interest of creating greater public value for the country's citizens, government should guarantee that anyone who wants to go to college, meets the scholastic requisites, and a willingness to apply themselves to self-betterment, SHOULD be able to go to college without amassing huge sums of loan debt. It's in the country's interest to maintain a well educated, skilled, and productive work-force in order to prevent corporations from seeking cheaper labor elsewhere. And statistics reflect that higher educated individuals make more money, and thus, pay more taxes. So if it's liberal to have a government, of the people, for the people, and by the people, involved in benefitting the people, then so be it. There's certainly a precedent for mandatory (compulsory) requirements being placed on society by the government. It's called the public school system. Is it "liberal" that we require young people to go to school until age 18? Or is it economic self-interest? Hawk