Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Petition: Petition to introduce national service for the Long-term youth unemployed Watch

Announcements
    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by greatguy136)
    The minimum wage? What absolute bs.

    They should be paid the proper wage just like anyone else doing them jobs would get.
    The minimum wage here is higher than Real Life I believe, and at any rate, it's better than the £50-70 per week that they'd currently be getting. Even with Workfare on a 40 hour placement people effectively earn less than £2 per hour.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    For a start, we'd save £15m from JSA, as well as plenty more from other benefits.

    Not all of them will be in the Armed forces, £3bn isn't a lot in the grand scheme of things, especially as it's an investment.

    Non-combat and combat are both completely different. Each role is either designated as combat or non-combat so there's nothing vague about it.

    So national service doesn't work? Would you care to explain all the other times where it has worked then? Or how about the workfare scheme which runs on the same principle?
    £15m won't come close to being enough. You'd need to spend that much on extra uniforms.

    You've estimated 180,000+, a majority of which would end up in the armed forces from the list you provided, therefore, an estimate of ~100,000 entering the armed forces is not unrealistic.
    That's accommodation for 100,000 people needed. Remember that at present our armed forces number around 180,000.

    You haven't talked about how you'll afford all the additional full time personnel you'll need to babysit these unwanted children, either.

    No, they're not. While you get some roles like chef that you might think "we'll, obviously that's non combat", you forget the fact that forward operating bases have their own cook team, that locations like that can regularly come under fire and that everyone in the armed forces is a warfighter first, trade second. A medic can easily be out of the front line in direct enemy fire.

    National service can work, at times of total war when it's all hands to the pumps. The rest of the time it's a waste of money. Especially only for 1 year - you're not actually getting any service out of them. National service here, back in the 50s, was 2 years long. And that was dismissed as a waste of money and resources.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    If someone has the qualifications though, I see no reason why the RAF can't train them to be pilots should all the requirements be there.
    The RAF has no shortage of applicants for pilots. People who actually want to be there.

    And the notion that you can train a modern pilot in less than a year is completely fanciful. It takes ~5 years. Minimum service for any pilot is 12 years.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    No, the resources could be better spend pushing people to focus on education than providing jobs to everyone for little in return. I support a large increase in the armed forces but there needs to be an expansion of manpower, equipment, overseas bases, and overseas interactions with allies.
    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    £15m won't come close to being enough. You'd need to spend that much on extra uniforms.

    You've estimated 180,000+, a majority of which would end up in the armed forces from the list you provided, therefore, an estimate of ~100,000 entering the armed forces is not unrealistic.
    That's accommodation for 100,000 people needed. Remember that at present our armed forces number around 180,000.

    You haven't talked about how you'll afford all the additional full time personnel you'll need to babysit these unwanted children, either.

    No, they're not. While you get some roles like chef that you might think "we'll, obviously that's non combat", you forget the fact that forward operating bases have their own cook team, that locations like that can regularly come under fire and that everyone in the armed forces is a warfighter first, trade second. A medic can easily be out of the front line in direct enemy fire.

    National service can work, at times of total war when it's all hands to the pumps. The rest of the time it's a waste of money. Especially only for 1 year - you're not actually getting any service out of them. National service here, back in the 50s, was 2 years long. And that was dismissed as a waste of money and resources.
    There's nothing to suggest that the majority of these people will end up in the armed forces, you're clutching at straws. and you've also failed to take the point on board

    (Original post by Drewski)
    The RAF has no shortage of applicants for pilots. People who actually want to be there.

    And the notion that you can train a modern pilot in less than a year is completely fanciful. It takes ~5 years. Minimum service for any pilot is 12 years.
    Have you even read the full petition? It states clearly that should the situation be appropriate, the people can continue in their posts even after completing their national service. There are plenty of unemployed people that can't be bothered to work, plenty who can't find work and plenty who are holding out for something better, which is why all government institutions are involved, including the police, fire service, health service, civil service and all departments, defense is only one aspect.
    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    No, the resources could be better spend pushing people to focus on education than providing jobs to everyone for little in return. I support a large increase in the armed forces but there needs to be an expansion of manpower, equipment, overseas bases, and overseas interactions with allies.
    What of the people who are already well educated? There are plenty of rich kids who have never had to work a day in their lives, national service would be good for them.

    This isn't about the armed forces, it's about the almost 200,000 young people who haven't been in work for at least a year. Some military discipline will be good for some of them, and general work experience will be good for others.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    There's nothing to suggest that the majority of these people will end up in the armed forces, you're clutching at straws. and you've also failed to take the point on board

    Have you even read the full petition? It states clearly that should the situation be appropriate, the people can continue in their posts even after completing their national service. There are plenty of unemployed people that can't be bothered to work, plenty who can't find work and plenty who are holding out for something better, which is why all government institutions are involved, including the police, fire service, health service, civil service and all departments, defense is only one aspect.
    Given the options, the armed forces are one of the few listed that have a national presence, therefore it's not an unrealistic assumption.

    And speaking as someone who is ex-military, I know for a fact the armed forces prizes itself on being an expert volunteer force. It categorically does not want thousands of people who don't want to be there. The vast majority of whom are probablyv deeply unsuitable for service anyway.

    Remove the armed forces from the list and then you're on.
    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    Given the options, the armed forces are one of the few listed that have a national presence, therefore it's not an unrealistic assumption.

    And speaking as someone who is ex-military, I know for a fact the armed forces prizes itself on being an expert volunteer force. It categorically does not want thousands of people who don't want to be there. The vast majority of whom are probablyv deeply unsuitable for service anyway.

    Remove the armed forces from the list and then you're on.
    Some military discipline would do plenty of good for plenty of people, so nope.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    What of the people who are already well educated? There are plenty of rich kids who have never had to work a day in their lives, national service would be good for them.

    This isn't about the armed forces, it's about the almost 200,000 young people who haven't been in work for at least a year. Some military discipline will be good for some of them, and general work experience will be good for others.
    I disagree, national service is only beneficial to children who are badly behaved, school leavers, criminals, and immigrants as a way to speed up citizenship.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    National Service is fine where a country is a peacemaker. Not in the case of UK. The government has just carried out a policy of slash and burn of the Military forces. How dare some numpty suggest they can fill the blanks with young people. We are not cannon fodder but you can bet your boots that's exactly what they/we would be used for. There is no history of compulsory military service in this country and so it should remain. I also think that people nowadays are less likely to be brainwashed by government propaganda when they're promoting their next military (mis)adventure and because Of this I do not believe mass conscription is a viable option. Do you want to lay your life on the line because your government wants to steal another country's resources under the guise of introducing democracy? I certainly don't, won't and when I have children I will not allow them to be used as a disposable item for a corrupt warmongering government.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Except none of these institutions are going to want National Service.

    The military regards itself as a professional elite force. Everyone there volunteered and wants to be there and recieves specialist training. Same with the NHS, they're not going to have need of a whole bunch of untrained young people running around. Neither of the military or the NHS are going to want to devote resources to supervising a whole bunch of unskilled labourers they won't have enough jobs for, that don't necessarily want to be there and that will most likely begone in 12 months.

    The administrative side of all these organisations deals with far too much sensitive information for the people on this scheme to be expected to deal with and it would cost a significant amount to ensure that they all weren't security risks. Plus the second something is mishandled (which it will be because unskilled labourer remember) you're going to get public outcry as to why all this sensitive information is being handled by people ill-equipt to deal with it.
    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DougallnDougall)
    National Service is fine where a country is a peacemaker. Not in the case of UK. The government has just carried out a policy of slash and burn of the Military forces. How dare some numpty suggest they can fill the blanks with young people. We are not cannon fodder but you can bet your boots that's exactly what they/we would be used for. There is no history of compulsory military service in this country and so it should remain. I also think that people nowadays are less likely to be brainwashed by government propaganda when they're promoting their next military (mis)adventure and because Of this I do not believe mass conscription is a viable option. Do you want to lay your life on the line because your government wants to steal another country's resources under the guise of introducing democracy? I certainly don't, won't and when I have children I will not allow them to be used as a disposable item for a corrupt warmongering government.

    I'm going pretend not to be offended at being called a numpty, especially by someone who stated that we have no history of compulsory military service. But at any rate, what you've written is utterly irrelevant as you've most likely not read the actual petition.

    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    I disagree, national service is only beneficial to children who are badly behaved, school leavers, criminals, and immigrants as a way to speed up citizenship.
    I couldn't disagree more. If anything, those are the people who'd least benefit.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Good idea it's about time something like this is introduced.
    Although I do support the idea wouldn't be good to train them in a trade like plumbing, brick laying , construction etc this will give them extra useful skills that they can use in the future
    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gwilym101)
    Except none of these institutions are going to want National Service.


    The military regards itself as a professional elite force. Everyone there volunteered and wants to be there and recieves specialist training. Same with the NHS, they're not going to have need of a whole bunch of untrained young people running around. Neither of the military or the NHS are going to want to devote resources to supervising a whole bunch of unskilled labourers they won't have enough jobs for, that don't necessarily want to be there and that will most likely begone in 12 months.

    The administrative side of all these organisations deals with far too much sensitive information for the people on this scheme to be expected to deal with and it would cost a significant amount to ensure that they all weren't security risks. Plus the second something is mishandled (which it will be because unskilled labourer remember) you're going to get public outcry as to why all this sensitive information is being handled by people ill-equipt to deal with it.
    There will be an element of choice in this, so people who are qualified for specific roles will be given those roles or similar ones.

    I have to go now, so I'll reply later on when I'm back, probably around half 10.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DougallnDougall)
    National Service is fine where a country is a peacemaker. Not in the case of UK. The government has just carried out a policy of slash and burn of the Military forces. How dare some numpty suggest they can fill the blanks with young people. We are not cannon fodder but you can bet your boots that's exactly what they/we would be used for. There is no history of compulsory military service in this country and so it should remain. I also think that people nowadays are less likely to be brainwashed by government propaganda when they're promoting their next military (mis)adventure and because Of this I do not believe mass conscription is a viable option. Do you want to lay your life on the line because your government wants to steal another country's resources under the guise of introducing democracy? I certainly don't, won't and when I have children I will not allow them to be used as a disposable item for a corrupt warmongering government.
    Want to take a look at Army demographics? Under 30s make up 55.9% of personnel, 26.6% under 25 and 1.1% under 18. 44.6% of the Army intake is under 20, 4% of officers being in that group. 70.5% of officer intake is between 20 and 25, with 38.9% of other rank intake being in the same age band. So in terms of Army intake we have 73.5% of Army "other rank" intake are young enough to be considered "youth", and 74.5% of officers. The young are already the cannon fodder. 19.6% of non officer intake are under 18. Stats being derived from the 2014 Annual Personnel Report
    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by _icecream)
    Good idea it's about time something like this is introduced.
    Although I do support the idea wouldn't be good to train them in a trade like plumbing, brick laying , construction etc this will give them extra useful skills that they can use in the future
    Having read the budget, it seems that there's going to be a lot of house building 100,000 a year. These young people could have a very large hand in this.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    Having read the budget, it seems that there's going to be a lot of house building 100,000 a year. These young people could have a very large hand in this.
    Depends whether you look at what the words say or what the numbers say. The words say 100,000 but the numbers say 10,000
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    just no



    Aph may be interested in this though
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    Some military discipline would do plenty of good for plenty of people, so nope.
    Pray tell, what's your experience of the armed forces?



    You have a tired, clichéd, ignorant and completely out of date idea of what the military is. You've watched too much Bad Lads Army and Full Metal Jacket and think it represents reality.

    You're wrong.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    Having read the budget, it seems that there's going to be a lot of house building 100,000 a year. These young people could have a very large hand in this.
    However, the building industry heavily relies on EU migrants atm, so it would be a good idea if more long-term unemployed are trained in this field as it's hands on and relatively requires little training
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Should Spain allow Catalonia to declare independence?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.