From: rdonahue@spdcc.com (Bob Donahue)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Utopia (was Re: mandatory service)
Date: 12 Aug 92 17:30:02 GMT
Article-I.D.: spdcc.1992Aug12.173002.6512
Organization: insert anything here

anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson) writes:
>In article <ROBERTL.92Aug11210033@luciano.Stanford.EDU>
>robertl@luciano.Stanford.EDU (Robert Lodenkamper) writes:

>>I think that instead of requiring public service, it could
>>be rewarded.

>I think it should be both.  Under my scheme, it
>automatically would be.

>>That is, those who help out by doing some public service are
>>thereby entitled to significantly larger transfer payments
>>from the state if and when needed.
>I think it should go about like this:  

>You get 20 years of free education (this makes you about
>25).  You then do about 5 years of public service, which
>includes such things as the present Vista and Peace Corps
>ideas, rebuilding and maintaining infrastrucure, reclaiming
>and cleaning up the land, recycling as necessary, and a host
>of other useful projects.

>The main thrust of the service is (a) to serve others, and
>(b) to learn how the world works (it being a given that the
>formal education taught you how to read and how to think and
>gave you useful historical and cultural background).

>*Every* person who was physically/mentally able would do
>this (so it's not indentured service after all, it's only a
>universal societal norm).  Now you're 30.

>At this point you choose a career (not earlier).  Careers
>might include any or all of (voluntary) professional
>military work, parenting, or anything else.  If you need
>more training (normally you would), you work for to pay for
>it out of your own pocket.  Now you're 35 and ready to live
>a decent life.

	This is of course severely flawed:  it assumes that to
some degree all careers are the same, and worse it slows down the
progress in those careers for the best and brightest.  Under
this scheme I would *just* be entering my profession whereas
under the imperfect world I am in now, I already have 7+ years
of experience, and have made controbutions to my field.

	A system where people are forbidden from doing the best
they can because of a bureaucratic ideology is doomed to fail.
Your idea might be great for those people who don't really knpw
what they want to dow thi their lives, but for those of us who 
did at an early age, we'd appreciate it if you'd not stand in our
way too much.

	There are lots of careers that fit into this arena:  nearly
all of the arts --- I can see some musical prodigy studying and
training all through childhood, adolesence, etc. only to have to 
put things on a back burner to go, fix potholes and "learn about
the real world".  Ditto for most people in science.

	I'm not saying that one career is "better" than any other:
I'm sure I benefit more on a day to day basis from the guy who
drive the food truck up the lab at lunch than he benefits from my
research...

	There is a lot of merit in the idea of a corps dedicated to
public service.  Such a program would be an excellent place for
people to learn a trade, get experience, see more of the country
and provide something.  Limiting it to 25-30 year olds is silly since
it limits the diversity and cross-experience that comes with age,
and it prevents people of other ages in transitions in their lives
from having this option.  such an option might also be used to
assist people in deep unemployment or helpt he homeless get back on
their feet.  Those people are more in need of assistance than people
who have a clear picutre of what they want to do with their lives
and the ability to do it.

BBC
Newsgroups: soc.motss