Every able-bodied citizen in the US should attain at least 1 year of military training by age 24.
Debate Rounds (3)
P2) Having your population well-trained for combat is certainly a benefit within itself. If ever threatened, the US would have well over 50 million trained, battle-ready soldiers at any given moment, ready to respond to any threats. This would give the US political leverage during international deliberations.
W56;) Every able-bodied citizen in the US should attain at least 1 year of military training before the age of 24.
P2) Forcing citizens to go into military training would take away from allowing them choose the education they want to go into. US universities are world renowned for their flexibility. Students are encouraged to take broad assortment of classes, allowing them to paint a better picture for what they want in life. By placing citizens in mandatory military training you take away from allowing them to find what they want in university.
C) Every able-bodied citizen in the US should attain at least 1 year of military training before the age of 24.
American universities are much more expensive than comparable universities worldwide. If citizens were to attend a year of mandatory military training, and then have part of their University tuition paid for, I they would not be losing anything in the process. As I previously argued, military training would improve our citizens physically and mentally, and allow them to mature, allowing them to appreciate a good education more than if they were to simply move from high school to college.
Overall, I argue that boosting a populations physical and mental fitness, allowing them to mature, and then paying for their college education would be such an economical benefit that it would offset the costs incurred by sending them to training in the first place.
I think you might be confusing yourself. The chart that I attached was not the amount of people living in America that are 18, but in fact, the population of Americans ranging from 18-24. You were the one that stated in the first round "1 year of military training before the age of 24." So i was right to say, that there would be 25 million.
Over all, America would be fighting an uphill battle trying to pay for civilians to go through training. At a time where we are just getting out of a resection, starting mandatory training would not be the smartest move.
For any budget anywhere, the budgeter asks for the overall amount of money they need. What I am informing you of is that the money the US requests for training does not all go to basic training; as I stated, a pilot costs MILLIONS of dollars to train, which vastly skews how much money is left for the basic recruit.
How does a single trainee max $4,000 a month (minimum)? I do not understand that statistic. As you stated, when asking for a budget, all factors are considered, including lodging and food. The $4,000 includes both food and lodging. If the US could find a way to standardize the basic training procedures for massive amounts of people, then the cost of basic training would not significantly rise. Building basic training camps (some concertina wire, a few barracks, bathrooms, a kitchen and an armory) really does not cost millions of dollars. They're relatively primitive facilities.
I believe that you are the one that is confused. Each year, approximately 6 million Americans turn 18. If a policy was put into affect to train all eligible Americans, then why would we have to train every American between 18 and 24? The idea here is to train every American that turned 18 the year the policy was legislated, and next year, every American that turned 18 that year...it's a rolling effect. For no reason would we need to build facilities to train 25 million Americans at one point, when the only expected yearly incoming group of Americans is 6 million. I hope that clears things up.
If by 'resection', you mean recession, then it is a common economic policy to invest money into long term plans to make money. This investment into training Americans would be a policy meant to pay off in the long term.
As previously stated, boosting the population's physical and mental fitness, allowing them to mature, and then paying for their college education would produce economical benefits that would greatly offset the incurred costs.
sgtpepsband forfeited this round.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.