The very concept of a 'volunteer' military is farcical. If a person has nowhere to turn for housing, Food or medicine except that they sign their lives away to military service, Can you truly say they're volunteering? Moreover, If I volunteer to work for, Say, The Red Cross, I can cease my voluntary work at any time I choose. Not so for those who 'volunteer' for the military. They are therefore indentured servants, But a hair's breadth from chattel slavery.
Yes, I was not wealthy, and no one enlisted that i know of who wasn't. I loved serving my country, went to college, and it took me a long time to graduate, since i was working. No one cares if you have your degree after your 40th, because you "should" have a journeyman level trade by then, or everyone in the field about your age with that degree will have more experience than you, or may be several degrees ahead. Life is not about keeping up with the Jones's, you need Soldiers, and you gotta do what you gotta do..Might as well serve your country too, I wish it was like Israel, and everyone had to serve for a while, because it's pretty apparent to me that the policymakers aren't sending their own kids to Iraq, but the Queen of England did.
Patriots fight out of their own will and emotion. Mercenaries fight for money, who is more likely to be selected? Those willing to be mercenaries who come from a low economic standing? Or those who are patriots. I believe its fair to say that in these times eating is a little more important then saluting the flag.
In low income communities people are just trying to get out of the "hard" life, some get sports scholarships while others are stuck in that lifestyle. The statement that your whole college will be payed for for just a few years of service is very convincing for people who don't have a stable income. So there would be a higher recruit rate in low income places so of course it's a recruiting target.
The military, for example, chooses to focus on certain schools which are not well-off economically to entice prospects with promises of financial aid to go to school. They also obtain phone number lists from certain schools to call students and encourage them to join the military. People who don't have a lot of financial prospects make for easier recruits.
Take a look at the location of military recruitment offices and it is easy to see that the military is targeting lower socioeconomic neighborhoods. Likewise, their frequent presence at schools in the same neighborhoods is clear proof that they are targeting lower-income kids for recruitment.
Young people graduate high school wanting to maximize productivity. It becomes extremely difficult when they lack the finances to further their education. The military is an opportunity to gain independence since, in these neighborhoods, minimal opportunity exists. So, recruit numbers are increased in these areas, in my opinion. I don't feel as though it's a bad thing, because it's keeping people off the streets, protecting the country, and taking care of families.
There is nothing wrong with the military recruiting in those areas. The people are more likely to need the jobs, money, and education that the government can offer. They are given an opportunity to succeed, instead of becoming another statistic or entering a life of crime. If they don't like it after they have joined, then they can always leave.
The US military has a long history of being the only "out" for poor kids, especially during the tough economic times. It provides food, housing and a salary (although very low). Kids that live in wealthier neighborhoods have a lot more options at their disposal, and don't need other outlets to escape their current life situation.
The military chooses to recruit in lower socioeconomic neighborhoods and schools because they know that there aren't many options for the young men (and women) living there, so they believe that it will be easy for them to convince them that there are many opportunities in the military. In a higher socioeconomic neighborhood, most of the students will attend college so the military focuses their attention on where they are most likely to get results.
The current US military picks from the brightest, the best educated, and the highest sociology and economic groups available.
The individuals that are not picked up by the military for service are left to complain and sulk in self-pity.
Where is the proof? A legitimate study that backs up the statement “Does the military purposely go into lower socioeconomic neighborhoods and schools to recruit?” There are none.
The military recruits everywhere. I live in one of the better of areas of my region, and they still do recruiting around here. It might seem like they recruit more in the lower socioeconomic neighborhoods. But that's only because there are more people from those neighborhoods that want an opportunity to get out of there and make something with their lives.
From what I understand, Military recruits go into rich and poor neighborhoods. While is true that many recruiters may try to take advantage of poor people, this does not mean that the majority of them do so, or that they purposely target poor schools. Many poor people do join the military because it provides an opportunity and path that wouldn't be possible for them after high school. It is due to financial reasons, but there is no evidence to show that the military has some wicked scheme to target poor folks.
Over 25% of soldiers are from upperclass brackets. Only 12% can be said to be from a lower class tax bracket, however only in fiscal representation. They are not in debt or on bad standing financially.
The rest are middle class with the median leaning heavily towards upper-middle class.
To say that the military recruits the poor has absolutely no basis in reality.
Look at the stats. The military is primarily white middle class. Recruiters go into ALL neighborhoods, they have less success in lower socioeconomic ones. H.S. Graduation (a requirement for military service, except for a brief period at the height of the war in Iraq) is much higher in in upper socioeconomic neighborhoods as well.