Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Rusty]

When you look at census numbers you would find something like 10% of rural adults are veterans while only 7% of urban adults are, accordingly you might think there is a significantly larger number of rural enlistments, but we're looking at 10% of less than a fifth of the population vs 7% of the rest of the population aren't we?

You're putting the cart before the horse.  Where a veteran lives after leaving the military is irrelevant, and there's a lot of reasons why that would skew urban, the primary being that census of all veterans necessarily includes all age demographics, including those that require to be close to major healthcare facilities due to age.  What matters to this conversation is what areas supply the military, and that is skewed rural.  Waaay rural.  Looking at military recruits, 36% of them came from rural areas and almost 40% were suburbanites.  Less than a quarter came from the country's most populous areas.

[Quarque]

My more cynical take.

The thing that separates Trump most from previous administrations isn't as much the things he does.  It's the things he says.

This may be partially true, but some of the things he does are extremely bad, worse and more extreme than any other president in the last century.

No other president has been ravaging institutions like the EPA like Trump did. No other president has tried so hard to increase co2 emissions. No other president has done so much to tear up nuclear agreements, bringing the apocalypse that much closer. Climate change and nukes are the biggest thre7ats to mankind and Trump has done more than anyone else in history to bring about the extinction of our species. If he is re-elected we are f*ckd. Not just the US, everyone.

His contempt for the constitution is also unheard of. Teargas on peaceful protesters for a photo-op.. no other US president has been that evil. Or the way he fires anyone who is loyal to the law instead of loyal to him personally.

In fact, making us believe that other people are just as bad as him is Trumps main way of promoting himself. It is the narrative he wants you to believe.

[voliol]

My more cynical take.

The thing that separates Trump most from previous administrations isn't as much the things he does.  It's the things he says.

-snip-

This was about why the army might dislike him, not why he’s a extraordinarily bad president. The cynical part of SalmonGod’s take was probably that the two are not the same.

Or after these protests genuinely weighing the possibility that if they join up, they might be ordered to fire on their own friends and family.

One would imagine it would be both counter-intuitive and against the military programme to send troops to their own home cities, instead of others across the federation. Due to the risks of mutinies, and all. But perhaps the worrying of possible recruits isn’t affected by this.

[Max™]

When you look at census numbers you would find something like 10% of rural adults are veterans while only 7% of urban adults are, accordingly you might think there is a significantly larger number of rural enlistments, but we're looking at 10% of less than a fifth of the population vs 7% of the rest of the population aren't we?

You're putting the cart before the horse.  Where a veteran lives after leaving the military is irrelevant, and there's a lot of reasons why that would skew urban, the primary being that census of all veterans necessarily includes all age demographics, including those that require to be close to major healthcare facilities due to age.  What matters to this conversation is what areas supply the military, and that is skewed rural.  Waaay rural.  Looking at military recruits, 36% of them came from rural areas and almost 40% were suburbanites.  Less than a quarter came from the country's most populous areas.

Now, I did consider afterwards that there are no doubt a varied number of ex-rural vets who moved inwards towards cities, but it seems weird as hell to hear anyone consider suburbs in any way resemble actual rural areas.

I mean, I personally lived in all three categories around Dallas, going from Lewisville and DeSoto suburbs out to a house in Hutchins where we had horses and the neighbor on one side was like 10 miles away, the other was actually next door, but then it was another half mile to the guy that raised emus, and another couple of miles to get to where Chuck Norris lived so I guess it was pretty damn rural even before considering the huge fallow field across the road... after that we moved briefly to a duplex in East Dallas where I could see downtown if I stood out in the street on the closest thing to a hill around there and we had three or four windows shot out which were completely unrelated to us, just stray bullets.

Ever heard a lowrider thumping la cucaracha? It's a trip, but if East Dallas wasn't full of mexican bangers and you couldn't literally see downtown I would definitely say it was more like any suburb I've lived in than those suburbs resembled rural areas.

I mean, to go to a convenience store in hutchins was a several mile bike ride, I once rode one of our horses out there because he loved trying to figure out what the fuck emus were and it was hilarious the first time we were clipclopping down the road and he saw them come out from behind their shed and LITERALLY slid to a stop on the road... KSSSHHHHHH and if we had been going much faster/I hadn't kinda been expecting him to want to take a look I mighta smacked into the back of his head. Big beautiful moron.

[Naturegirl1999]

In the horse’s defense, emus are native to Australia;is, not North America. They are new here

[TamerVirus]

Emus brutally conquered Australia in 1932. Do not trust their imperialistic machinations.

[Max™]

Oh I get why he stopped and freaked out, eyes twitching around, ears up on tiptoes somehow, huffing and puffing like a freight train as he sniffed and snuffed at them.

Let him walk down into the ditch some to get closer and he clearly wanted to see them closer but I was like "dude, I get it, but you're acting like a creep and scaring them" and had to get him back up on the road again.

[misko27]

One would imagine it would be both counter-intuitive and against the military programme to send troops to their own home cities, instead of others across the federation. Due to the risks of mutinies, and all. But perhaps the worrying of possible recruits isn’t affected by this.

I don't believe a system in the US military exists which actively thinks about this as an issue, because troops on US soil in this fashion is not a typical situation to begin with.

Also, inexplicably the unemployment rate is down this month. Still brutally double digits but we were expecting worse this month, not better; not until June at the earliest did I hear anyone expect recovery.

[Akura]

not until June at the earliest did I hear anyone expect recovery.

...But it is June.


Also, unemployment rate measures people seeking work and not having found any. It doesn't count the jobless people who have stopped looking for work or have, well... died.

[Rusty]

When you look at census numbers you would find something like 10% of rural adults are veterans while only 7% of urban adults are, accordingly you might think there is a significantly larger number of rural enlistments, but we're looking at 10% of less than a fifth of the population vs 7% of the rest of the population aren't we?

You're putting the cart before the horse.  Where a veteran lives after leaving the military is irrelevant, and there's a lot of reasons why that would skew urban, the primary being that census of all veterans necessarily includes all age demographics, including those that require to be close to major healthcare facilities due to age.  What matters to this conversation is what areas supply the military, and that is skewed rural.  Waaay rural.  Looking at military recruits, 36% of them came from rural areas and almost 40% were suburbanites.  Less than a quarter came from the country's most populous areas.

Now, I did consider afterwards that there are no doubt a varied number of ex-rural vets who moved inwards towards cities, but it seems weird as hell to hear anyone consider suburbs in any way resemble actual rural areas.

I mean, I personally lived in all three categories around Dallas, going from Lewisville and DeSoto suburbs out to a house in Hutchins where we had horses and the neighbor on one side was like 10 miles away, the other was actually next door, but then it was another half mile to the guy that raised emus, and another couple of miles to get to where Chuck Norris lived so I guess it was pretty damn rural even before considering the huge fallow field across the road... after that we moved briefly to a duplex in East Dallas where I could see downtown if I stood out in the street on the closest thing to a hill around there and we had three or four windows shot out which were completely unrelated to us, just stray bullets.

Ever heard a lowrider thumping la cucaracha? It's a trip, but if East Dallas wasn't full of mexican bangers and you couldn't literally see downtown I would definitely say it was more like any suburb I've lived in than those suburbs resembled rural areas.

I mean, to go to a convenience store in hutchins was a several mile bike ride, I once rode one of our horses out there because he loved trying to figure out what the fuck emus were and it was hilarious the first time we were clipclopping down the road and he saw them come out from behind their shed and LITERALLY slid to a stop on the road... KSSSHHHHHH and if we had been going much faster/I hadn't kinda been expecting him to want to take a look I mighta smacked into the back of his head. Big beautiful moron.

No argument there from me.   The issue is overrepresentation.  Rural people is the only demographic there that is overrepresented, and it's by a lot.  Only 23% of the nation's population is rural.  Unfortunately I haven't found solid numbers on it, but from 20 years in the military my gut tells me that if you were able to break that down to actual jobs you'd find that the rural overrepresentation skews even harder when you only look at the actual trigger pullers.  I'm in the National Guard right now (I'm not going to say where because, yes, I'm in a major city doing riot control and I'd rather not put out too much information until this whole thing is done) and my state has 5 combat arms battalions (infantry, armor, cavalry, artillery).  Only one is headquartered out of any of our major cities, and zero are headquartered out of the capital.

[Max™]

Yeah, but 23% rural pop making up 36% of recruits vs 77% of the pop making up the other 64% means that while yes, there are a lot of rural kids in the military, there are still far more kids from the burbs and cities, and shit, it takes a lot of work to turn any of them into people willing to go "over there" and pull triggers, and when a big part of doing that involves stressing the importance of keeping that shit "over there" to keep folks "back here" safe... asking them to go do the same shit "back here" is a whole other cakewalk.

It's totally possible to train people to do this, for an example: cops get trained to look at people as potential threats WAY THE FUCK too easily, and get told that they're more or less always in a warzone.

This suggests to me that asking dudes and gals a year or two out of boot camp to start running around looking at the civvies they've been training to fight FOR as if they are threats and targets isn't going to result in bloodbaths as quickly as some shitbag like Trump might hope.

Honestly I'd expect a soldier to assess the situation and identify that the aggressors are the guys armored up like a bunch of wannabe operators chasing kids around with tear gas and batons and rubber bullets, so the reflex probably isn't going to be to assume the cops are on the right side when they're actively attacking folks you LITERALLY decided you would risk your life to protect, sight unseen.

[Egan_BW]

You might be overestimating people's tendency to actually analyze the situation for themselves rather than just do whatever their immediate superiors tell them to. At least, that's what I'd assume would happen. "Just follow orders" is a powerful shield against the mental unpleasantness inherent to being a soldier, and it's a lot "safer" than trying to think for yourself or object.

[Max™]

That's part of what the training involves, instilling the idea that you're not a bad person for doing this because you're doing it to keep people back home safe.

When you just instill the "targets are shaped like people" and "follow orders" subroutines you get cops murdering people all over the fucking place, but I think a little more highly of soldiers, got a whole family of marines down to my little sister, and I'm basically named after my awesomely bearded grandpa, though he usually answered to "Gunny" when he was still around.

[misko27]

not until June at the earliest did I hear anyone expect recovery.

...But it is June.


Also, unemployment rate measures people seeking work and not having found any. It doesn't count the jobless people who have stopped looking for work or have, well... died.

But it's the report for May! Data is published for each month on the first Fridsy of the following month.

...Also, am I reading this article correctly?

The Labor Department cautioned that data-collection issues that have plagued the agency throughout the crisis continued last month. Some temporarily jobless workers were characterized as “employed” in May; had they been counted correctly, the department said, the unemployment rate would have topped 16 percent.

Because that basically says to me that the unemployment rate is actually 16% and it's being reported as 13% for... reasons.

[Ametsala]

Because that basically says to me that the unemployment rate is actually 16% and it's being reported as 13% for... reasons.

Eh... I'm sure it's going to be fixed as soon as Donald's no longer the prez. /s

Btw, is Trump officially the GOP nominee, or is the nominee nominated in the national convention?