Dr. Williams on the Draft & Economics ...

ViRedd

New Member
Reinstating the military draft

By Walter E. Williams

Wednesday, December 27, 2006


Congressman Charles Rangel plans to introduce legislation calling for reinstatement of the military draft. He says, "There's no question in my mind that this president and this administration would never have invaded Iraq, especially on the flimsy evidence that was presented to the Congress, if indeed we had a draft and members of Congress and the administration thought that their kids from their communities would be placed in harm's way."

Rep. Rangel, D-N.Y., has it completely backward in terms of incentives created by the draft. Let's apply a bit of economic logic to it, but first get a pet peeve of mine out of the way: The term "draft" is a euphemism for what is actually "confiscation of labor services." The Defense Department can get all the military personnel it wants on an all-volunteer basis; it could simply raise wages. Indeed, there exists a wage whereby even I would volunteer my services.

The draft is needed when the military wants to pay soldiers wages lower than those earned in the non-military sector of our economy. When we did have a draft, as in 1950s, look at who was and was not drafted. The commander in chief at that time, President Dwight Eisenhower, wasn't drafted. Neither were members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Generals and other high-ranking officers weren't drafted. Who was drafted? Recruits, and it's not hard to understand why. A newly inducted recruit's pay was $68 a month. The pay of the commander in chief, Joint Chiefs of Staff, generals and other officers were many multiples higher than a recruit's pay. It's not difficult to understand why drafting recruits was necessary. Some argue that depending on an all-volunteer military is too expensive. That's wrong. The true cost of having a man in the military is what society has to forgo, what economists call opportunity costs. Say a man worked producing televisions for which he was paid $1,000 a month. If he's drafted, he's not producing $1,000 worth of televisions. The sacrificed $1,000 worth of televisions is part of the cost of his being in the military whether he's paid $68 a month or nothing a month. One effect of the draft is to understate the full cost of military operations. In 1959, prior to my being drafted, I drove a taxi for Yellow Cab Company in Philadelphia earning about $400 a month. In August that year, I started earning $68 a month. The military budget saw a cost of $68 as opposed to the $400 worth of taxi services society had to forgo. Simple economics suggests that if the cost of a resource is understated, there will be bias toward greater and more wasteful use of that resource. Contrary to Rep. Rangel's assertion, a draft would tend to give rise to greater, not less, use of the military. Today's all-volunteer military consists of high-quality soldiers and fewer misfits than yesteryear. I speak from experience; I was one of those misfits. Being drafted meant lower wages and a waste of my time. To make matters worse, my basic training was at Fort Jackson, S.C., and afterward, I was stationed at Fort Stewart, Ga. This was 1959, and I didn't have a very good orientation on Southern customs and its standards for blacks. There were many self-created adjustment problems associated with my activities, such as: organizing black soldiers to go to the post dance on the "wrong" night; sloppy soldiering; being court-martialed and winning; investigations of me, at least being tailed, by the military authorities; and at-home FBI inquiries of neighbors about Mrs. Williams. The military draft is an offense to the values of liberty, causes misallocation of resources, and there's a higher risk of getting a bunch of misfits. The all-volunteer military does none of this.


Dr. Williams serves on the faculty of George Mason University as John M. Olin Distinguished Professor of Economics and is the author of More Liberty Means Less Government: Our Founders Knew This Well. Be the first to read Walter Williams' column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox. Sign up today!

Copyright © 2006 Salem Web Network. All Rights Reserved.
 

medicineman

New Member
Yeah this guy had it tough, He actually had to deal with blacks, What a fucking joke. The Idiot should have to go to Iraq where every day you risk getting part of your body blown off, Maimed or Killed, then I might listen to his opinion On the Draft, What a fucking loser, Had to go to the south and deal with the southern culture, Ha ha ha ho ho ho! This guy has no opinion coming, period! He should go back to driving a cab!
 

Dankdude

Well-Known Member
Med, Dr. Williams is black.... But I don't agree with a lot he has to say, although I am totally against the draft.
 

medicineman

New Member
My mistake, I guess I assumed when he said he had to deal with black culture, he was white, Mistake recognized! but still, to compare duty in Georgia to Iraq Is ridiculous!
 

ViRedd

New Member
What? No comments on the economic issues raised in the article by Dr. Williams?

And by the way, Med ... Williams was serving in the military in the South in 1959. For a black person, that would be about like serving in Iraq today. Hey, step into the wrong bar or restaurant, drink out of the wrong water fountain, look at a white woman the "wrong" way ... or just be "upitty" and the dogs are on yer black azz pronto. If the dogs don't kill ya ... there's always the hangin' tree.

Vi
 

medicineman

New Member
What? No comments on the economic issues raised in the article by Dr. Williams?

And by the way, Med ... Williams was serving in the military in the South in 1959. For a black person, that would be about like serving in Iraq today. Hey, step into the wrong bar or restaurant, drink out of the wrong water fountain, look at a white woman the "wrong" way ... or just be "upitty" and the dogs are on yer black azz pronto. If the dogs don't kill ya ... there's always the hangin' tree.

Vi
Yeah right just like Iraq. That shows me how much you know about combat, One minute in a combat zone is like an hour in hell. When you don't know what you are talking about, stop talking!
 

ViRedd

New Member
Med ...

What about the economic principles in Dr. Williams' article ... any thoughts on it? That was, after all, the point of the thread.

Thank you ...

Vi
 

medicineman

New Member
newly inducted recruit's pay was $68 a month. The pay of the commander in chief, Joint Chiefs of Staff, generals and other officers were many multiples higher than a recruit's pay. It's not difficult to understand why drafting recruits was necessary. Some argue that depending on an all-volunteer military is too expensive. That's wrong. The true cost of having a man in the military is what society has to forgo, what economists call opportunity costs. Say a man worked producing televisions for which he was paid $1,000 a month. If he's drafted, he's not producing $1,000 worth of televisions. The sacrificed $1,000 worth of televisions is part of the cost of his being in the military whether he's paid $68 a month or nothing a month. One effect of the draft is to understate the full cost of military operations. In 1959, prior to my being drafted, I drove a taxi for Yellow Cab Company in Philadelphia earning about $400 a month. In August that year, I started earning $68 a month. The military budget saw a cost of $68 as opposed to the $400 worth of taxi services society had to forgo. Simple economics suggests that if the cost of a resource is understated, there will be bias toward greater and more wasteful use of that resource. Basically what I get out of this is gobblygook If a guy is drafted and paid 68.00 a month, instead of 1,000, someone else will come along and take the 1,000 dollar job. Nothing lost except the individuals wages. The same with the taxi situation, He took a cut in pay, but the new taxi driver picked up where he left off, Now tell me what I've missed here? The fact that the military pay was so low, basically has nothing to do with the economics of the civilian work market. I was a part of that 68 dollar culture and it was understood that with that 68.00 came room- board- clothing and prices at the PX that were about 1/3 what you paid on the outside, so no comparison! Plus you never got any time off to spend the money anyway! Have I paid my dues here. I know you think I'm ignorant but I am getting damn tired of being asked to prove every post I make, so from now on, Just post your everopposing view and lighten up!
 

ViRedd

New Member
Basically what I get out of this is gobblygook If a guy is drafted and paid 68.00 a month, instead of 1,000, someone else will come along and take the 1,000 dollar job. Nothing lost except the individuals wages. The same with the taxi situation, He took a cut in pay, but the new taxi driver picked up where he left off, Now tell me what I've missed here?

What you've missed is that a $1000 producer has been taken out of the job market and given a government job at $68 dollars an hour AGAINST HIS/HER WILL.

Vi
 

medicineman

New Member
What you've missed is that a $1000 producer has been taken out of the job market and given a government job at $68 dollars an hour AGAINST HIS/HER WILL.
That my friend is the nature of the draft. As someone else will fill the thousand dollar production there is no economic loss except to the individual being drafted, Tell me the second time where I'm wrong. The only one impacted by this is the draftee, and if you want to look further someone new will benefit from the thousand dollar position! I never said I was for or against the draft. There are two sides and I can clearly see both of them. One side says it will be fair as all sons and daughters will face the same conscription, the other says a well trained volunteer force is better. About the fairness of the draft issue, we all know that sons of influence got cushy National Guard duty or deferences ala G.W.Bush! so the fairness issue is moot! I myself don't really like a draft, But I also don't like War of any kind, especially unwarranted ones!
 

ViRedd

New Member
What you've missed is that a $1000 producer has been taken out of the job market and given a government job at $68 dollars an hour AGAINST HIS/HER WILL.
That my friend is the nature of the draft. As someone else will fill the thousand dollar production there is no economic loss except to the individual being drafted, Tell me the second time where I'm wrong. The only one impacted by this is the draftee, and if you want to look further someone new will benefit from the thousand dollar position! I never said I was for or against the draft. There are two sides and I can clearly see both of them. One side says it will be fair as all sons and daughters will face the same conscription, the other says a well trained volunteer force is better. About the fairness of the draft issue, we all know that sons of influence got cushy National Guard duty or deferences ala G.W.Bush! so the fairness issue is moot! I myself don't really like a draft, But I also don't like War of any kind, especially unwarranted ones!
Exactly right, Med ... and that draftee has been conscripted against his will by a government that sees him, not as an individule with God given property rights, but as a servant of the State. Why did I bring up property rights ... because we, as free men, own ourselves.

Vi
 

medicineman

New Member
Why did I bring up property rights ... because we, as free men, own ourselves.

In the real world, we own nothing, we float along with the Idea that we are free, while anyone can offer false testimont against you and you go to the Bastille to be awarded a chance to prove your innocence, and then you get the best justice money can buy, this is reality. None of us are truly free untill we depart this place. There are some that have a greater perception of freedom and those are usually the ones with money, for in this society, Money buys you a perception of freedom The more money, the greator the perception. We are trapped in this body and there's only one way out. You with the great perception enjoy what freedoms you have left. If I had a pot of gold, I'd seriously be looking for greeener pastures, like Spain, France South America, the warmer climes for me. You can have all the patriotic bull----, I did my service and now the ships sinking, If I can find a liferaft, I'm out of here!
 

medicineman

New Member
And the glass is half empty.

Vi
I'm thinkin less, maybe 3/4 empty or even 7/8. What kind of bullshit are you trying to throw now, how your positive thinking is going to save the world. The only thing your positive thinking did for you was make you rich so things naturally seem a little rosier, I don't think it helped the Iraqis much, or the so. Africans, or the samalians etc. etc. so in the reaL WORLD the glass is gettin emptier all the time. Don't lay your smart ass rhetoric at my feet and expect a walk, Mr smug! Your glass may be overflowing, but take a look around, how many full glasses do you see outside your little circle? You
need to stop watching Pat Robertson, that goofball should be put away, He's fomenting fear among the religious zealots!
 
Top