Illusion of Recovery – Part I: Print and pray has officially failed - Eric Janszen

[DSpencer]

Re: Illusion of Recovery – Part I: Print and pray has officially failed - Eric Janszen

Lakedaemonian,

Re ex-mil in the private workforce

I didn't mean to imply that all soldiers are ill-equipped for private sector jobs. Your ex-mil employees worked out bc you hired people with skills that matched your needs. Surely you would not have hired solely based on military experience? Lektrode's plan seemed to be guaranteeing jobs regardless of actual qualification.

I know some ex military that are extremely bright and disciplined. I know others I wouldn't trust to be a dog sitter. I just believe people should be hired based on merit not because they need a job or used to serve in the military.

As a side note- I think part of the changing perception of the military is due to the fact that many people don't consider the military to be fighting for just causes anymore. Peoples opinion of WWII vets is probably much higher than people who fight in Afghanistan.

[shiny!]

Re: Illusion of Recovery – Part I: Print and pray has officially failed - Eric Janszen

I'm not talking about returning soldiers being dangerous, or not being able to re-acclimate to civilian life, or Society needing to care for their hurts (of course we should, but that's not what I'm talking about here). I'm just talking about jobs.

Of course ex-soldiers make great workers! But so do millions of other people who are currently unemployed and can't find work. What will happen if we bring home thousands more able-bodied people when there are no jobs available?

One thing could be to utilize them to protect our borders and ports, but I don't think TPTB want that, or they would have done it already in the ten years since 9-11.

Is the problem of employing them if they were home one of the reasons for keeping the wars going?

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Illusion of Recovery – Part I: Print and pray has officially failed - Eric Janszen

Lakedaemonian,

Re ex-mil in the private workforce

I didn't mean to imply that all soldiers are ill-equipped for private sector jobs. Your ex-mil employees worked out bc you hired people with skills that matched your needs. Surely you would not have hired solely based on military experience?

Absolutely not....but I think part of the problem is in the gulf between those with experience or knowledge of the military, and the majority that don't. I think employers that are better equipped to accurately translate military definitions of skillsets into a civilian work force setting have a bit of an advantage over those that don't. And until such time as most employers have an accurate understanding of it, it will come at the detriment of those trying to make the transition from military to private sector work.

Lektrode's plan seemed to be guaranteeing jobs regardless of actual qualification.

I know some ex military that are extremely bright and disciplined. I know others I wouldn't trust to be a dog sitter. I just believe people should be hired based on merit not because they need a job or used to serve in the military.

Absolutely, even the best organizations have their "10%ers" who should never have been hired/recruited. Not everyone who worked for Google, Microsoft, Genentech, or GE are super awesome either......their are turbds who work their way into the best of employers.

I also agree on no preferential treatment of veterans....but I'm unsure how I feel about preferential treatement given to government vendors when it comes to disabled veterans.....even though it's proven to be a slippery slope with all kinds of preferential treatment of minority interest groups.

As a side note- I think part of the changing perception of the military is due to the fact that many people don't consider the military to be fighting for just causes anymore. Peoples opinion of WWII vets is probably much higher than people who fight in Afghanistan.

I guess that's where I get a bit depressed and disappointed in public perceptions......everyone in service now is a volunteer in service to their country(and to make a decent career of it for many).....they don't get to choose where they serve...that choice is made on their behalf...I'm sure many would prefer fighting/deterring a more crystal clear existential threat like Hitler.

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Illusion of Recovery – Part I: Print and pray has officially failed - Eric Janszen

I'm not talking about returning soldiers being dangerous, or not being able to re-acclimate to civilian life, or Society needing to care for their hurts (of course we should, but that's not what I'm talking about here). I'm just talking about jobs.

Of course ex-soldiers make great workers! But so do millions of other people who are currently unemployed and can't find work. What will happen if we bring home thousands more able-bodied people when there are no jobs available?

One thing could be to utilize them to protect our borders and ports, but I don't think TPTB want that, or they would have done it already in the ten years since 9-11.

Is the problem of employing them if they were home one of the reasons for keeping the wars going?

A couple points to keep in mind:

US military headcount has been slashed in the last 50 years.

I think there were 3+ million at the height of the Vietnam conflict circa late 1960's.

Approx 2 million circa Desert Storm 1990.

And approx. 1.5 million today( not including Reservists and National Guard).

Of those, I believe approx 1/3(circa 500k) are stationed or deployed on operations overseas.

So if we saw a reduction in defense spending it MIGHT include some of the following:

Reduced headcount of service folks in units permanently deployed overseas(Germany,South Korea, Japan, Italy for example).

Reduced headcount on operations in places like Iraq and Afghanistan.

Reduced headcount of those stationed in the Continential US.

Not all of those reductions would result in a total headcount reduction....many reduced in foreign permanent postings or operations could cycle back to a duty station in the US.

My guess is that headcount reduction would probably come in what could be considered "non core" functions.

If you are unable to deploy on core military operations then it's possible your job could be on the chopping block....we are seeing that very thing here as I type.

I doubt keeping the war going to keep folks employed is a realistic reason....as the cost of keeping a single soldier deployed, supplied, and supported on operations is VERY, VERY, VERY expensive.....for every soldier deployed in a very logistically difficult to support area of operation like parts of Afghanistan you could easily pay for X number of soldiers stationed in the Continental US.

What with the chaos in Mexico in it's perpetual narco-civil war, the rampant illegal immigration program, and the genuine national security issue it represents...I'd be a keen supporter of seeing more emphasis and multi-agency/service resources placed on the US Southern Border.

In the end, I reckon if/when the headcount is reduced in the US military we will see the same thing as when headcount gets reduced at GE, etc.

Some will have a really hard time, some will do exceptionally well risking it all on new businesses, and most will hopefully find a place/calling as a cog in a new wheel.

[DSpencer]

Re: Illusion of Recovery – Part I: Print and pray has officially failed - Eric Janszen

I guess that's where I get a bit depressed and disappointed in public perceptions......everyone in service now is a volunteer in service to their country(and to make a decent career of it for many).....they don't get to choose where they serve...that choice is made on their behalf...I'm sure many would prefer fighting/deterring a more crystal clear existential threat like Hitler.

I think that's kind of the point. They choose to serve despite the lack of a deserving enemy. So people might ask: who are they serving, themselves or the country?

I don't mean this to be disrespectful. I know many have the best of intentions. I just think the lack of an existential threat decreases people's perception of military service.

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Illusion of Recovery – Part I: Print and pray has officially failed - Eric Janszen

There was a draft (both WWII and Vietnam.)

Everyone had an equal chance of serving. That's why it was "far more intertwined."

Funny you should say that....I wonder if we will see a return to some form of national service....not for the military(as they are finding it quite easy to recruit at the moment...even before the crash as well to the surprise of many) but for the many unemployed university graduates we see piling up.

I wonder if we might see a 1930's CCC, with 21st century characteristics?

I think I recall President Clinton's Americorps of the 90's...I wonder if something like that could be under consideration for expansion or creation to keep the embarrassingly large and growing number of debt ridden university graduates from actually getting off the sofa to protest the broken higher education FIRE system?

I like the idea of some form of national service for many(but not all)...not military.....civil...but with the whole military challenge, sacrifice, and bonding/forging of friendship, community, belonging, and love of country it can produce.

Whoops......I just had a look back at my posts on this thread and have seen I've started dragging it into a different direction....sorry....my bad....

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Illusion of Recovery – Part I: Print and pray has officially failed - Eric Janszen

I think that's kind of the point. They choose to serve despite the lack of a deserving enemy. So people might ask: who are they serving, themselves or the country?

I don't mean this to be disrespectful. I know many have the best of intentions. I just think the lack of an existential threat decreases people's perception of military service.

Well, my only response to that would be that existential threats do not always present themselves directly, clearly, and/or immediately.

In the 1930's, many could see the rise of Hitler as a threat...others(including many in the US) could have seen him as a model to emulate at the time.

Distance, geographic isolation from the threat, and the inability to project sufficient force over long enough distances allowed the US the opportunity(time and space) to ramp up to the existential threats that eventually presented themselves.

The world has changed, but I think most folks' perception of an existential threat hasn't.

The speed/velocity of conflict today(whether it be a conventional global conflict or a small asymmetric "fire" to be extinguished) precludes us from having the time and/or space to ramp up to face it.

Requiring a need to be "ready" to face unknown or not yet publicly perceived threats...and as EJ has alluded to...in yet to be widely used new battlefields(digital for one).

To the point about who are they serving:

Many do serve out of a desire to serve for country and their love of their profession of arms....and many serve simply because it's a decent job with decent benefits.

[lektrode]

Re: Illusion of Recovery – Part I: Print and pray has officially failed - Eric Janszen

...Surely you would not have hired solely based on military experience? Lektrode's plan seemed to be guaranteeing jobs regardless of actual qualification. ..

no... i didnt get into any of those operational details, as 'my plan' is simply a conceptual framework on how best to redeploy a vast resource base to A: get The US working again, suck up the 'output gap' and _rebuild_ our infrastructure before it and our entire economy collapses - and i simply meant that within the US military ranks we have a HUGE pool of (mostly) well trained, disciplined people who are used to functioning (and _working_) in well-organized teams involving most of the skills required to perform LARGE SCALE logistical operations that would be necessary to immediately roll out LARGE SCALE construction efforts -
i think thats whats required and cant think of a better way to B: 'fix the budget problems' (end the wars); C: fix the unemployment problem (rebuild what made our economy the worlds biggest, and it wernt wall st); D: fix the traffic/transportation problems (the transport system is clearly in need of repairs/re-orientation away from dependence on highways/air travel); E: end our 'addiction' to oil imports (by buildout of a new generation of nuke power plants, the technology of which the right .mil people are clearly qualified to do); F: solve one of the bigger environmental threats we are facing: burning coal/oil etc for electric power, that we will require to put anything more than a few toys for the rich/trendy on the roads (electric cars); G: and hey, yeah - border control - and didnt even think of that one - am sure theres lots more

we can argue/discuss the details as we go along, but we need a BOLD Plan of ACTION now, today, yesterday in fact - since the political class hasnt been able to come up with a GD thing - what have we got to lose (sides everything if we dont) in trying?

and agree with lakedaemonian: cant think of a BETTER group of people who are READY to _immediately_ take on the task..
i'm quite sure they'd rather be back here at home working on OUR road/bridges/power plants, than sweatin their butts off getting shot at in some desert defending what, exactly? (sides the oil (&profits of the mil/ind complex), that if we didnt need so much of, mostly for our cars, and if we had more nuke energy, the iranians et al would have less money/reasons to wage war against us = solving LOTS of problems)

[DSpencer]

Re: Illusion of Recovery – Part I: Print and pray has officially failed - Eric Janszen

no... i didnt get into any of those operational details, as 'my plan' is simply a conceptual framework on how best to redeploy a vast resource base to A: get The US working again, suck up the 'output gap' and _rebuild_ our infrastructure before it and our entire economy collapses - and i simply meant that within the US military ranks we have a HUGE pool of (mostly) well trained, disciplined people who are used to functioning (and _working_) in well-organized teams involving most of the skills required to perform LARGE SCALE logistical operations that would be necessary to immediately roll out LARGE SCALE construction efforts -
i think thats whats required and cant think of a better way to B: 'fix the budget problems' (end the wars); C: fix the unemployment problem (rebuild what made our economy the worlds biggest, and it wernt wall st); D: fix the traffic/transportation problems (the transport system is clearly in need of repairs/re-orientation away from dependence on highways/air travel); E: end our 'addiction' to oil imports (by buildout of a new generation of nuke power plants, the technology of which the right .mil people are clearly qualified to do); F: solve one of the bigger environmental threats we are facing: burning coal/oil etc for electric power, that we will require to put anything more than a few toys for the rich/trendy on the roads (electric cars); G: and hey, yeah - border control - and didnt even think of that one - am sure theres lots more

we can argue/discuss the details as we go along, but we need a BOLD Plan of ACTION now, today, yesterday in fact - since the political class hasnt been able to come up with a GD thing - what have we got to lose (sides everything if we dont) in trying?

and agree with lakedaemonian: cant think of a BETTER group of people who are READY to _immediately_ take on the task..
i'm quite sure they'd rather be back here at home working on OUR road/bridges/power plants, than sweatin their butts off getting shot at in some desert defending what, exactly? (sides the oil (&profits of the mil/ind complex), that if we didnt need so much of, mostly for our cars, and if we had more nuke energy, the iranians et al would have less money/reasons to wage war against us = solving LOTS of problems)

2: nobody gets laid-off - any of them who wants to work gets re-deployed to REBUILD ***OUR*** INFRASTUCTURE

Sounded pretty clear to me...

Regardless, I agree that production is good and generally speaking destruction is bad. However, I don't think that simply redeploying troops to build infrastructure will solve our budget or unemployment problems.

The troops would still be paid by taxes and borrowing. The missile builders would have to retrain as reactor builders. We would at least have something to show for it other than some dead bodies but it's not a miracle solution by any means.

[vinoveri]

Re: Illusion of Recovery – Part I: Print and pray has officially failed - Eric Janszen

But that, believe it or not, is the good news. Today the BLS revised Q1 GDP growth down from 1.9% to 0.4% almost no growth, and the first pass at Q2 growth is 1.4%. The past record of revisions during our feeble crawling out of the output gap suggests another cut to near zero or negative growth is likely.

Deficit reductions spelled out in the Budget Control Act of 2011 virtually guarantee that the economy, already teetering on the edge of recession in the first half of the year, will fall into recession and contract in the second half of the year.

This political acceleration into a mid-gap recession is occurring a full two years before my previous projection of a next recession occurring in 2013 if the US fails to pursue a program of energy and communications infrastructure targeted, ROI producing stimulus programs. Once again, try as I might, just as I failed in 2001 to imagine that our leaders were crazy enough to create a housing bubble to bail the economy out of the fallout from the tech stock bubble, I was unable to think darkly enough to foresee the economic nightmare our leaders were capable of creating with alacrity.

Are you any more sanguine on the near term prospects for the economy in view of the 2.5% GDP print today?

[vinoveri]

Re: Illusion of Recovery – Part I: Print and pray has officially failed - Eric Janszen

Originally Posted by EJ

But that, believe it or not, is the good news. Today the BLS revised Q1 GDP growth down from 1.9% to 0.4% almost no growth, and the first pass at Q2 growth is 1.4%. The past record of revisions during our feeble crawling out of the output gap suggests another cut to near zero or negative growth is likely.

Deficit reductions spelled out in the Budget Control Act of 2011 virtually guarantee that the economy, already teetering on the edge of recession in the first half of the year, will fall into recession and contract in the second half of the year.

This political acceleration into a mid-gap recession is occurring a full two years before my previous projection of a next recession occurring in 2013 if the US fails to pursue a program of energy and communications infrastructure targeted, ROI producing stimulus programs. Once again, try as I might, just as I failed in 2001 to imagine that our leaders were crazy enough to create a housing bubble to bail the economy out of the fallout from the tech stock bubble, I was unable to think darkly enough to foresee the economic nightmare our leaders were capable of creating with alacrity.






Are you any more sanguine on the near term prospects for the economy in view of the 2.5% GDP print today?

Are you any more sanguine on the near term prospects for the economy in view of the 2.0% GDP print today?