End the All-Volunteer Force

[AmericanPride]

I did neither write about individual soldiers nor only about money. I wrote about general welfare - the country's general well-being.

I do harm to you when I force you to do something disgusting by pointing a gun at you. Such an action would not have any fiscal impact or GDP effect. Now imagine I'd do it to four million Americans every year. Something really, really disgusting. Four million times a year.
The general welfare of the U.S. would suffer because I would cause human costs.


Not monetarised enough?
Monetarise "national security" well first, or else the whole conscription thing lacks any revenue side!

Americans are already conscripted for jury duty, education (up to the 12th grade), and to a smaller extent, community and charitable work through the school and prison systems. This is repeated every year to tens of millions of Americans. What are the "human costs" and how do we measure it? What are the "disgusting" "human costs" of military conscription and how do you measure it?

[Fuchs]

Irrelevant.

I do not discuss the price of butter when I decide to buy a salami or not. Just stay on topic.

And I already showed that I'm not the first to monetarise the human costs, for the whole basis of conscription requires a "pro" side - National Security- which is not monetarised either.
On top of that, my first post explains enough to show that monetarising the human costs is not necessary for a conclusion.

Just read it again till you get what I meant, for I was really as clear as I could.

[AmericanPride]

Irrelevant.

I do not discuss the price of butter when I decide to buy a salami or not. Just stay on topic.

And I already showed that I'm not the first to monetarise the human costs, for the whole basis of conscription requires a "pro" side - National Security- which is not monetarised either.
On top of that, my first post explains enough to show that monetarising the human costs is not necessary for a conclusion.

Just read it again till you get what I meant, for I was really as clear as I could.

OK. Sure. Whatever. The "keep-reading-what-I-stated-because-it-was-clear-and-self-evident-until-you-agree-with-me" line is not an argument. Thanks for playing though!

[Fuchs]

Sure it's no argument. Why should I keep providing new ones before you understand my original, central argument?

Arguments are meant to be weighed against each other. Makes no sense to dust off the scale before you know what to put on it.