User Tag List

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 12 of 22

Thread: Mandatory Volunteerism

  1. #1
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    454
    Threads
    16
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Mandatory Volunteerism

    How do you guys feel about bills like HR 1444 which call for mandatory service from Americans? Watch this cute little video if you don't know about it:
    YouTube - "Mandatory Volunteerism"... Is this a repeat of history?

  2. #2
    Hot Lava Aussie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Canberra, Australia
    Posts
    1,355
    Threads
    33
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Isn't mandatory volunteerism a contradiction in terms?
    I reject your reality and insert my own!

  3. #3
    Esquire Dan_77's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    3,679
    Threads
    237
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Quote by: MyApologies View Post
    How do you guys feel about bills like HR 1444 which call for mandatory service from Americans? Watch this cute little video if you don't know about it:
    YouTube - "Mandatory Volunteerism"... Is this a repeat of history?
    How do I feel?

    I feel you should stop getting your news from YouTube.

    The "mandatory" requirement was only in one early version of the bill and was quickly removed when it was discovered.
    "But it wasn't until he met his beautiful wife that he learned using logic and reason isn't enough. You have to be a dick to everyone who doesn't think like you." - South Park on Richard Dawkins

  4. #4
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    454
    Threads
    16
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    No, it isn't. Its in HR 1444; you're thinking of the GIVE Act HR 1388. In HR 1444 Section 4 (b)6, states:

    "Whether a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people could be developed, and how such a requirement could be implemented in a manner that would strengthen the social fabric of the Nation and overcome civic challenges by bringing together people from diverse economic, ethnic, and educational backgrounds."

  5. #5
    Esquire Dan_77's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    3,679
    Threads
    237
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Quote by: MyApologies View Post
    No, it isn't. Its in HR 1444; you're thinking of the GIVE Act HR 1388. In HR 1444 Section 4 (b)6, states:

    "Whether a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people could be developed, and how such a requirement could be implemented in a manner that would strengthen the social fabric of the Nation and overcome civic challenges by bringing together people from diverse economic, ethnic, and educational backgrounds."
    How does this "call" for mandatory service?

    That is listed under subsection b, which states, "Specific Topics- In carrying out its general purpose under subsection (a), the Commission shall address and analyze the following specific topics:"

    This bill is a bill to create a "commission" to study and create a comprehensive report on various public service and volunteer opportunities. If passed, the Commission will meet for 20 months, at which point they will publish a report on their findings, and 30 days later disband.

    Posting Youtube videos supposedly analyzing legislation without actually reading and understanding it yourself = Fail.
    "But it wasn't until he met his beautiful wife that he learned using logic and reason isn't enough. You have to be a dick to everyone who doesn't think like you." - South Park on Richard Dawkins

  6. #6
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    454
    Threads
    16
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    quote again for the dullards in the back:
    "...workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people..."


    If you mention the youtube video again, you fail. It was cute and you're obviously insecure about that woman's beaming sexuality making more of an impact than your revisionist reply.

  7. #7
    Esquire Dan_77's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    3,679
    Threads
    237
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Quote by: MyApologies View Post
    quote again for the dullards in the back:
    "...workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people..."
    And?

    Quote again for those who can't seem to read a statute:

    (b) Specific Topics- In carrying out its general purpose under subsection (a), the Commission shall address and analyze the following specific topics:

    (1) The level of understanding about the current Federal, State, and local volunteer programs and opportunities for service among individuals in the United States.

    (2) The issues that deter volunteerism and national service, particularly among young people, and how the identified issues can be overcome.

    (3) Whether there is an appropriate role for Federal, State, and local governments in overcoming the issues that deter volunteerism and national service and, if appropriate, how to expand the relationships and partnerships between different levels of government in promoting volunteerism and national service.

    (4) Whether existing databases are effective in matching community needs to would-be volunteers and service providers.

    (5) The effect on the Nation, on those who serve, and on the families of those who serve, if all individuals in the United States were expected to perform national service or were required to perform a certain amount of national service.

    (6) Whether a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people could be developed, and how such a requirement could be implemented in a manner that would strengthen the social fabric of the Nation and overcome civic challenges by bringing together people from diverse economic, ethnic, and educational backgrounds.
    The bill asks the Commission to STUDY those things. STUDY.

    One more time. STUDY. Not "require". Not "call for."

    If you mention the youtube video again, you fail. It was cute and you're obviously insecure about that woman's beaming sexuality making more of an impact than your revisionist reply.
    Revisionist is pretending this bill purports to "call for mandatory service from Americans", when in reality all it would do is create a panel that would study volunteerism and public service, and one of the many things they might study is whether mandatory service should be further explored. It's quite possible (likely even) that the commission will publish a report 20 months after its formation that specifically REJECTS the idea of mandatory public service.

    We don't know. That's the idea behind the bill - to see whether such a thing (as well as many other things) would be feasible or desireable.

    Instead of getting your information from a woman with "beaming sexuality", you should read the text of the bill. Sure, it's not as sexy, but plain text on a webpage can't blatantly lie to you while flashing cleavage.

    P.S. The video is talking about the GIVE Act. See the description to the right of it, if you can peel your eyes away for a second.
    "But it wasn't until he met his beautiful wife that he learned using logic and reason isn't enough. You have to be a dick to everyone who doesn't think like you." - South Park on Richard Dawkins

  8. #8
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    454
    Threads
    16
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Right... and I'm asking people how they feel about a bill calling for mandatory service from all Americans. I was the one who quoted you the text of the bill, cute girl aside, this is an issue Americans should be talking about. Obama and his cabinet have repeated over and over again that he wants a civil volunteer core; if people in America don't know about that, they should be informed. If it was one bill, but it isn't; it was in GIVE, its been in speeches, its been in the news. I didn't expect anyone to doubt the validity of this, seeing as its true. So stop replying, please, as a favor to other posters who don't need to be misinformed about the reality of this bill-- it is a plan in action!
    What conspiracy site do you come from? Where they claim bills that exist don't exist?

    Here is Rahm Emmanuel (Obama's favorite cabinet member) talking about policy on mandatory service:
    YouTube - Obama's Plan MANDATORY SERVICE

  9. #9
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    454
    Threads
    16
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    So, I've now quoted the bill, quoted Obama, quoted Rham Emmanuel, and I've got the cute girl video. If your next post asks me for any more proof I'll ignore it.

  10. #10
    Chancellor
    Guest
    Quote Quote by: MyApologies View Post
    So, I've now quoted the bill, quoted Obama, quoted Rham Emmanuel, and I've got the cute girl video. If your next post asks me for any more proof I'll ignore it.
    How about quoting the bill IN CONTEXT as Tivodan did. This particular line from the bill is a key to understanding what it entails:

    "(b) Specific Topics- In carrying out its general purpose under subsection (a), the Commission shall address and analyze the following specific topics"

    "Address and analyze" does not mean "call for."

    But let's set your idiotic misrepresentation of the bill aside for a moment and assume just for a moment that the Obama regime is calling for "mandatory volunteerism." First of all, as someone else here indicated, if it's mandatory then it isn't volunteerism. What it is, however, is indentured servitude and unconstitutional.

  11. #11
    Hellenist
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    7,488
    Threads
    446
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    53 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Techniquely I am a volunteer. Senior Companions are considered volunteers and they are paid a stipend. To be a Senior Companian, a person must be over 60 and low income. The low income qualifies us for other forms assistence, such as Section 8 housing and a food card, and the stipend in not counted as income. So my $2.65 an hour stipend is balanced out with the other forms of assistance. Senior Companions enable people to stay in their homes, and this saves the feds and states millions of dollars. This system is a bit complex but it works for me.

    Bill Clinton started Americore, which is geared for college students, who also work for a stipend, and do some kind of civic work. It is not so different from Vista, which is the domestic Peace Core- civic volunteer work for a stipend. I don't know why we need a new progrram, but it is not the beginning of anything new, nor the end of reality as we know it, if another program is started.

    At least one school in my area, requires stupents to do volunteer service. It is a good way to learn about the community and one's self. I am strongly in favor of this.

    Considering the high standard of living we enjoy, we should have a sense of civic duty, and not be selfish, self centered, ingrates. In the ancient past, people gave civic service instead of paying taxes. Rich nations can afford to use money for everything. When a nation has large deficits, it has greater reason to return to paying with civic service, instead of taxes.

    A good citizen is a person with something to give. It is better to promote giving than taking. Or do you like a capitalist welfare state where the poor are marginalized, and both the poor and rich are focused on what they can take?

  12. #12
    Igneous Magma
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    410
    Threads
    2
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The mandatory volunteerism is a bit of a contradiction in terms. I understand a commission will study the issue and I suppose in due course (years from now) they'll reach some conclusions. If the commission examines how to require mandatory public service and the opportunities for volunteerism, I'd expect they'd cover the mandatory/volunteer issue.

    Its not the same thing for a person to do something (without compensation) because he is required to, as it is for him to do it just because he chooses to help. If the commission concludes it is a good idea to compell all "able young people" (high schoolers?) to do some public service, I'd expect the contributions from volunteers to be more valuable -and to substantially diminish.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •