Obama Proposes *Mandatory* Community Service

[Sisyphus]

Just curious, though, but how do you know so much about this program? How do you know I wouldn't receive what it says? How do you know having a job would make me ineligible (what be the rationale for that?)? How do you know what will and will not count as "community service?" It seems like you're making an awful lot of assumptions.

 

And no, he's not kidding, but don't assume the worst. The details have already changed several times in the last few days in response to feedback.

[waitforufo]

I know because I have been paying taxes for nearly three decades. I have filled out countless tax forms and extra schedules just to find out "no sorry you don't qualify." Then, when I complain about the wasted effort to friends and family, they all say "join the club."

 

Look, you said you have a job. Trust me, don't get your hopes up too much about qualifying for any of Obama's tax credits. If you have a job, you are one of those people with abilities that supplies money to people with needs. Don't consider that community service you gready bastard.

 

But don't worry Boxer, they will put you in a nice comfortable pasture one day.

 

And no, he's not kidding, but don't assume the worst. The details have already changed several times in the last few days in response to feedback.

 

Well of course they are still changing it. They will continue to change it until no one qualifies for money. But they won't drop the mandatory service requirement.

Edited November 11, 2008 by waitforufo
multiple post merged

[tvp45]

I, like most young men my age, was required to perform 17,500 hours of community service, the alternative being an exercise camp in Kansas or foreign travel. We thought it our patriotic duty. Now I learn that was socialism! And, we didn't even get off for May Day. Darn!

[Phi for All]

I know because I have been paying taxes for nearly three decades. I have filled out countless tax forms and extra schedules just to find out "no sorry you don't qualify." Then, when I complain about the wasted effort to friends and family, they all say "join the club."

Assuming something will be the same because it's been that way before is a poor basis for the definitive statements you've made.

[Mr Skeptic]

I, like most young men my age, was required to perform 17,500 hours of community service, the alternative being an exercise camp in Kansas or foreign travel. We thought it our patriotic duty. Now I learn that was socialism! And, we didn't even get off for May Day. Darn!

 

It's patriotic when we are talking about Republicans, and socialist when talking about Democrats.

[big314mp]

I, like most young men my age, was required to perform 17,500 hours of community service, the alternative being an exercise camp in Kansas or foreign travel. We thought it our patriotic duty. Now I learn that was socialism! And, we didn't even get off for May Day. Darn!

 

17500 hours = ~2 years.

 

I'm guessing you were deployed. Out of curiosity, where and when?

[Pangloss]

If it is "credit" then it is a massive amount of money' date=' btw. I don't know how many high school + college students there are in this country, but it's a pretty honkin' huge number. That'd be up in bailout territory.[/quote']

 

According to Obama's web site he expects the program to cost $10 billion.

 

The tax credit is only for college students, not high school students.

 

Thanks for the info.

 

Unfortunately even with the qualification it still sounds a lot steeper than 10 bills. According to this 2006 US Census report, there are about 17 million undergrad students in the US, which would be $68 billion if all of them tapped in (why wouldn't they?). That's a lot of money to take off the "income" side of the books right now, though I'd still probably sign off on it myself.

 

http://www.census.gov/prod/2008pubs/p20-559.pdf

(warning: PDF)

 

Swansont, why would you assume that it will replace existing deductions? I don't see why it would, and there's no indication that it would (that I'm aware of).

Edited November 11, 2008 by Pangloss

[JohnB]

Assuming something will be the same because it's been that way before is a poor basis for the definitive statements you've made.

Why would you expect a politician to act differently from all the other politicians?

 

Every time I hear of one of these programs I think of the comedian Billy Russell. In one of his routines "On Behalf of the Working Classes" he said regarding politicians.

What do they do for the working man? What do they do? Promise him everything, give him nothing and before he gets it, they take it orf him.

And that was in the 1930s.

 

From a political reality POV, if the figure looks like it's going to head for $68 Billion as the previous post suggests it might, then you will see ever increasing restrictions placed on eligibility. This will be done to keep the expected total near Obamas estimate so he will look "Financially Responsible".

 

To allow the cost to blow out will only be handing ammunition to his opponents.

 

I'd be pleasantly surprised if waitforufo is wrong, but his prediction is a relatively accurate picture of what happens to all of this type of program, regardless of political party or nation.

[swansont]

Swansont, why would you assume that it will replace existing deductions? I don't see why it would, and there's no indication that it would (that I'm aware of).

 

If they didn't, and you could apply all deductions and credits, then you could get something like $8500 to attend a year of community college, where tuition is usually below $4000. And that's insane. I'm assuming you will be limited to an either/or situation. If it isn't, then hell, I may enroll in a night-school class.

[Phi for All]

I'd be pleasantly surprised if waitforufo is wrong, but his prediction is a relatively accurate picture of what happens to all of this type of program, regardless of political party or nation.

If he'd stated it as a prediction or a probability I wouldn't have said a thing.

[npts2020]

If this is how you wish to frame the issue, then you clearly find fault in the arguments presented by swansont, me, and others in this thread.

 

Please detail the faults you find in our arguments.

 

I am not finding fault with your arguments per se, merely attempting to point out that teaching capitalism and socialism at the same time to the same people seems contradictory. On the one hand you are telling young people that you live in a capitalist society where the measure of your person is how much wealth you accumulate. Then at the same time you are telling them that society would be better off if the same individual does things for reasons other than accumulating wealth. How are these very different views reconciled?

[waitforufo]

Thanks for the info.

Unfortunately even with the qualification it still sounds a lot steeper than 10 bills. According to this 2006 US Census report, there are about 17 million undergrad students in the US, which would be $68 billion if all of them tapped in (why wouldn't they?). That's a lot of money to take off the "income" side of the books right now, though I'd still probably sign off on it myself.

 

Why wouldn't they??? This will be mandatory.

 

I can just see it now. Tax payers giving four grand to Yale frat boys with trust funds for doing a week of community service at a fat camp for rich kids in the Adirondacks. Lets all sing kumbaya.

[Pangloss]

If they didn't, and you could apply all deductions and credits, then you could get something like $8500 to attend a year of community college, where tuition is usually below $4000. And that's insane. I'm assuming you will be limited to an either/or situation. If it isn't, then hell, I may enroll in a night-school class.

 

I'd need to see the math on that. Deductions are removals from your taxable income, not straight-out returns via check. They tend to sound large but when you put them down on paper they can be quite small.

 

If you run across any analysis on this please pass it along.

[swansont]

I'd need to see the math on that. Deductions are removals from your taxable income, not straight-out returns via check. They tend to sound large but when you put them down on paper they can be quite small.

 

If you run across any analysis on this please pass it along.

 

The deduction is up to $4000, and is "above-the-line," i.e. in addition to your itemized or standard deduction, according to the link I had provided. So can be about $1000 off your tax bill if you qualify. Then there are the two tax credits.

 

Anyway, I looked at the IRS pub, and the current deductions/exemptions cannot be taken simultaneously. Why would the new one be any different?

[Pangloss]

Well that would certainly cost a lot more, if it was. It'll be interesting to see how that plays out.

 

I wonder if that debate will even enter public awareness, given some of the massive issues on the agenda at the moment. I mean, we're only talking about a hundred billion dollars or so. Not even "real money."

[ParanoiA]

Hence' date=' we supplement their efforts. People who commit crimes often are given community service as part of their punishment. There are a lot crimes committed, and thousands and thousands of hours of community service assigned. Yet our municipal workers still have jobs, and are even under staffed and over worked at that.

 

 

Adding more people to the "task force" won't take their job away from them, it will make it easier, less taboo, and bring our communities into a better place since the work to be done won't seem so overwhelming and never ending.[/quote']

 

Won't people have to wonder why they're being required to do community service...like criminals? Isn't this one of those things where we color it up with language to hide the true meaning of what we're doing?

 

Criminals: This is your punishment.

Students: This is your stewardship.

 

Sorry guys, you can do all the philosophical acrobats you want, but using force to promote altruism is like spreading freedom in Iraq with tanks and bombs. Your flowery language is nowhere in sight when that school kid is bent with resentment because he was forced to work for the city like a criminal. What a great first impression coersion can be...

 

Why is persuasion not good enough? Why is control so important? You realize, that when you use force, then force will always be required to maintain it right? Whereas persuasion works long after you're gone, whether you're paying attention or not. The best solution to abiding law is for one to not desire breaking it in the first place. The same can be said of convincing people to do right. If they desire it, you will not need any Obama law to make them do it - so teach them, convince them. Force will not achieve that.

[iNow]

Sorry guys, you can do all the philosophical acrobats you want, but using force to promote altruism is like spreading freedom in Iraq with tanks and bombs. Your flowery language is nowhere in sight when that school kid is bent with resentment because he was forced to work for the city like a criminal. What a great first impression coersion can be...

 

Why is persuasion not good enough? Why is control so important? You realize, that when you use force, then force will always be required to maintain it right? Whereas persuasion works long after you're gone, whether you're paying attention or not. The best solution to abiding law is for one to not desire breaking it in the first place. The same can be said of convincing people to do right. If they desire it, you will not need any Obama law to make them do it - so teach them, convince them. Force will not achieve that.

 

As I said a page ago... who said ANYTHING about force? The way you are choosing to frame this issue is extreme in the maximum possible way.

 

What specific details in the plan encourage your persistent use of the word "force" and "coercion?"

 

I'd like to know, as I'm just not seeing it, and I'm sure there is a basis for your point, but I'm not sure it's as profound as you make it out to be.

[swansont]

Won't people have to wonder why they're being required to do community service...like criminals? Isn't this one of those things where we color it up with language to hide the true meaning of what we're doing?

 

Or we color it with language to spin it the way we want. You could have said "… like Boy Scouts," or "… like fraternity/sorority members"

 

—————

 

There was a time when people in the US did service for their country, as tvp45 has mentioned. You got compensation, but it was less — possibly far less — than what you might get for two years at a job in the "real world." Other people have made, and continue to make significant sacrifices to allow people of today to enjoy what they have. The amount of squawking about requiring community service, not military service, and certainly not two years' worth, is just sad, IMO.

[ParanoiA]

As I said a page ago... who said ANYTHING about force? The way you are choosing to frame this issue is extreme in the maximum possible way.

 

What specific details in the plan encourage your persistent use of the word "force" and "coercion?"

 

I'd like to know, as I'm just not seeing it, and I'm sure there is a basis for your point, but I'm not sure it's as profound as you make it out to be.

 

Well, either I misread this thread (and the *mandatory* in the title) from the outset or the verbiage in the link has changed. It now says:

 

Obama will call on citizens of all ages to serve America, by setting a goal that all middle school and high school students do 50 hours of community service a year and by developing a plan so that all college students who conduct 100 hours of community service receive a universal and fully refundable tax credit ensuring that the first $4,000 of their college education is completely free.

 

I don't see any force in any of that. That sounds like good ole persuasion to me. I like it. I would have done it too as I had a hard time paying for my community college.

 

At any rate, ignore my previous post please. And I apologize for not keeping up.

 

There was a time when people in the US did service for their country, as tvp45 has mentioned. You got compensation, but it was less — possibly far less — than what you might get for two years at a job in the "real world." Other people have made, and continue to make significant sacrifices to allow people of today to enjoy what they have. The amount of squawking about requiring community service, not military service, and certainly not two years' worth, is just sad, IMO.

 

The more you centralize and corporatize, the more you disengage from the common citizen. I don't feel like I belong to a city. I belong to a machine. I'm processed. I'm a number. A large portion of my check is taken every two weeks to feed the machine, part of that goes to needy people. Then I go home and tell my kids "no" to most everything they ask since I don't have any money left.

 

I blame this lack of initiative to help the community on this disconnect with the common man. The state takes so much of our money - and we all know people who receive this money - that we have no inclination to give even more.

 

Yeah, there was a time when people in the US did service for their country and it was a time when they had the capacity to do it, and for a country they were proud of.

[Pangloss]

Oh wow, you're right, the verbiage did change. LOL!

 

I know why -- Obama's been lurking here at SFN. That must be it. Good job, guys!

[Saryctos]

I blame this lack of initiative to help the community on this disconnect with the common man. The state takes so much of our money - and we all know people who receive this money - that we have no inclination to give even more.

 

IIRC there was a study showing that tax cuts lead to increases in charitable giving =)

[swansont]

IIRC there was a study showing that tax cuts lead to increases in charitable giving =)

 

OTOH, it's been my observation that people who make more money generally tend to rank higher on the cheapskate scale.

[ParanoiA]

I wonder how Bill Gate's philanthropy measures up to our federal government's.

[Pangloss]

Well if you buy the concept that entitlement = philanthropy then he's a pretty poor comparison. He's given away, what, a billion dollars? We give away a couple trillion a year. But of course there's another side to that argument.

[big314mp]

Well if you buy the concept that entitlement = philanthropy then he's a pretty poor comparison. He's given away, what, a billion dollars? We give away a couple trillion a year. But of course there's another side to that argument.

 

I was thinking Warren Buffet would beat the federal government.

 

Especially since he is giving away money that he actually has

 

And does the bailout count as charity?