Looking for help crafting a solid libertarian arguement against Obama's civilian service ideas

[badger]

An intelligent friend of mine (Stanford undergrad) who happens to be a pretty closed-minded, mainstream liberal, Obama-supporting kind of guy, recently got into a debate with me about Obama’s plans for gov’t mandated community service. For those who are unfamiliar, he plans to have middle and highschoolers submit to 50 hours of community service per year, and 100 hrs/year for college students, in exchange for a 4000$ handout to go towards tuition costs. From what I understand this is to be mandatory. Also, Obama has spoke of creating a civilian force, “just as strong, just as powerful, just as well funded” as the US military, to be utilized in the capacity of homeland security. Its obviously pretty nasty stuff from a liberty-minded viewpoint.

Here is his latest response:

"the point is that we want more community participation right, in a general sense? a healthy society has engaged citizens. the government can encourage that, by having programs that give funding and opportunities to those who want it, which he was basically saying he would expand.

and it’s not ‘requiring students to volunteer’, it’s called ‘service-learning’ because it’s about exposing students to what engagement in society is like. we require students to learn about a host of things, so why not that too? and the causes of high school dropouts are many and varied and can guarantee that they are much bigger and more complicated than service-learning requirements. for the students who are too lazy to do some unpaid work outside of school - well sucks to be them, just as much as it sucks to be the kids with the attitude who refuse to do homework and go to class and wind up failing.

and you also missed my point about participation: it’s a democracy - would you rather people don’t pay attention, don’t vote, don’t engage in the process, in society?

and the sense I’ve gotten from when I’ve heard Obama (not omamba) talk about the college tax credit (despite what it says on the website about ‘requiring’) was that it would be money for those willing to put in the service time, in which case it would just be a job and would not cause colleges to raise tuition. it’s called a ‘tax credit’ for that reason. I don’t think he would force it on all college students, because you’re right - that wouldn’t make economic sense.

Obama comes from a background of engaging with the community, he wants people to be able to do more of it, and wherever you got that quote, the real question is about what specifics he’s laid out, and none of them seem to be about forcing scads of people into working on things they don’t want to. they’re all opportunities that people can take if they want, or they’re about educating students about engagement and participation (which already happens).

it seems like you’re jumping to big conclusions based on one quote. it’s like when people assume assuming obama’s going to completely appease all of iran’s wishes when they hear he wants to talk to them.

I don’t know. that’s my take on it all at least."

How can I soundly take this argument apart? I mostly just want him to rethink his beliefs, because while he may be very bright, he seems to lack whatever quality it is which allows people to question their sense of reality. For example, he graduated #1 in our high school class and it seems to me his greatest weakness is the inability to conceive that he may be wrong about something.

I would greatly appreciate it if you could help me, help him!

[nje5019]

Interestingly enough, sometime in the last 48 hours the word ‘required’ was removed from Obama’s website where he mentions community service. So either it was a typo that was fixed, or they’re hiding/modifying their original plans because of the internet uproar, or they just worded it poorly in the beginning and then fixed it.

[thebob]

It’s ..aehm… slavery?

Edit: In fact you can easily rewrite his “argument” to defend slavery. What is fundamentaly wrong is that he has no idea about how society functions or about economics or ethics. For example his idea that you are only active in the community if you volunteer for stuff (of course, stuff he likes).

And his biggest problem is that he is an empathy-lacking technocrat.

[Kakugo]

I’ll try to help you out a tiny bit, though other more capable persons will surely pop up later.

First is the age-old argument against cohercion. You can pick your arguments from St. Thomas, the Locke vs Hume debate, a whole host of Mises and Rothbard works etc. This is not about preseving lives and private properties but forcing other persons to do what you deem good. Is there any difference from conscription or slavery?

Second is the concept of democracy itself. We are all taught that majority rules and the rest must follow. But did 50% plus one of the voting students express the desire of being used as cheap manpower and to being indoctrinated to the joys of Socialism? Will the students be allowed to have the final word on the matter or will they just be told to follow orders or else?

Third is how this cheap manpower will be used: who will decide where the resources are needed? Who will decide how much “tuition money” each student will be given? It’s the problem when the State steps in to rape a free society and ita has already been covered by much more capable persons than myself.

Fourth is how this will be funded? Like many politicians Obama is either uncapable to understand the simple mechanism of “you must not spend more than you have” or he thinks that the Fed can simply print all the money he needs or he just doesn’t care. He either needs to cut expenses somewhere else or find “alternative” funding. Which means extorting money by taxation, debt or inflation from the usual suspects. This has already been covered too.

Fifth is the paranoid inside me coming to the surface. I’ve already heard more than one rumor that the US are seriously considering reinstating the draft. Who guarantees us that this isn’t simply a general rehersal for the time when young US “citizens” (who are not still old enough to legally buy a beer in most states) will be sent kicking and screaming to pump some lead into some young foreign “citizens”?

[Solomon]

we require students to learn about a host of things, so why not that too?

Ha! Well this is really what it all comes down to, isn’t it? Either all state mandates are authoritative, since one thing legitimizes everything else, or none are.

[fakename]

@badger

]"the point is that we want more community participation right, in a general sense? a healthy society has engaged citizens. the government can encourage that, by having programs that give funding and opportunities to those who want it, which he was basically saying he would expand.

The question is whether or not there should be more community service. Firstly, this quote is question begging by calling that society which has community service healthy as a way of arguing that this service should be adopted. He basically says that this law should pass because it should. Also he believes that government is not just capable of providing things for the common good but is also the only thing that can. You should point out to him that in many things vital to the community (like private charity) the market provides them better.

@badger

and it’s not ‘requiring students to volunteer’, it’s called ‘service-learning’ because it’s about exposing students to what engagement in society is like. we require students to learn about a host of things, so why not that too? and the causes of high school dropouts are many and varied and can guarantee that they are much bigger and more complicated than service-learning requirements. for the students who are too lazy to do some unpaid work outside of school - well sucks to be them, just as much as it sucks to be the kids with the attitude who refuse to do homework and go to class and wind up failing.

The first part where he shifts definitions also assumes that this slavery really is service-learning and that therefore it is service-learning. As for learning about things -why not “encourage” students to learn about multicultural diversity or gay people, or cartoons -but then we already do all those worthless things. The point is that learning should at least be economically efficient and allocate scarce time and manpower to learning things that are utility maximizing. I don’t know what his point is about lazy kids and stuff.

@badger

and you also missed my point about participation: it’s a democracy - would you rather people don’t pay attention, don’t vote, don’t engage in the process, in society?

This is the only logical appeal in the whole argument so far. But even so it is false because we already know that is the workings of democracy that make it harder for people to vote or for their votes to matter anyways (the marginal value of a vote is almost zero and decreases with the increase in the electorate and the signalling of votes always gives all power to the median voter).

@badger

and the sense I’ve gotten from when I’ve heard Obama (not omamba) talk about the college tax credit (despite what it says on the website about ‘requiring’) was that it would be money for those willing to put in the service time, in which case it would just be a job and would not cause colleges to raise tuition. it’s called a ‘tax credit’ for that reason. I don’t think he would force it on all college students, because you’re right - that wouldn’t make economic sense.

Point out how this whole salary system is identical to any federal bureaucracy and how federal bureaucracies -because they can’t calculate -are not dependable stewards to the goals of a charitable organization.

[Jon_Irenicus]

Is he very bright? I did not get it from the OP.

-Jon

[badger]

Yes, depending on how you define it. He got close to perfect on the SAT and got into Stanford. Basically he is very smart in the realms where we’re “allowed” to be smart. I consider being able to break out of that box an essential part of intelligence, however. He would be a great person to have on the side of liberty.

[badger]

My response so far, I haven’t sent it to him yet:

Hey thanks for the response, I had to leave our debate prematurely because I had to work last night (gotta make that paycheck so ¼ of it can go to the gov. to keep society afloat!)

I’ll try my best to address the points you’ve made:

‘Community participation’ is too vague to argue about, so let me assume what one might define it as: something like cleaning up a park, planting trees by a highway, restoring wetlands, providing Robinwood kids with some type of healthy recreation so they aren’t out doing drugs, etc. These services, as well as the services of a janitor, landscaper, green architect, engineer, etc. are being carried out continually every day, and new services will arise according to people’s needs and demands. Most services are done in exchange for money, in terms that are voluntary and mutually beneficial. Still yet, many services are done out of the goodness of people’s hearts for no compensation, ie charity and volunteering. So should there be more ‘community participation’? I think so. You’re begging the question though that government is the only thing that can provide for the common good, therefore there should be more government-mandated service to ‘encourage’ people to participate. I’m arguing that not only is this coercive, but that the market can provide services and common good far better than any government can.

Call it ‘service-learning’ if you like thinking in euphemisms. The reality is we’re required to do it in order to graduate. You claim, “we require students to learn about a host of things, so why not that too?” So all state decrees are legitimate simply because the first decree issued legitimizes each that follow? That’s a very dangerous system of government you’re talking about.

Fact is, America is NOT a democracy, the word is never uttered in the constitution, nor the declaration, and the founders despised it. We are a constitutional republic with a democratic process that serves as one check out of many which restrain the government from abusing us. That is what was unique about the principles behind the constitution; they threw the chains and shackles upon the government, not the people. Sadly you ask 100 people on the street what form of government we have, 99 will tell you a democracy. But its not their fault, they were required to learn it in 3rd grade!

Having people conscious and engaged in finding truth, having them engaged in society’s direction, I do think is essential to a healthy society… that being said I believe that each person should determine these things how he sees fit. And if he doesn’t want to participate, his individual liberty is guaranteed, and is not subject to a vote of 51% to 49%. But non-participation is his choice. And perhaps for good reason, because some people just want to live their lives and be left alone as lame as that sounds. Forcing people to participate will only make them despise your efforts, and will take away from the bright people who actually have the capacity to act for the benefit of society.

Where will the money for 4000$ checks come from? Where will the money for any of this come from? Either Obama doesn’t understand that you cannot spend what you do not have, or he thinks we can just print whatever money we need. Maybe he’ll cut the Department of Education in order to pay for the new Civilian Homeland Security Force…or he could tax, or borrow, but those won’t happen, he’ll have to simply inflate the currency.

He spoke of a “just as well funded” force as the military in one of his speeches. Easy enough to find it on youtube.

Maybe I would be jumping to huge conclusions if this one quote were entirely out of context with the whole of Obama’s career. Unfortunately, it makes perfect sense for him given the rest of what he believes.

[badger]

bumpage

[billott1]

Aside from the slavery arguments. I have a practical/technical argument against doing these things. I have personal experience with US volunteer soldiers and the conscripted soldiers of other countries. I have a strong preference for those that choose to be in the armed forces over those who do not want to be there.

The people who dream these programs up miss this. Do you want old folks or children to “helped” by people who do not want to be doing it? What message is this sending?

[PMix]

My biggest problem with Obama’s plan is that it is offering $4000 to college students for only 100 hours of work. In effect it is not volunteering at all. It’s a job that pays $40 an hour. Considering that is a higher pay rate than almost any just about any undergrad will make after graduation, why would anyone not participate? Even those students from wealthy backgrounds who don’t need the money for tution could probably convince their parents to give them the money in cash in exchange for helping to offset the costs of tuition. This wouldn’t be a volunteer program, this would be a job.

When you look at it from that perspective, I think it becomes pretty easy to refute from an economic perspective. How does having the government overpay students to perform community service help anything? Especially in light of the state of the economy and fiscal situation of the government. It makes so much more sense just to give away the money to students based on financial need and let students spend their time working real jobs actually providing needed goods and services to help grow the economy.

[liberty_student]

@PMix

My biggest problem with Obama’s plan is that it is offering $4000 to college students for only 100 hours of work. In effect it is not volunteering at all. It’s a job that pays $40 an hour. Considering that is a higher pay rate than almost any just about any undergrad will make after graduation, why would anyone not participate? Even those students from wealthy backgrounds who don’t need the money for tution could probably convince their parents to give them the money in cash in exchange for helping to offset the costs of tuition. This wouldn’t be a volunteer program, this would be a job.

This is a good point. There are tons of unemployed people, who can provide the 100 hours of service, assuredly for a much lower cost, and potentially a higher level of expertise than the students. While it’s great to throw money at kids, can it be justified when millions of Americans are on foodstamps or losing their jobs?

The question he should be answering is, if Obama believes in social justice, why is he bailing out students, while taking jobs from the market? Isn’t he choosing one group, or rather favouring one group over another? If we’re all equal, then what he is doing is completely unjust.

Your friend sounds like a tough nut to crack. My experience has been, this will go two ways. You’ll either win, or you will lose the friend. Because your arguments will disturb him enough to either reject his preconceived ideas, or to reject your friendship and go into denial.

That is why these days, I don’t try to hit homeruns. I just drop one or two indisputable facts each time I communicate with the person. The longer you can draw it out, the better the chance you have of a lightbulb coming on in his head and eureka, his eyes are open. But if you come hard and fast, he might reject the ideas and arguments before giving them due consideration.

My mostly copper 2 cents, now worth around $0.035

[Daniel_J_Sanchez]

More and more, we are showing that children our to an ever greater degree, controllable by the state. The new encroachments are always justified using the old encroachments. “Compulsory high school is not so bad; we already have compulsory elementary school”. Then “compulsory service is not so bad; we already have compulsory high school”. Is it so hard to imagine that “compulsory service” becoming gradually more specific until it becomes indoctrination that is even more overt than what we have now?

[Richard]

“the point is that we…”

who exactly is we?

a healthy society has engaged citizens.

ask him what they need to be engaged in…

it’s called ‘service-learning’

sounds like an internship to me…

we require students to learn about a host of things,

ever see the results of the U.S. math and reading tests? there’s very little learning going on

and the causes of high school dropouts are many and varied and can guarantee that they are much bigger and more complicated than service-learning requirements.

if they are “bigger and more complicated” than service-learning, how is service-learning going to change that?

for the students who are too lazy to do some unpaid work outside of school - well sucks to be them

not sure the meaning of this sentence but if this is his actual writing you might want to rethink your opinion on his intelligence

just as much as it sucks to be the kids with the attitude who refuse to do homework and go to class and wind up failing.

so the same kids who refuse to do work while IN school are expected to accomplish something OUT of school?

and you also missed my point about participation: it’s a democracy - would you rather people don’t pay attention, don’t vote, don’t engage in the process, in society?

Seeing as how this is a “democracy” do they have the right to not participate? He might want to rethink his point. And isn’t it Third World dictatorships that have 100% voter turnout?

in which case it would just be a job

it’s either a “job” or it’s “volunteering,” it can’t be both.

I don’t think he would force it on all college students,

seems not thinking is the root of the problem here…

that wouldn’t make economic sense.

it also doesn’t make economic sense to have Jennifer Granholm, Governor of Michigan on your economic transition team. But that’s a topic for another discussion.

Obama comes from a background of engaging with the community

I have yet to hear anybody, including Obama, say exactly how he “engaged” the community. And considering his 'hood of South Side Chicago is rampant with crime, ruin and poverty, he probably doesn’t want that to come out anyway. And furthermore, we are to trust this “community organizer” to “change” the country when his own community is a basket case?

he wants people to be able to do more of it

Insert your favorite argument against kings and dictators here…

they’re all opportunities that people can take if they want, or they’re about educating students about engagement and participation (which already happens).

Once again, these are vague terms of “engagement and participation” that have no meaning…or no meaning Obama wants made to the public.