[lbo-talk] The Working-Poor Draft

[Yoshie Furuhashi]

> I just did what I should have before sending the article - visited
> the Heritage website for the original study
> <http://www.heritage.org/Research/NationalSecurity/cda05-08.cfm>.
> Turns out there's plenty there, starting with an interesting
> comparison of their work with that of a widely cited National
> Priorities Project paper. The NPP paper foregrounds the top 20
> counties, which are mostly poor and rural
> <http://nationalpriorities.org/index.php? 
> option=com_content&task=view&id=177&Itemid=107>,
> and produces misleading results, as the Heritage gang rightly points
> out <http://www.heritage.org/Research/NationalSecurity/wm922.cfm>.
> The Heritage study uses three-digit zip codes. NPP's broader measure,
> which uses average zip code incomes, shows the $25,000-50,000 range
> (roughly the second and third income quintiles) over-represented and
> others under-rep'd
> <http://nationalpriorities.org/index.php? 
> option=com_content&task=view&id=179&Itemid=107>.
> Heritage, which uses first-three-Zip-digit data, finds the lowest
> income quintile under-rep'd (15% of recruits), the next slightly
> under 20%, and the top three slightly over 20%. Urban areas are
> under-rep'd, and rural ones over - but not poor rural areas. And
> since most of the pop lives in metro areas, most recruits come from
> metro areas, not the sticks. The South is over-rep'd, New England
> under (big surprise). Recruits are more educated than the general
> pop. Racial/ethnic mix mirrors general pop.
>
> Without tearing the thing apart, the Heritage study looks serious,
> unlike their economic freedom work. In any case, it really looks like
> the poverty draft argument should be retired.
>
> Doug

The volunteer military in the United States depends on the working- 
poor draft.  Rather than drafting the poorest of the poor (whose  
physical health is too poor, whose education too neglected, whose  
criminal record too extensive, whose attitudes too badass, etc.), the  
Pentagon preys on the sons and daughters of the working poor (those  
whose parents are relatively regularly employed, earn too much [the  
household income of $25,000-40,000 <http://www.heritage.org/Research/ 
NationalSecurity/loader.cfm?url=/commonspot/security/ 
getfile.cfm&PageID=85094>] to qualify for most or all forms of means- 
tested public assistance and need-based grants [cf. "Department of  
Education to Tighten Pell Grant Eligibility," <http://www.cnn.com/ 
2004/EDUCATION/12/23/pell.grants/>], etc., and yet too poor not to  
worry about paying bills, especially big-ticket items like health  
care and children's' college tuitions).

Yoshie Furuhashi
<http://montages.blogspot.com>
<http://monthlyreview.org>
<http://mrzine.org>