> But the fact is that the military is more or less a cross-section
> of American society. Slightly poorer than average, slightly
> darker, but not all that much so. And, it seems, better educated
> than average. I know it was a Heritage guy that ran the numbers,
> but until you can find some actual fault with them, you don't
> really have much to say.
I intend to post a criticism of the Heritage Foundation article to MRZine sometime soon (maybe someone will submit one before I do it and save my time), but I don't think that the HF study is the last word on the matter. I've already mentioned one caveat about the data and suggested alternative interpretations of the data given by the HF.
Here's another note of caution. When liberals like Charles Rangel and leftists speak of the rich not sharing the burden of the Iraq and Afghan Wars, they aren't thinking of the military as a whole (notwithstanding imprecise remarks made by some of them) -- in their minds are images of grunts (below the level of NCOs) in combat zones in Iraq and Afghanistan, who are a relatively small portion of the military. So, stats about the military as a whole are off the mark if they are offered by way of rebutting their charge.
About 15% of the US military personnel are officers (at <http:// www.bls.gov/oco/ocos249.htm>). And 40% of the military personnel are not war-fighters (and many of the war-fighters are stationed outside war zones besides). There are a myriad of occupations in the military that must be filled (a <http://www.bls.gov/oco/ ocos249.htm>). If the military as a whole looks like a slightly poorer, slightly darker cross-section of working America, that is because the military is like a giant multinational, some of whose employees are assembly-line workers, others are foremen, others are engineers, others are salesmen, others are company doctors, others are managers, etc., etc.
John wrote:
> I'm also hardly impressed by this habit of yours (and of Yoshie and
> Carrol in a different vein, as well as many others on this list) of
> repeating things that we all already know as if they were a special
> insight of yours.
Whoa, John, when you are shooting, aim straight, and don't exaggerate collateral damage. :->
Yoshie Furuhashi <http://montages.blogspot.com> <http://monthlyreview.org> <http://mrzine.org>