Reply #17: I like the idea, actually

[northzax]

and have long been a supporter of mandatory nationa service (before you ask, yes, I spent two years in Americorps) I believe that making all young people spend two years, or even one year, doing something in the service of the nation will do nothing but help the next generation build a spirit of community and national identity.

Let me expound on several reasons this will help:

1: it is the great leveler, there is no way out. Everyone, from a Bush to a Chavez, will spend time together. We will all have a common experience of some sort to build on. The children of the idle rich will have something in common with the children of sharecroppers and migrant labourer, and the children of lawyers and dentists.

2: it will give momentum to those people unfortunate enough to have started life in less than fortunate circumstances, the urban and rural poor especially. Too many young men and women have no incentive or drive to leave toxic neighborhoods and dedicate themselves to something.

3: It will help develop a generation that has spent time in the service of others, something too few people do today.

4: it will keep young men and women 'off the streets' and provide alternatives to negative lifestyles, be they running with a gang or blowing a trust fund on fine living.

5: it would provide a perfect opportunity for a 'clean start' for young people who had problems (perhaps legal or other) while teenagers, if you complete your national service honorably, we can wipethe slate and allow you to enter adulthood as a fully functioning member of society.

The first alternative would be military, but I see no real problem with providing alternatives such as Americorps or other civil service alternatives. In fact, I would love to see any real objections people have to this idea, and the reasonsings behind those objections.