The unwilling return to conscription because AVF supposedly has too few college graduates or too many African Americans. How to decide which of volunteers to turn away is never addressed. today’s today’s conscripts who replace the willing volunteers would bear a tax that no one bears in an AVF. And because these conscripts do not necessarily perform better than the volunteers they displace, this tax yields no Because the conscripts are part of society, the tax they pay is simply a “revenue.” waste to the country as a whole. And some who are qualified and would like to enlist are denied and forced into jobs for which they are less well suited A draft also encourages the or that offer less opportunity. government to misuse resources. more national Because draftees and other junior personnel seem cheaper than they actually are, the government may “buy” defense than it should, and will certainly use people, especially high-skilled individuals and junior personnel, in greater numbers than is efficient. This means that a given amount of national defense is more costly to the country than it need be. The Draft increases defense spending by billions - the total force must be larger and draftees have shorter enlistment periods Jehn, 2008 VP for Government Programs at Cray Inc. – [Christopher, Vice president for government programs at Cray Inc. He served as the assistant secretary of defense for force management and personnel from 1989 to 1993, and was assistant director for national security of the Congressional Budget Office from 1998 to 2001, The concise Encyclopedia of Economics: Conscription, Economics Library, July 5, 2016, ] [Premier] U.S. General Accounting Office studied the effects of reinstituting conscription In 1988, for example, the (GAO) and concluded that an equally effective force under a draft would be more costly, even in a narrow budget sense, than the existing force. With a draft, a larger total force would be needed because draftees serve a shorter initial enlistment period than volunteers. Therefore, a today’s larger fraction of the force would be involved in overhead activities such as training, supervising less-experienced personnel, The GAO estimated that these activities would add more than four billion and traveling to a first assignment. dollars per year (in 2003 dollars) to the defense budget.
return to conscription because today’s AVF supposedly has too few college graduates or too many African Americans. How to decide which of today’s volunteers to turn away is never addressed. The unwilling conscripts who replace the willing volunteers would bear a tax that no one bears in an AVF. And because these conscripts do not necessarily perform better than the volunteers they displace, this tax yields no “revenue.” Because the conscripts are part of society, the tax they pay is simply a waste to the country as a whole. And some who are qualified and would like to enlist are denied and forced into jobs for which they are less well suited or that offer less opportunity. A draft also encourages the government to misuse resources. Because draftees and other junior personnel seem cheaper than they actually are, the government may “buy” more national defense than it should, and will certainly use people, especially high-skilled individuals and junior personnel, in greater numbers than is efficient. This means that a given amount of national defense is more costly to the country than it need be. The Draft increases defense spending by billions - the total force must be larger and draftees have shorter enlistment periods Jehn, 2008 – VP for Government Programs at Cray Inc. [Christopher, Vice president for government programs at Cray Inc. He served as the assistant secretary of defense for force management and personnel from 1989 to 1993, and was assistant director for national security of the Congressional Budget Office from 1998 to 2001, The concise Encyclopedia of Economics: Conscription, Economics Library, July 5, 2016, ] [Premier] In 1988, for example, the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) studied the effects of reinstituting conscription and concluded that an equally effective force under a draft would be more costly, even in a narrow budget sense, than the existing force. With a draft, a larger total force would be needed because draftees serve a shorter initial enlistment period than today’s volunteers. Therefore, a larger fraction of the force would be involved in overhead activities such as training, supervising less-experienced personnel, and traveling to a first assignment. The GAO estimated that these activities would add more than four billion dollars per year (in 2003 dollars) to the defense budget.
Premier-Debate-Brief-SO17.docx