Interesting stats on who actually serves in our Army versus who some like to say serve. from WSJ
"Just last week, two well-educated and well-known writer acquaintances of mine remarked in passing on the "fact" that those who serve in the U.S. military typically have no other career options. America's soldiers, they said, were poor and black.
They don't mean this to denigrate their service—no, they mean it as a critique of American society, which turns its unemployed into cannon fodder. Especially today with high unemployment, the charge goes, hapless youths we fail to educate are embarking on a one-way trip to Afghanistan.
These allegations—most frequently leveled at the Army, the military's biggest service and the one with the highest casualty rate—are false. "
'In 2008, using data provided by the Defense Department, the Heritage Foundation found that only 11% of enlisted military recruits in 2007 came from the poorest one-fifth, or quintile, of American neighborhoods (as of the 2000 Census), while 25% came from the wealthiest quintile. "The Link
So not only do the " rich" pay a much larger% of their income in fed taxes a much larger% of totsal fed taxes BUT they send a larger % of their own to serve in the Army.
I wonder
if you read the article you learn that whites are over represented in the Army to % of whites in population and blacks and Hispancs are underrepresented in our amry relative to % of total population.
This is ONLY interesting in relationship to how often people say there are a disportionate % of blacks in the Army. In fact I had a discussion with someone who said that very thing 2 weeks ago. he even used the phrase '"cannon fodder" speaking of the disproportinate number of blacks serving.
I know they said it about Viet Nam and I bet it wasn't true then either.
Some lies never die
"Just last week, two well-educated and well-known writer acquaintances of mine remarked in passing on the "fact" that those who serve in the U.S. military typically have no other career options. America's soldiers, they said, were poor and black.
They don't mean this to denigrate their service—no, they mean it as a critique of American society, which turns its unemployed into cannon fodder. Especially today with high unemployment, the charge goes, hapless youths we fail to educate are embarking on a one-way trip to Afghanistan.
These allegations—most frequently leveled at the Army, the military's biggest service and the one with the highest casualty rate—are false. "
'In 2008, using data provided by the Defense Department, the Heritage Foundation found that only 11% of enlisted military recruits in 2007 came from the poorest one-fifth, or quintile, of American neighborhoods (as of the 2000 Census), while 25% came from the wealthiest quintile. "The Link
So not only do the " rich" pay a much larger% of their income in fed taxes a much larger% of totsal fed taxes BUT they send a larger % of their own to serve in the Army.
I wonder
if you read the article you learn that whites are over represented in the Army to % of whites in population and blacks and Hispancs are underrepresented in our amry relative to % of total population.
This is ONLY interesting in relationship to how often people say there are a disportionate % of blacks in the Army. In fact I had a discussion with someone who said that very thing 2 weeks ago. he even used the phrase '"cannon fodder" speaking of the disproportinate number of blacks serving.
I know they said it about Viet Nam and I bet it wasn't true then either.
Some lies never die
