To think compulsory national service for young people could be helpful for many?

[Jane379]

The recent thread on benefits generational cycle got me thinking...could compulsory national service period help some young people, including ones like these?

Or would it make things worse?

Quite, and if we're going to do this, there should be major rewards at the end as described by a pp: preferential mortgage rates, university paid for, that kind of thing. If not, we're just exploiting our young people as cheap labour. And we have shafted them quite enough.

I said that you are not being unreasonable, but I remember my dad (27 years in the Army) saying “We don’t want the buggers” when it was suggested that unruly teenagers would benefit from National Service!

I’m from one of the countries listed previously that has military service and honestly I think you’re putting too much faith in it OP. It doesn’t really teach anyone much and is basically a “doss” year. You can defer up to around age 30 if you’re studying at Uni for undergrad / masters / phd and also if you live abroad and for a number of other reasons. As for the service, you can bribe your way to a “good” destination like the coast so you just spend your time sunbathing and drinking. Because it’s mandatory you get the worst of everything (accommodation / uniform etc) so for those who don’t have family money to pay for things it’s a bit rubbish.

Better pay them a good wage Taxis cost more at night and not everywhere has night buses.

im from a country where its mandatory so im for it.

Bus/ taxi times for travelling to and from a 12 hour night shift are more 'daytime' than for a day shift, so that arguement doesn't stand up.

We need state backed institutions to train trades people in areas like bricklaying, carpentry, plumbing, electrical, roofing etc. At the moment we rely on existing tradespeople taking on apprentices but existing tradespeople benefit from the shortage of supply because they can charge more.

Courses need to include basic business skills - learning how to use simple book keeping apps, basics of tax as a self employed trader.

Anyone going for large government infrastructure contracts or housing estates over 8 properties should be required to include a minimum number of training roles.

We also need more state support for industries like cement, glass, brick making, and timber. We end up very volatile to price shocks on these because we don't always produce enough of our own.

My shifts finshed at 3am when i had a night job. You do realise there is such a thing as split shifts right.

As long as it applies to everyone equally, yes, of course it would be a great idea.

With so many parents who fight relentlessly against their children growing up and getting any independence ever, it would be life saving for so many of those poor kids (how many threads do we need on refusing to allow a 17yo to spend a weekend home alone)

Level of anxiety would go right down.

Haven't read the full thread, so apologies if this has been said already.

The last 18 year olds were conscripted for National Service in 1960. So born about 1942.

I propose National Service should start with its supporters in the age groups that missed out last time. So supporters aged 80-83 first, then supporters in their 70s, and so on down the decades.

There's not a chance in hell it would apply to everyone equally.

nothing can be truly equal, not everybody will go to uni for the right relevant skils,

but as long as it's absolutely mandatory unless extreme medical reasons, then it would be a bonus. No one realistically expect the same treatment of favour that William and Harry had, but we know that.

And... there are lots of different shifts but adults need to work and manage to work, but your attitude of not expecting young adults to do so in a structured way that contributes to society just because taxi's cost money is ridiculous.

If your shifts are an issue, get yourself onto the union as a staffside rep or get in to management and change it. Night work still needs covering and there is no reason that young people can't be part of this.

They could also live in hospital accomodation or lodging near the hospital (or other place of work) as many young people have done for generations before.

It won't be that either.

There'll need to be exemptions for pregnancy, maternity and sole carers, for one thing. I don't know what you mean by an extreme medical reason, though that'd be fun finding out, but presumably the use of extreme means you envisage placement for those with non-extreme reasons. If you're not going to exempt them, this means the creation of placements that can accommodate the level of need, and some form of monitoring system.

The ones who don't fancy it and have options, be that a second passport or money, will just leave.

If you want to advocate for it despite the fact that it won't apply to everyone equally, go for it, but let us not pretend we could possibly implement anything like a universal system.

They could if we had sufficient hospital accommodation or cheap lodgings available, perhaps. Come back when that happens.

Conscription into the NHS, though, seems particularly foolish. The last thing we want is resentful people who've been forced to be there being up close and personal with the most vulnerable. Better to use the resources involved in managing them and making sure they dont kill anyone to train the ones who actually want to do it!

It was when i HAD a night job as i said quite clearly People have a weird habit on here of talking in the present tense when the previous poster whom they have quoted was clearly talking in the past tense

Last time i checked the NHS is not a charity So why should it be part of ppl doing NS there

The last 18 year olds were conscripted for National Service in 1960. So born about 1942.

Even my Dad born just before end of second world war missed it.

It is the kind of thing FIL would say - he's never had to do it - and it won't occur to him it would add another year or two on top of education before full time proper career jobs can get started - and then thanks to uni debts and house prices his DGC will be even older than us reaching milestones.

I image through money or connections any advantages positions will be snapped up by the more privilaged so it will breed resentment. Plus it will cost money to run and possible put straing on insitutions having to dela with teens truning up every 12 months needing training and work to do.

There are scheme where I am - welsh gov run targeted at school leavers to help prevent teens ending up as neets - think it goes up to 25. Targeted at teens/young people who are most likely to need the help.

So we can't have conscription into the military because some people are to kind and caring and we can't have conscription into the NHS because some people aren't kind and caring, so that's why you have both and other options inbetween (Also there are plenty of ex military who are fantastic HCPs).

It's all so defeatest. Lets just let young people languish and claim UC then.

You can have my children when the First Battalion of the Westminster Rifles (sons and daughters of politicians, peers, senior civil servants, and the senior judiciary company) are on their way to Iran, Ukraine or wherever.

Or... we could come up with some ideas that aren't such obvious shit. It's actually pretty defeatist to think we have a binary choice between spunking a load of resources on an unworkable idea and UC all round.

And your ex military HCPs point isn't comparable because these are people who chose to be in both, not a random adolescent who got forced against their wishes and because they couldn't get out of it.

"I think national service is a positive thing.

It works well in other countries, and teaches young people discipline, resilience, teamwork and respect.

I think that’s a great thing for all youths, including SEN."

Can you share a list of the countries where it works well ?

Why only young people? Why not ALL people?

Right so you would be totally ok with conscription / National Service into childrens homes and conscription into child minding then. Because why not right? Why should NHS patients or those in care homes etc be the only ones to take the risk of being cared for by someone who may not want to be there. Still palatable? Put your money where your mouth is!!!

Your attitude is exactly WHY I think it would be a very positive thing.

means you envisage placement for those with non-extreme reasons.
why wouldn't we? It's 2026 , is it necessary to have such an ableist attitude?

If you want to advocate for it despite the fact that it won't apply to everyone equally, go for it, but let us not pretend we could possibly implement anything like a universal system.
you have 2 options, either we never do anything because it can't be truly universal
or we work towards making it as universal as possible.

It would be a huge improvement to ignore lazy people usual excuses to avoid to do anything.