Comments by "Titanium Rain" (@ChucksSEADnDEAD) on "Student Loan Crisis Fuels Military Recruitment Boom" video.

Because kids were out of school. They've stopped in recent weeks because at this point their target audience is in college.
4
@davemardon6756 and during those 4 deployments how many didn't make it to 45? Mind that your "great pay and benefits" come from funds others didn't get to claim.
4
"I was in the air force for 12 years. I never had to kill anyone." If you ever had to fuel an aircraft, repair it, arm it, do inventory, finance, cleaning or cooking your job existed as a support to the activity of killing. You can try to shrug the responsibility of your shoulders but if you accept to be a getaway driver and someone dies during the bank robbery you'll be charged as an accessory to that murder. It's only fair that if the state kills people, anyone who signed up for a support job is an accessory.
3
The US economy hinges on worldwide demand for the US dollar and this depends on keeping a good chunk of major oil producers willing to only deal in USD. Saddam Hussein started selling oil for Euros in 2002. Qaddafi wanted to create an African currency backed by natural resources to make them independent of Western banks. If you threaten the USD you get taken out.
3
When a mortar round crashes through the prefab ceiling it doesn't care that the guy in the room is a cook. I remember in like 2004-2005 there was a mini documentary about America's Army, the game developed to air recruitment (it was actually pretty good), and how a recruiter set up LAN parties to keep kids entertained and talk to them about military careers. He asked a girl if she was interested in a career in the military after playing and she said she didn't like the killing so he enumerated some careers that don't involve combat and one of the examples was driver. Then the girl asked something along the lines of "but a couple of months ago wasn't a female driver captured by terrorists and had her throat slit?". The fact is that when you fuel a vehicle, you're fueling it so that it can go kill people. If you're a mechanic, you're fixing the vehicles that will be used to kill people. If you're supply, you're supplying the means to kill people. If you're communications you'll be working the radios to transmit positions that will receive a strike so you better hope that position was actually a Taliban compound and not a Doctors Without Borders hospital or a wedding.
2
Yeah, let's ask the guy who continues to milk his military career about his unbiased and factual opinion.
1
@GRIGGINS1 "The rest is all under NDA" - it doesn't help that you use the same excuse as literally all the fake Navy SEAL stolen valor chuckefucks. "It's under NDA!" your MOS should be on your DD-214 which is accessible through FOIA. So you can't use the excuse of an NDA unless you're so super secret squirrel they actually purged your records.
1
@GRIGGINS1 "Why is it that all civilians assume NDAs only apply to Special Forces and such" - because that's what fakers claim the most. "Mine had to do with special naval projects" - nobody asked about the projects, just your MOS. If it was combat or not combat. That was the only question asked. Yet you started mouthing off about NDAs, which is something that sets off every alarm. Anyone who knows your real identity can issue a FOIA and get your DD-214, that's how the fakers get exposed. You don't sign NDAs about which MOS you served under. So when being asked about having a combat MOS your NDAs don't matter worth a fuck. Mentioning them only makes people suspicious because only the fakers start talking about NDAs.
1
@GRIGGINS1 no, YOU are just some guy on the internet trying to convince strangers how fucking super secret his time in the military was.
1
Wow, the enforcers of state violence are diverse. Truly the leftist ideal.
1
Wow the enforcers of state violence are diverse. Truly a leftist ideal.
1
If you get a degree you'll have negative wealth. That's your debt. You need to start paying it off. If your small town needs help, who exactly is living there who can afford to pay you enough for you to settle that debt? Unless there's a really cheap business opportunity that requires the knowledge of a degree (which you can get for essentially "free" because almost every book is online) you can't just get The Degree™, built The Factory™ and give the people The Jobs™.
1
In many countries there's conscription service. The US has a full volunteer armed forces. Unless there's a draft.
1
James Registe he directed the comment at someone with the hammer and sickle on the American flag. Jury's out if that's because he thinks communism is the answer, or if he thinks the USA is the new USSR.
1
@comrademcsalty7676 "we-we-we're only gwonna whurt the biwwionaires!" starts lining up the lower middle class against the wall
1
How would tax cuts increase tuition costs? The costs started rising because of the 1978 Middle Income Student Assistance Act. From 1965 onwards banks had the loans backed by the government in case students defaulted. In the 70's Sallie Mae started buying the loans off banks. The socialization of risks and privatization of cost obviously created an incentive for more loans to be issued by the banks, which always had their money guaranteed. Combine this with the 1978 expansion of federal assistance and prices can simply rise unchecked.
1
@yarnpower "Tax cuts meant less income for the federal govt." - but that's false. Tax revenue actually increased. In 1980 receipts were 517k Million dollars, 1981-599k M, 1982-617k M, 1983-600k M, 1984-666k M, 1985-734k M, 1986-769k M, 1987-854k M, 1988-909k M. The income actually grew, in fact almost doubled. "so they in turn had less to send back to each state" - not only is the premise that the government was taking less tax income false, but even if that was true that doesn't cause tuition to rise. States could easily bump sales, property or income tax. I want some documentation proving that state governments all together decided to increase tuition as a tax collection scheme because there have to be meetings on record and bills passed that put this theory on paper. "Private colleges then felt free to raise their rates." - that doesn't even make sense. If state college becomes more expensive for factors unrelated to private schools then they get a boost in enrollment. That could explain a slight increase in tuition costs simply because demand is higher than the supply - more students trying to join than a college can accommodate - but it wouldn't explain a 1000 percent increase over the last few decades. Are the states still trying to cover up a budget hole after all these years? Please come to your senses. Are private colleges still in a race to the top with states trying to raise an infinite amount of taxes by bumping tuition costs? Or does the existence of laws that make banks profit off excessive loans create a spike in demand that allows the supply side to keep increasing prices?
1