Started By
Message
re: Calling BTHog to the flight deck.
Posted on 10/25/12 at 3:39 pm to bpfergu
Posted on 10/25/12 at 3:39 pm to bpfergu
Well this thread rustled some jimmies.
Hog on Hog violence is never appreciated. If you badge bunnies approach being a civil servant with a slanted biased mindset from the get go and not with an unbiased, objective mindset that only considers the facts and evidence then you're not serving and protecting, you're oppressing those that depend on you.
just. $.02 worth.
Hog on Hog violence is never appreciated. If you badge bunnies approach being a civil servant with a slanted biased mindset from the get go and not with an unbiased, objective mindset that only considers the facts and evidence then you're not serving and protecting, you're oppressing those that depend on you.
just. $.02 worth.
1
Posted on 10/25/12 at 3:48 pm to CtotheVrzrbck
quote:
Well this thread rustled some jimmies.
Hog on Hog violence is never appreciated. If you badge bunnies approach being a civil servant with a slanted biased mindset from the get go and not with an unbiased, objective mindset that only considers the facts and evidence then you're not serving and protecting, you're oppressing those that depend on you.
just. $.02 worth.
My jimmies aren't rustled at all, actually. I'm firm in my opinion on the matter and will happily defend myself if someone asks.
I have no problem with anyone in uniform and respect those that do it primarily for love of their country/safety of society, but I just don't drink the koolaid that many in our society do in that if you join the military you magically become a hero. The fact of the matter is that many of these people join the military because it pays the bills, has good benefits, and end up having a desk job like the rest of us. Sure, they may get deployed but they signed up for that and even then most are rarely in any danger. I have plenty of friends that are in the military that tell me this on a regular basis.
I have to leave for weeks at a time for my work on a regular basis, and I'm oftentimes in the same level of danger as many of these infantrymen. Am I a hero? Not at all. It's just two groups doing the job they signed up for.
Posted on 10/25/12 at 6:13 pm to bpfergu
quote:
bpfergu
agree with what you said
Posted on 10/25/12 at 6:22 pm to bpfergu
Most employers that prefer Veterans do so because of leadership experience, and military personel work well in group settings.
With that said, I've never known an employer to hire a Vet simply because he was a Vet, but it can be the deciding factor when all else is equal.
Vets that have trouble landing a job after their military service have trouble not because of their education or skill set, but because of other factors, such as having to work autonomously, working in an unstructured environment, or because of combat stress. Getting the job is easy for the most part, it's keeping it that poses the problem.
I don't know who your friends are, but part of what they say is correct, a large % of soldiers never see combat, or when they do they aren't in harms way (relatively speaking). The problem is you can't just look at a soldier and know if he's seen combat or not, that's why most people view soldiers as heroes (although, we aren't).Understand that it doesn't matter why they served, the fact of the matter is they did knowing the potential risk.
I've served on 3 combat tours, I've been at risk. Other than education benefits, I've never used my Veteran status for anything pertaining to a job. I don't even ask for military discounts anywhere.
With that said, I've never known an employer to hire a Vet simply because he was a Vet, but it can be the deciding factor when all else is equal.
Vets that have trouble landing a job after their military service have trouble not because of their education or skill set, but because of other factors, such as having to work autonomously, working in an unstructured environment, or because of combat stress. Getting the job is easy for the most part, it's keeping it that poses the problem.
I don't know who your friends are, but part of what they say is correct, a large % of soldiers never see combat, or when they do they aren't in harms way (relatively speaking). The problem is you can't just look at a soldier and know if he's seen combat or not, that's why most people view soldiers as heroes (although, we aren't).Understand that it doesn't matter why they served, the fact of the matter is they did knowing the potential risk.
I've served on 3 combat tours, I've been at risk. Other than education benefits, I've never used my Veteran status for anything pertaining to a job. I don't even ask for military discounts anywhere.
This post was edited on 10/25/12 at 6:23 pm
Posted on 10/25/12 at 10:14 pm to TheOtherWhiteMeat
quote:
Most employers that prefer Veterans do so because of leadership experience, and military personel work well in group settings.
I agree that being in the military can help build leadership qualities, but I don't see this being any different than, say, being a supervisor or manager at a previous job. The simple fact of the matter is that, within the private sector, the employer should hire the person that is most qualified for the job. Being bias towards vets could potentially open up all sorts of legal issues via preferential treatment. And as Hog fans we definitely know what happens when that gets out of the bag.
quote:
With that said, I've never known an employer to hire a Vet simply because he was a Vet, but it can be the deciding factor when all else is equal.
When it comes to government jobs, by law, they HAVE to be preferential towards vets. The Veterans' Preference Act is Federal Law, and whether or not you agree with it, it is there.
quote:
Vets that have trouble landing a job after their military service have trouble not because of their education or skill set, but because of other factors, such as having to work autonomously, working in an unstructured environment, or because of combat stress. Getting the job is easy for the most part, it's keeping it that poses the problem.
I disagree. I think it has all to do with education and skill set. When it comes to technical positions and even in other sectors, having a degree that supports that is almost mandatory now. For example, I work in engineering and we won't even look at someone who doesn't have an engineering degree. It doesn't matter if they were a fricking 5-star general - if they don't have at least a bachelors in engineering from an accredited school then we won't even entertain the idea.
I'm not saying that experience acquired in the military isn't valuable for building a person, but beyond whatever leadership experience and teamwork abilities acquired, it really can't be applied to a lot of other areas.
quote:
I don't know who your friends are, but part of what they say is correct, a large % of soldiers never see combat, or when they do they aren't in harms way (relatively speaking). The problem is you can't just look at a soldier and know if he's seen combat or not, that's why most people view soldiers as heroes (although, we aren't).Understand that it doesn't matter why they served, the fact of the matter is they did knowing the potential risk.
There is potential risk in a lot of things. I work in the oil field. Ever been on a rig up on the North Shore? What those guys go through is just as, if not more dangerous than what your average solider sees. Are those guys heroes? I don't think so - they are just doing the job they signed up for. I just don't know if potential risk entails being a hero.
quote:
I've served on 3 combat tours, I've been at risk. Other than education benefits, I've never used my Veteran status for anything pertaining to a job. I don't even ask for military discounts anywhere.
That's basically what I am saying. You said you are in IT, right? Do you think you would have gotten your current position just based off of your military experience? I doubt it. I agree that the military can be a good way to build your leadership and teamwork skills, but after you get out you really need to acquire additional education to be marketable in technical jobs.
Posted on 10/25/12 at 10:42 pm to bpfergu
What youre failing to recognize that is within the mikitary there are people who are being trained in any number of jobs from janitor to nuclear engineer.
Posted on 10/25/12 at 11:09 pm to BTHog
quote:
What youre failing to recognize that is within the mikitary there are people who are being trained in any number of jobs from janitor to nuclear engineer.
No, they aren't being "trained" within the military. They are getting degrees. It has absolutely nothing to do with the military. They are getting degrees from an accredited institution no different than anyone else going to college.
Posted on 10/26/12 at 7:26 am to FlyingRazorback
quote:
I was thinking about taking up a reserve deputy gig and work on my days off from my normal job.
From what I understand, it's pretty good $$$.
<csb>
After I graduated, I was a Probation Officer in AZ, and later moved to Kansas City where I worked as a Probation/Parole Officer. I would HIGHLY recommend to any students reading this post - DON'T MAJOR IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE!!!
I ended up going back to school for Computer Programming, and haven't looked back
</csb>
Posted on 10/26/12 at 8:42 am to bpfergu
quote:
No, they aren't being "trained" within the military. They are getting degrees. It has absolutely nothing to do with the military. They are getting degrees from an accredited institution no different than anyone else going to college.
really, so you don't suppose that say naval nuclear engineers are receiving hands on training on top of their college education.
come on man, i get it, you don't like the military, but let's not be unrealistic.
Posted on 10/26/12 at 9:17 am to BTHog
quote:
really, so you don't suppose that say naval nuclear engineers are receiving hands on training on top of their college education.
come on man, i get it, you don't like the military, but let's not be unrealistic.
Do you even think before you type shite? Does it cross your mind to simply google this stuff so it doesn't make you look stupid?
LINK
The American Council of Education recommends an average of 60-80 semester-hours of college credit, in the lower-division baccalaureate/associate degree category, for completion of the entire curriculum including both Nuclear Field "A" School and Naval Nuclear Power School. The variation in total amount depends on the specific pipeline completed — MM, EM, or ET. Further, under the Servicemembers Opportunity Colleges degree program for the Navy (SOCNAV), the residency requirements at these civilian institutions are reduced to only 10-25%, allowing a student to take as little as 9 units of coursework (typically 3 courses) through the degree-granting institution to complete their Associate in Applied Science degree in nuclear engineering technology or as much as 40 units to complete a Bachelor in Nuclear Engineering Technology degree.
Their "training" entails working towards a bachelor in "Nuclear Engineering Technology", whatever the frick that is. The hilarious part? They can't even finish it in the military! They have to go BACK to a university that offers this curriculum (which there are all of FOUR) and finish their degree there.
And what is their "hands on training" good for after they leave the military? Do you even know anything about engineering degrees? Engineering technology degrees are essentially a joke. They are watered down, simplified, and less technical. Technical positions, firms, academia, etc. prefer and look for conventional Bachelors/Masters/etc of Science in Engineering degrees. You could have all the hands on training in the world but when you apply for that job and are competing against people with actual BSNE degrees at the minimum.
I don't dislike the military and I agree that it is a good way to acquire and improve teamwork skills, problem-solving skills, etc., but when it comes to finding work after the military a degree is a degree.
This post was edited on 10/26/12 at 9:19 am
Posted on 10/26/12 at 9:48 am to bpfergu
boomPosted on 10/26/12 at 10:46 am to bpfergu
quote:.
When it comes to government jobs, by law, they HAVE to be preferential towards vets. The Veterans' Preference Act is Federal Law, and whether or not you agree with it, it is there
So is the Patriot Act. Very loose legislation that has almost zero enforcement. From experience I can tell you these are more suggestions than law.
quote:
I disagree. I think it has all to do with education and skill set. When it comes to technical positions and even in other sectors, having a degree that supports that is almost mandatory now. For example, I work in engineering and we won't even look at someone who doesn't have an engineering degree. It doesn't matter if they were a fricking 5-star general - if they don't have at least a bachelors in engineering from an accredited school then we won't even entertain the idea.
I'm not sure how this conversation got side tracked, at least from my stand-point, but I never argued otherwise. My argument was that military experience could tip the scales when all else is equal. You also seem very limited to the fields you're talking about (engineering).
quote:
There is potential risk in a lot of things. I work in the oil field. Ever been on a rig up on the North Shore? What those guys go through is just as, if not more dangerous than what your average solider sees. Are those guys heroes? I don't think so - they are just doing the job they signed up for. I just don't know if potential risk entails being a hero.
This is where you show that your experience is narrow. This is an apples to oranges argument. First of all, what the hell is the "average soldier"? Currently there are nearly 1.5M active military personnel,20% of those have seen combat (70% of Marines). Do the math. That's just CURRENT troops.
Second, the risks you may face elsewhere are of a different variety, they can have a life long affect on a person. Have you ever been shot/injured in combat, totally helpless, while your buddies are getting plastered by enemy fire? Have you ever watched your buddy get riped apart from an IED? No? Neither have oil rig workers.
Dramatic? Yes. Very real? Absolutely.
quote:
That's basically what I am saying. You said you are in IT, right? Do you think you would have gotten your current position just based off of your military experience?
No, I'm in the medical field. And no, military experience alone didn't get me my job, but it sure in the hell didn't hurt me.
Posted on 10/26/12 at 11:30 am to TheOtherWhiteMeat
quote:
So is the Patriot Act. Very loose legislation that has almost zero enforcement. From experience I can tell you these are more suggestions than law.
Wtf does the Patriot Act have to do with anything?
So what you are saying is that a well-established act that has been well-known, amended, and implemented for nearly 70 years doesn't work. Gotcha.
quote:
I'm not sure how this conversation got side tracked, at least from my stand-point, but I never argued otherwise. My argument was that military experience could tip the scales when all else is equal. You also seem very limited to the fields you're talking about (engineering).
No, your EXACT words were:
Vets that have trouble landing a job after their military service have trouble not because of their education or skill set, but because of other factors...
That is absolutely incorrect. Military experience =/= a college degree. Nearly every professional job in existence now requires a degree. Those people have trouble landing jobs after their service because they are UNDER-QUALIFIED for those positions.
You say my field is limited, but I challenge you to try to prove to me otherwise. Please, give me some examples of careers that typically require degrees that will make exceptions for people who were in the military. Show me some examples from medicine, computer science, engineering, architecture, social services, law...ANYTHING.
Now I agree that, if all else equal, having previous military experience could help pad your resume but that is AFTER those people acquired the necessary education. However, that isn't what you initially said, as I showed above.
quote:
This is where you show that your experience is narrow. This is an apples to oranges argument. First of all, what the hell is the "average soldier"? Currently there are nearly 1.5M active military personnel,20% of those have seen combat (70% of Marines). Do the math. That's just CURRENT troops.
Second, the risks you may face elsewhere are of a different variety, they can have a life long affect on a person. Have you ever been shot/injured in combat, totally helpless, while your buddies are getting plastered by enemy fire? Have you ever watched your buddy get riped apart from an IED? No? Neither have oil rig workers.
Dramatic? Yes. Very real? Absolutely.
You say 20% of soldiers have seen "combat", right? And obviously "combat" can mean a lot of things. So the "average" solder has NOT seen combat.
You can play the hypothetical card here all you want but the simple fact of the matter is that most people in the military have not been in the situations you speak of, and even if they have been, that is what they signed up to it. Not saying that I don't respect them for it, but from personal experience most people I know joined for the pay check, not to be some hero who wants to go into battle and kill people. Either way, it's a silly thing to discuss and really doesn't have anything to do with anything.
quote:
No, I'm in the medical field. And no, military experience alone didn't get me my job, but it sure in the hell didn't hurt me.
I never said it would hurt you. I actually said the opposite. However, as you are basically saying, the education you have acquired is what got you your position, not your past military experience. You had to actively go out and pursue additional education not related to your military background to further yourself. That's all I'm saying. Being in the military is not enough.
Posted on 10/26/12 at 11:45 am to bpfergu
quote:
Wtf does the Patriot Act have to do with anything? So what you are saying is that a well-established act that has been well-known, amended, and implemented for nearly 70 years doesn't work. Gotcha.
It has to do with legislation that isn't enforced. You seem mad.
quote:
No, your EXACT words were: Vets that have trouble landing a job after their military service have trouble not because of their education or skill set, but because of other factors...
What does this have to do with what I said about "with all other things being equal"?
Not every job out there require a degree, if they did you'd be correct about this whole argument. Again, you seem stuck in your own little world.
And I never said your field is limited, I said you seem limited to your field.
quote:
You say 20% of soldiers have seen "combat", right? And obviously "combat" can mean a lot of things. So the "average" solder has NOT seen combat.
You're assuming. There's no way to know if these figures are those that have seen actual combat or not or just those that were in a combat zone. Given that most of us know that our forces have been stressed since 911, I'll guess that that's those that have actually been in combat, but my guess is no better than yours.
ETA: /thread hijack on my part.
This post was edited on 10/26/12 at 12:08 pm
Posted on 10/26/12 at 12:38 pm to TheOtherWhiteMeat
quote:
It has to do with legislation that isn't enforced. You seem mad.
I'm not mad at all, actually. By the way simply saying it "isn't enforced" is not viable evidence. Please, provide me with proof that it isn't being enforced? Any studies? Any legislation? Any proof at all? Of course you don't have any.
quote:
What does this have to do with what I said about "with all other things being equal"?
Not every job out there require a degree, if they did you'd be correct about this whole argument. Again, you seem stuck in your own little world.
And I never said your field is limited, I said you seem limited to your field.
I quoted what you said. You said that their lack of education isn't why they have trouble landing jobs. That is wrong. Simply wrong.
However, I'll play along. Let's assume that they do have the equivalent education and let's go back to your quote. So you are saying that, despite having the proper education and skill set, they STILL have trouble landing jobs? So wouldn't that mean that being in the military is actually HURTING their chance of getting a job? According to what you said, there are other factors involved that are the direct result of being in the military (having to work autonomously, working in an unstructured environment, or because of combat stress).
So which is it? Are they not getting jobs because of lack of education or because of issues that have been created from being in the military? Seems like a lose-lose to me either way.
Of course not every job requires a degree. I never said that was the case. I said that jobs that DO require a degree aren't going to make exceptions to people in the military just because they were in the military. That would just be dumb and wreckless. Those people are not qualified to do those jobs and should not get special privelages just because they were a soldier.
quote:
You're assuming. There's no way to know if these figures are those that have seen actual combat or not or just those that were in a combat zone. Given that most of us know that our forces have been stressed since 911, I'll guess that that's those that have actually been in combat, but my guess is no better than yours.
You're the one that gave me that statistic! I am simply responding to what you typed. How am I assuming anything? I guess the only assumption I'm making is that you aren't pulling numbers out of your arse, but I guess that is up to question now as well according to what you are saying.
Once again, I don't know what this has to do with what we are talking about and, even so, this added stress from combat you keep bringing up seems like further evidence to me that being in the military is actually HURTING your ability to secure a job afterwards.
Posted on 10/26/12 at 12:52 pm to bpfergu
quote:
bpfergu
i don't even know what you're babbling about at this point.
do you realize that the military sends people to college all the time. the best go to college on top of getting their practical experience, its not a one or the other deal.
Posted on 10/26/12 at 1:04 pm to BTHog
quote:
i don't even know what you're babbling about at this point.
Perhaps you are to used to the babbling of your messican wife to understand english
Posted on 10/26/12 at 1:07 pm to bpfergu
quote:
Please, provide me with proof that it isn't being enforced? Any studies? Any legislation? Any proof at all? Of course you don't have any.
You're right, I don't have any, but neither do you that it is. Saying that there's legislation doesn't mean that it's enforced. I have my own experience with it, as do many that I know.
quote:
I quoted what you said. You said that their lack of education isn't why they have trouble landing jobs. That is wrong. Simply wrong.
I said they have problems holding jobs, that their education and getting a job wasn't an issue. And that isn't wrong. Maybe if you included Vietnam era and those soon after.
I know a very large number of Veterans, very few of which have ever had a problem getting a job.
quote:
You're the one that gave me that statistic! I am simply responding to what you typed. How am I assuming anything?
You assumed that that number wasn't those of which have seen actual combat.
quote:
I guess the only assumption I'm making is that you aren't pulling numbers out of your arse, but I guess that is up to question now as well according to what you are saying.
Those numbers are from the VA, and they were actually 25%, I lowered it. There's not any question about what I'm saying, you've tried to twist what I've said 3 different times and I've corrected you.
Posted on 10/26/12 at 1:23 pm to BTHog
quote:
i don't even know what you're babbling about at this point.
do you realize that the military sends people to college all the time. the best go to college on top of getting their practical experience, its not a one or the other deal
Yes, they go to college to get an education so they can get a job. That is what I have been saying this entire time. Just being in the military is not enough.
Being a "vet" or "non-vet" has absolutely nothing to do with it. It boils down to who is qualified for the job through education and experience.
...or did you already forget what you said?
yes this, that is why if given a choice most employers would hire a vet over a non vet every time.
Just dumb.
Posted on 10/26/12 at 1:40 pm to TheOtherWhiteMeat
quote:
You're right, I don't have any, but neither do you that it is. Saying that there's legislation doesn't mean that it's enforced. I have my own experience with it, as do many that I know.
Are you shitting me? I'm sorry, but the burden of proof is not on me. I don't have to provide proof of a federal law. That's like someone telling me to prove that the sky is blue or that grass is green.
You want proof? How about the simple fact that these agencies are committing a FEDERAL OFFENSE if they don't follow the guidelines. Or what about the law was passed in 1988 that required the Department of Labor to report agencies' violations of veterans' preference and failure to list vacancies with State employment services to the Office of Personnel Management for enforcement. What proof do you have that they aren't working? Are you going to tell me that every government agency is committing a federal offense? Or that every single one is committing fraud in giving falsified numbers to the Office of Personnel Management? That is basically what you are saying if you come back and say that they aren't working.
quote:
I said they have problems holding jobs, that their education and getting a job wasn't an issue. And that isn't wrong. Maybe if you included Vietnam era and those soon after.
I know a very large number of Veterans, very few of which have ever had a problem getting a job.
I'm not playing the semantic game with you. What you said is clear as day:
quote:
Vets that have trouble landing a job after their military service have trouble not because of their education or skill set, but because of other factors...
I'm not arguing about their ability to get an education. I'm not arguing that having military experience doesn't look good on the resume. I'm arguing with what you said in the above quote, and that is that the lack of education isn't the primary reason they can't secure jobs after leaving the military. That is simply false. You can twist your words in whatever way you want to, but you said what you said and that is simply not true.
quote:
You assumed that that number wasn't those of which have seen actual combat.
I didn't assume anything other than that you knew what you were talking about, but I guess I assumed too much. You said 20% have seen combat and I went with that. I'll be sure to find my own numbers from here on out because you've clearly indicated yours are full of shite. Thanks for the heads up at least!
quote:
Those numbers are from the VA, and they were actually 25%, I lowered it. There's not any question about what I'm saying, you've tried to twist what I've said 3 different times and I've corrected you.
You truly are unbelievable. You give me phony numbers and you say I'M the one trying to twist things? It is a good thing you aren't a lawyer because you are absolutely horrible at all of this.
This post was edited on 10/26/12 at 1:41 pm
Page 2 of 3
Latest Arkansas News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News