Showing posts with label soldiers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label soldiers. Show all posts

Friday, August 2, 2013

Who volunteers for the volunteer army?

When I was young, the Viet Nam was was underway, and the way the American army got many soldiers was by conscription. But conscription ended in 1973, the Army has been an all volunteer force since then.

One reason it's interesting to look at who American soldiers are is because of the light it might shed on other debates, such as the one about whether living kidney donors should be compensated, and what would be the likely change in the pattern of donations should the law be changed to allow that.  One concern that arises is that, if kidneys could be bought and sold, the sellers would be the poorest of the poor, in desperation.

That isn't who end up in the American Army, it turns out. Here's a 2008 report from the Heritage Foundation that casts some light on the subject. It appears that being an American soldier is a good enough job that you have to have substantial human capital to be able to qualify.

Who Serves in the U.S. Military? The Demographics of Enlisted Troops and Officers
By Shanea Watkins, Ph.D. and James Sherk

"Based on an understanding of the limitations of any objective definition of quality, this report compares military volunteers to the civilian population on four demographic characteristics: household income, education level, racial and ethnic background, and regional origin. This report finds that:
  1. U.S. military service disproportionately attracts enlisted personnel and officers who do not come from disadvantaged backgrounds. Previous Heritage Foundation research demonstrated that the quality of enlisted troops has increased since the start of the Iraq war. This report demonstrates that the same is true of the officer corps.
  2. Members of the all-volunteer military are significantly more likely to come from high-income neighborhoods than from low-income neighborhoods. Only 11 percent of enlisted recruits in 2007 came from the poorest one-fifth (quintile) of neighborhoods, while 25 percent came from the wealthiest quintile. These trends are even more pronounced in the Army Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) program, in which 40 percent of enrollees come from the wealthiest neighborhoods-a number that has increased substantially over the past four years.
  3. American soldiers are more educated than their peers. A little more than 1 percent of enlisted personnel lack a high school degree, compared to 21 percent of men 18-24 years old, and 95 percent of officer accessions have at least a bachelor's degree.
  4. Contrary to conventional wisdom, minorities are not overrepresented in military service. Enlisted troops are somewhat more likely to be white or black than their non-military peers. Whites are proportionately represented in the officer corps, and blacks are overrepresented, but their rate of overrepresentation has declined each year from 2004 to 2007. New recruits are also disproportionately likely to come from the South, which is in line with the history of Southern military tradition.
The facts do not support the belief that many American soldiers volunteer because society offers them few other opportunities."

HT: Volokh conspirators

Friday, January 25, 2013

Women soldiers in combat

The road to a top job in the American armed forces lies in the combat branches, and soldiers can be forgiven for wanting combat experience. Women soldiers (and sailors and airmen? Is there a gender neutral word for soldiers in the Air Force?) are no exception, but have been excluded from "combat" assignments. (Of course, particularly in anti-insurgent and anti-terrorist warfare, where there are no front lines, women soldiers have increasingly often been thrust into combat.)

It appears that this is another repugnance that is fading away (not without opposition): Formally Lifting a Combat Ban, Military Chiefs Stress Equal Opportunity

"WASHINGTON — Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta and Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, on Thursday formally lifted the military’s ban on women in combat, saying that not every woman would become a combat soldier but that every woman deserved the chance to try.
...
"In the most vocal official opposition to the changes, Senator James M. Inhofe of Oklahoma, who is set to become the senior Republican on the Armed Services Committee, warned that some in Congress may seek legislation to limit the combat jobs open to women.

“I want everyone to know that the Senate Armed Services Committee, of which I am the ranking member, will have a period to provide oversight and review,” Mr. Inhofe said in a statement. “During that time, if necessary, we will be able to introduce legislation to stop any changes we believe to be detrimental to our fighting forces and their capabilities. I suspect there will be cases where legislation becomes necessary.”

"Pentagon officials said that the different services would have until May 15 to submit their plans for carrying out the new policy, but that the military wanted to move as quickly as possible to open up combat positions to women. Military officials said that there were more than 200,000 jobs now potentially open to women in specialties like infantry, armor, artillery and elite Special Operations commando units like the Navy SEALs and Army Rangers.

"If a service determines that a specialty should not be open to women, Pentagon officials said that representatives of the service would have to make the case to the defense secretary by January 2016."

Tuesday, May 24, 2011

Misc. repugnant transactions

Minn. Voters Will Decide on Gay Marriage Ban
"After nearly six hours of emotional debate, a proposed constitutional amendment that would define marriage as between a man and a woman was approved in the Minnesota House late Saturday night. It was the last legislative step needed to put the question on the statewide ballot in November 2012.

"State law already prohibits gay marriage, but supporters of the proposed amendment said it's necessary to prevent judges or lawmakers from legalizing it in the future. Opponents said the constitution should be used to expand rights, not limit them, and predicted a long, divisive debate over the next 18 months.

"The House voted 70-62 mostly along party lines in the GOP-controlled chamber, though four Republicans crossed over to vote 'no' while two Democrats voted in favor of the ban."
********

Meanwhile in New York, Donors to G.O.P. Are Backing Gay Marriage Push

"The newly recruited donors argue that permitting same-sex marriage is consistent with conservative principles of personal liberty and small government."
***********


Mercenaries in the UAE: Secret Desert Force Set Up by Blackwater’s Founder
"In outsourcing critical parts of their defense to mercenaries — the soldiers of choice for medieval kings, Italian Renaissance dukes and African dictators — the Emiratis have begun a new era in the boom in wartime contracting that began after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. And by relying on a force largely created by Americans, they have introduced a volatile element in an already combustible region where the United States is widely viewed with suspicion.
...
"Still, it is not clear whether the project has the United States’ official blessing. Legal experts and government officials said some of those involved with the battalion might be breaking federal laws that prohibit American citizens from training foreign troops if they did not secure a license from the State Department."
************

Switzerland: Zurich votes on 'suicide tourism' laws
"While opinion polls indicate a majority of Swiss remain in favour of assisted suicide, they also suggest that 66% are against what has become known as suicide tourism."

In the end, Zurich Voters Keep 'Suicide Tourism' Alive
"Voters in the Swiss canton (state) of Zurich have rejected calls to ban assisted suicide or to outlaw the practice for nonresidents."
***********

Selling Educational 'Indulgences' in the U.K.  (HT Kim Krawiec)
"A fierce debate is raging in the U.K. about a new proposal to let wealthy students pay for places at top universities -- even if they've been rejected through the regular admissions process. As it stands now, British universities have firm quotas for the number of students they can admit, and those places are filled through meritocratic competition. Once you get in, you pay a low, flat fee to attend (about $6,000 a year to attend Oxford). But David Willets, the education minister, is proposing to create new, "off-quota" places, open to students who haven't made the cut, as long as they can afford to pay substantially higher fees. Rage and confusion have been the immediate results of his proposal."

Friday, July 23, 2010

Matching Marine officers to MOS

A reader writes:
"Dear Al,

I was a grad student a few years ago in your econ 2010a segment.

I came across a market design problem recently that I thought you might find interesting.  My brother is a Marine officer and is approaching the point when he gets matched to his "Military Occupational Specialty"-his future job (infantry, engineering, logistics etc).  As in matching medical residents, upcoming officers provide a ranking of their preferences.  Then the Marine administration ranks all the upcoming candidates on the basis of their performance in basic training (their overall average grade in "military skills, leadership, and academics").

The matching process is as follows: in a class of 100 officers, the officer ranked #1 gets his first choice, the 33rd ranked officer gets his first choice, then the 67th ranked officer gets his first choice.  Then the #2 ranked guy gets his top choice of the remaining jobs, then 34th, 68th, 3rd, 35th, 69th etc.

The intended purpose is clearly to ensure that there is an even distribution of "quality" in all specialties (you don't want all the best officers doing infantry (highest prestige) and all the worst officers managing logistics or supply).  (Actually this seems like a good idea for doctors too.)  However, the mechanism is clearly not incentive compatible-the 32nd ranked guy tries to fail his last tests to drop in rank to 33...

More details are here: http://www.dbdriven.net/mymos/All_MOS_Assignment_Process.asp.  I also believe that the Army and other branches use similar systems.

Anyway, perhaps you've already seen this. And perhaps the Marines are totally uninterested in changing a "tried and true" system. But it sounded like an interesting question on a socially important topic.

Best,
A.L.

Tuesday, February 16, 2010

Ending "Don't ask don't tell" in the US military

The day when gay and lesbian soldiers, sailors and airmen will be able to serve openly is coming closer, and Admiral Mike Mullen has called for an end to the makeshift compromise under which they presently serve. In the NY Times, Frank Rich notes that this has become politically feasible as the country's mood has shifted: Smoke the Bigots Out of the Closet

"Mullen’s heartfelt, plain-spoken testimony gave perfect expression to the nation’s own slow but inexorable progress on the issue. He said he had “served with homosexuals since 1968” and that his views had evolved “cumulatively” and “personally” ever since. So it has gone for many other Americans in all walks of life. As more gay people have come out — a process that accelerated once the modern gay rights movement emerged from the Stonewall riots of 1969 — so more heterosexuals have learned that they have gay relatives, friends, neighbors, teachers and co-workers. It is hard to deny our own fundamental rights to those we know, admire and love.
But that’s not the whole explanation for the scant pushback in Washington to Mullen and his partner in change, Defense Secretary Robert Gates. There is also a potent political subtext. To a degree unimaginable as recently as 2004 — when Karl Rove and George W. Bush ran a national campaign exploiting fear of gay people — there is now little political advantage to spewing homophobia. Indeed, anti-gay animus is far more likely to repel voters than attract them. "

This of course parallels the slow shift in attitude towards slavery and, presently, same sex marriage. I'm reminded of the 2004 New Yorker cartoon in which a wife is pictured, suitcase in hand, leaving her husband and explaining "There's nothing wrong with our marriage, but the spectre of gay marriage has hopelessly eroded the institution."

Update: today's NY Times also has a column on the complex relationship of women in the military, who presently aren't allowed to have combat specialties: Women's Work
"While it may be a D.O.D. policy to keep women out of combat, the reality doesn’t match the policy. Right now, a plan is being formulated to phase out “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,”, so that openly homosexual soldiers can serve in the military. If all goes according to plan, gay men will be able to serve in both combat and support units, depending on their chosen M.O.S. They will have to adhere to the same performance standards as straight male soldiers. So while we’re at it, can we phase out the policy of underestimating women? If Israel did it, why not the U.S.? Legislation like the Women Veterans Health Care Improvement Act, which aims to make sure women veterans get the services they need at home, is a step in the right direction, but it only addresses a symptom of the inequality women face in the active military. In reality, American women do engage in combat, so it’s probably time to make it a written policy. If the policy changes, maybe attitudes will too."

Tuesday, February 3, 2009

Market for soldiers: the Ghurkas

The hiring of mercenaries is widely repugnant (the Geneva Conventions sharply distinguish between soldiers and mercenaries: “A mercenary shall not have the right to be a combatant or a prisoner of war.”). A notable exception is the long standing relationship between the British Army and the Nepalese Ghurkas. Recently the British courts have required the army to treat retired Ghurkas somewhat more like regular Army retirees, and two articles in the London Times explore the story.

Nepal’s middle classes steal a march on path to riches reports that
"The problem is that the benefits of the job now outstrip the average in Nepal’s private sector by so much that even relatively wealthy members of the urban middle class are queuing up to enlist. The recruits used to come mainly from poor villages in the hills, where a Gurkha salary and pension, though less than those paid to the rest of the British Army until recently, were enough to support a large family for life. That started to change in 2007, when the British Government accepted the Gurkhas’ demands for the same terms and conditions as the rest of the Army. "...
"The most obvious effect in Nepal is that dozens of private Gurkha training schools have sprung up in the main recruiting areas to help to give prospective recruits a competitive edge. The schools typically charge would-be male recruits about 3,000 rupees (£27) a month for classes in maths and English and physical training. Women pay 1,000 rupees for a two-hour early-morning workout, six days a week, for three months. "...

"The Nepalese Government has backed away from a pledge to ban the country’s citizens from serving in a foreign army, which it described until recently as humiliating, but is concerned about a potential brain drain. "

Another story recounts some of the history of the Gurkhas:
"The Gurkhas fought the British in the 1814-16 Gurkha War. They impressed their enemy and later agreed to become British mercenaries "

The story also includes a remark on the changing technology of warfare:
"Their trademark is the kukri knife, which tradition demands must draw blood every time that it is unsheathed. Gurkhas say that today, however, the knife is used more often in cooking "