On 11/11/11 6:41 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 17:59:34 -0500, wrote:


I decided to do my own "fact checking" about these claims. Turns out, it's
BS.

Here's a few facts I discovered with very little Google effort:

Current active duty military personnel represent less than half of 1 percent
of the US population.
That's a very small number doing the dirty work for the rest of the
population.

Less than 9 percent of the current US population are either currently
serving in the military or are military veterans.
Most people guess around 25 to 30 percent.

Here's one that may surprise you:

Contrary to popular belief or myth, the average person in today’s US
military is better educated than their
civilian peers as a group. One (1) percent of active duty service members
lack a high school diploma.
Over 20 percent of civilians over the age of 25 lack a high school diploma.
BTW ... 95 percent of military officers
hold at least a Bachelor’s Degree; many hold advanced postgrad degrees.

and:

Contrary to popular belief or myth, enlistees in today’s military are not
predominately from low income
families or backgrounds. Eleven (11) percent of enlistees come from the
poorest US neighborhoods. 25 percent
come from the wealthiest US neighborhoods. The rest fall somewhere between.

Eisboch

They probably have better health care, too, since they have access to
free medical care. And that thing about education, that is free or
highly discounted, too, so I guess more people can afford it. Plus, if
you are in the military, you can get credit for "life experiences,"
that's pretty easy, too.

It appears to me that the"Heritage Foundation" is the source of your
data. I would not consider them either "fair" or "balanced" or
accurate.

I would consider these statistics more reliable:
http://www.census.gov/population/www...ry-Service.pdf


The Heritage Foundation? hehehe. If it said the sun were shining at high
noon, I'd look out the window to be sure.

"X ` Man" wrote in message
m...

On 11/11/11 6:41 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 17:59:34 -0500, wrote:


I decided to do my own "fact checking" about these claims. Turns out,
it's
BS.



The Heritage Foundation? hehehe. If it said the sun were shining at high
noon, I'd look out the window to be sure.

------------------------------------------------

I'll repeat my response to whoever "You.Don’t.Need@ToKnow" is:

The Heritage Foundation is one of the web sites I read (because it popped up
in the Google search) however knowing it's reputation among
some, I also searched for and read several others including the Department
of Defense military personnel and demographics
statistics. The numbers vary only slightly.

Interestingly, as I was on my laptop doing the search, I had "Morning Joe"
on the television and was half listening to it.
At one point Joe Scarborough started reciting some of the same statistics I
found. Now, I know Joe is a Republican, but I
don't think he's exactly a "right-winger".

Eisboch

On 11/11/11 7:11 PM, Eisboch wrote:


"X ` Man" wrote in message
m...

On 11/11/11 6:41 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 17:59:34 -0500, wrote:


I decided to do my own "fact checking" about these claims. Turns out,
it's
BS.



The Heritage Foundation? hehehe. If it said the sun were shining at high
noon, I'd look out the window to be sure.

------------------------------------------------

I'll repeat my response to whoever "You.Don’t.Need@ToKnow" is:

The Heritage Foundation is one of the web sites I read (because it
popped up in the Google search) however knowing it's reputation among
some, I also searched for and read several others including the
Department of Defense military personnel and demographics
statistics. The numbers vary only slightly.

Interestingly, as I was on my laptop doing the search, I had "Morning
Joe" on the television and was half listening to it.
At one point Joe Scarborough started reciting some of the same
statistics I found. Now, I know Joe is a Republican, but I
don't think he's exactly a "right-winger".

Eisboch


Joe is a decent right-winger, meaning he is a sort of old fashioned, not
insane right winger. He's mellowed some since his terms in the U.S.
Congress. The military demographics started changing some during the
Bush Administration, when job creation fell into the gutter.

"X ` Man" wrote in message
m...

On 11/11/11 7:11 PM, Eisboch wrote:


"X ` Man" wrote in message
m...

On 11/11/11 6:41 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 17:59:34 -0500, wrote:


I decided to do my own "fact checking" about these claims. Turns out,
it's
BS.



The Heritage Foundation? hehehe. If it said the sun were shining at high
noon, I'd look out the window to be sure.

------------------------------------------------

I'll repeat my response to whoever "You.Don’t.Need@ToKnow" is:

The Heritage Foundation is one of the web sites I read (because it
popped up in the Google search) however knowing it's reputation among
some, I also searched for and read several others including the
Department of Defense military personnel and demographics
statistics. The numbers vary only slightly.

Interestingly, as I was on my laptop doing the search, I had "Morning
Joe" on the television and was half listening to it.
At one point Joe Scarborough started reciting some of the same
statistics I found. Now, I know Joe is a Republican, but I
don't think he's exactly a "right-winger".

Eisboch


Joe is a decent right-winger, meaning he is a sort of old fashioned, not
insane right winger. He's mellowed some since his terms in the U.S.
Congress. The military demographics started changing some during the
Bush Administration, when job creation fell into the gutter.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

That's true and the statistics I found reflect *today's* military ...
meaning mid 2000's and newer.
It certainly wasn't true back in my era in 1968. We were just a bunch of
knuckleheads.
It's one of the reasons I am so impressed and respectful of today's
volunteer military.

Eisboch

In article , dump-on-
says...

On 11/11/11 6:41 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 17:59:34 -0500, wrote:


I decided to do my own "fact checking" about these claims. Turns out, it's
BS.

Here's a few facts I discovered with very little Google effort:

Current active duty military personnel represent less than half of 1 percent
of the US population.
That's a very small number doing the dirty work for the rest of the
population.

Less than 9 percent of the current US population are either currently
serving in the military or are military veterans.
Most people guess around 25 to 30 percent.

Here's one that may surprise you:

Contrary to popular belief or myth, the average person in today?s US
military is better educated than their
civilian peers as a group. One (1) percent of active duty service members
lack a high school diploma.
Over 20 percent of civilians over the age of 25 lack a high school diploma.
BTW ... 95 percent of military officers
hold at least a Bachelor?s Degree; many hold advanced postgrad degrees.

and:

Contrary to popular belief or myth, enlistees in today?s military are not
predominately from low income
families or backgrounds. Eleven (11) percent of enlistees come from the
poorest US neighborhoods. 25 percent
come from the wealthiest US neighborhoods. The rest fall somewhere between.

Eisboch

They probably have better health care, too, since they have access to
free medical care. And that thing about education, that is free or
highly discounted, too, so I guess more people can afford it. Plus, if
you are in the military, you can get credit for "life experiences,"
that's pretty easy, too.

It appears to me that the"Heritage Foundation" is the source of your
data. I would not consider them either "fair" or "balanced" or
accurate.

I would consider these statistics more reliable:
http://www.census.gov/population/www...ry-Service.pdf


The Heritage Foundation? hehehe. If it said the sun were shining at high
noon, I'd look out the window to be sure.

Would you cite the statistics in that article that you think are false
and tell use why they are false? Didn't think so.