Battle over soldiers scholarship

[Guest American Woman]

Army Guy, on 30 March 2010 - 01:39 PM, said: Your right it's not 2.5 they have downsized the number is 2.3 mil

I don't see any evidence of that. I see evidence of 1.4M regular forces.

More than 1.4 million people serve in the active Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force, and more than 1.0 million serve in their Reserve components and the Air and Army National Guard. link

Edited March 30, 2010 by American Woman

[Smallc]

More than 1.4 million people serve in the active Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force, and more than 1.0 million serve in their Reserve components and the Air and Army National Guard. link

That's correct. He was taking out the National Guard, so I saw no reason to include the reserves, which may or may not be available to immediately respond to a disaster.

[wyly]

Which of those jobs you mentioned involve threats of jail time when one quits? Which of those employees are made to pay a fine for quitting?

"Just like any other job." Riiiiiight.

correct just like any other job..who was put in jail? no one...what is the penalty for quiting a civilian job? quiting or being fired can disqualify a person from employment benfits, worth considerably more than $500...

[Guest American Woman]

correct just like any other job..who was put in jail? no one...what is the penalty for quiting a civilian job? quiting or being fired can disqualify a person from employment benfits, worth considerably more than $500...

I asked what other job you mentioned would involve threat of jail time if an employee quit. Were you unable to comprehend that? I think not. I think you're just unable to answer the question/engage in honest discussion, so I'll answer for you. NONE. NONE of the jobs you mention would involve threat of jail time if someone quit.

As for losing unemployment benefits, that's quite different from a fine on top of losing unemployment benefits. Unless you think someone who quits the military and gets a dishonorable discharge collects unemployment?

[waldo]

According to this site, tuition for an engineering degree at the University of Toronto is $7,350.00 a year.

or just head west - found updated 09/10 figures... at UBC, for an undergrad degree, Pharmacy is the only one significantly over the $5K figure, with Engineering just on the bubble (most are under $5K). But the point remains, the government's $5K allowance figure wouldn't be a fit for all schools/all faculties; however, as another Western Canadian example, that 'Alberta advantage' shows UofA costs are even lower - significantly lower.

since it appears you seem keen on statistics this afternoon (you've offered up a few posts now), I note you didn't bite on the point of education discrepancy costs, Canada vs. U.S. (not that this thread needs any additional impetus to send it off on another tangent).

[Guest American Woman]

That's correct. He was taking out the National Guard, so I saw no reason to include the reserves, which may or may not be available to immediately respond to a disaster.

If they are available to immediately respond to a disaster, then they should be included; and as far as I know, they are ready to respond. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong.

[Guest American Woman]

or just head west -

What if one doesn't want to "head west?" What if they live in/nearer Toronto and work in Toronto and don't want to move/move that far? The fact is, the $5000 tuition doesn't apply to all facilities, as you had claimed.

since it appears you seem keen on statistics this afternoon (you've offered up a few posts now), I note you didn't bite on the point of education discrepancy costs, Canada vs. U.S. (not that this thread needs any additional impetus to send it off on another tangent).

What is there for me to "bite" on?

[M.Dancer]

I bet there are quite a few jobs that quitting could involve jail time or at least a finacial penalty. Now when you join the regs, you sign a contract, when you join the reserves you don't, but that doesn't mean that in the middle of an exercise in the middle of the night in the middle of CFB Petawawa you can walk up to the CSM and say you quit (okay, you can do it...) ....you will spend the next day or two until your unit is heading backing in the stockade. And you may even get fined.

Now what if a pilot of a passenger jet crossing the atlantic says in the middle of the flight, "I quit"

What if a surgeon in the middle of an operation says "I quit". Or an paramedic in a response vehicle gets a 911 and says to the dispatcher, "I quit".

Repercussions? One would think.

RIVERHEAD, N.Y. - For months, the nurses complained that they were subject to demeaning and unfair working conditions - not what they were promised when they came to America from the Philippines in search of a better life. So they abruptly quit.

But in doing so, they put more than their careers at risk: Prosecutors hit them with criminal charges for allegedly jeopardizing the lives of terminally ill children they were in charge of watching.

http://www.nctimes.com/lifestyles/health-med-fit/article_3eacf020-caf6-5794-8e9c-31c59aac0a7f.html

[Bonam]

or just head west - found updated 09/10 figures... at UBC, for an undergrad degree, Pharmacy is the only one significantly over the $5K figure, with Engineering just on the bubble (most are under $5K). But the point remains, the government's $5K allowance figure wouldn't be a fit for all schools/all faculties; however, as another Western Canadian example, that 'Alberta advantage' shows UofA costs are even lower - significantly lower.

I took Engineering Physics at UBC and the cost is certainly more than $5000 per year. For one, you failed to include student fees, which are a mandatory fee you must pay to study there. That already brings an engineering degree to over 6000/year. Additionally, UBC assesses tuition on a per credit basis. 6000 must be for a minimal amount of credits, because my fees were on the order of 7000-8000 per year. Further, fees have risen since I left UBC (they've been continually rising for some time) so I'd say the number on their website could just be plain inaccurate. Note that this still does not include the cost of books, which can be further thousands of dollars.

Edited March 30, 2010 by Bonam

[wyly]

I asked what other job you mentioned would involve threat of jail time if an employee quit. Were you unable to comprehend that? I think not. I think you're just unable to answer the question/engage in honest discussion, so I'll answer for you. NONE. NONE of the jobs you mention would involve threat of jail time if someone quit.

As for losing unemployment benefits, that's quite different from a fine on top of losing unemployment benefits. Unless you think someone who quits the military and gets a dishonorable discharge collects unemployment?

were you unable to comprehend NO ONE goes to prison...

Leslie offers them a last-minute chance to refuse the assignment without losing face.

the risk is optional...

it's safer serving in the military than it is to be a fisherman, I'd choose military over fisherman any day...

Edited March 30, 2010 by wyly

[Guest American Woman]

were you unable to comprehend NO ONE goes to prison...

Since I didn't say anyone did, and since you still haven't addressed what I did say, I'll conclude that you are unable to engage in an honest discussion.

Carry on. Alone. I'm not interested in your level of discussion.

[Guest American Woman]

I took Engineering Physics at UBC and the cost is certainly more than $5000 per year. For one, you failed to include student fees, which are a mandatory fee you must pay to study there. That already brings an engineering degree to over 6000/year. Additionally, UBC assesses tuition on a per credit basis. 6000 must be for a minimal amount of credits, because my fees were on the order of 7000-8000 per year. Additionally, fees have risen since I left UBC (they've been continually rising for some time) so I'd say the number on their website is just plain inaccurate. Note that this still does not include the cost of books, which can be further thousands of dollars.

Thanks for the verification. From what I was finding online, what Waldo was saying just didn't make sense. I think the cost given is for a minimum number of credits to qualify for full time, but most people take more than the minimum number of credits. If they don't, they'll just be going to university that much longer/that many more years, so they'll still be paying more in the end.

Since the scholarship in question only applies for four years, anyone taking advantage of it would likely take more than the minimal credits required for full time so they could complete their degree in the four years.

[wyly]

Since I didn't say anyone did, and since you still haven't addressed what I did say, I'll conclude that you are unable to engage in an honest discussion.

Carry on. Alone. I'm not interested in your level of discussion.

OH REALLY!!!

lets look at your original post and who's not having an HONEST discussion...

Any one of those workers you mentioned can quit if they decide it's too dangerous, if they don't like it, or find out it's not what they thought it would be.

which I clearly proved with a quote from Canada's Supreme land commander..YOU WERE WRONG

They aren't required to fulfill a 'tour of duty.' They aren't required to stay on the job for x number of years when they apply/accept a job offer.

which I also clearly demonstrated was not the case...YOU WERE WRONG AGAIN!

IT'S YOU WHO IS CHILDISHLY MOVING THE GOALPOSTS...clinging to a lost arguement...and like a child picking up the ball and running away home when they've lost....wa, wa, wa, waaaaa all the way home.. carry on

[waldo]

or just head west - found updated 09/10 figures... at UBC, for an undergrad degree, Pharmacy is the only one significantly over the $5K figure, with Engineering just on the bubble (most are under $5K). But the point remains, the government's $5K allowance figure wouldn't be a fit for all schools/all faculties; however, as another Western Canadian example, that 'Alberta advantage' shows UofA costs are even lower - significantly lower.

I took Engineering Physics at UBC and the cost is certainly more than $5000 per year. For one, you failed to include student fees, which are a mandatory fee you must pay to study there. That already brings an engineering degree to over 6000/year. Additionally, UBC assesses tuition on a per credit basis. 6000 must be for a minimal amount of credits, because my fees were on the order of 7000-8000 per year. Further, fees have risen since I left UBC (they've been continually rising for some time) so I'd say the number on their website could just be plain inaccurate. Note that this still does not include the cost of books, which can be further thousands of dollars.

per the linked UBC web-site, the tuition cost is for a full course load (winter session - 2009/2010)... if you dispute that figure, take it up with UBC. What was the point of all this? Oh ya, to access whether there are funding alternatives to the "Project Hero" initiative... and there are... through the government ($5K) and the private corporation/citizen funded Canada Company ($4K without qualification to tuition vs. fees vs. book costs, versus living expenses, etc.). I would think a leveraging of both the government and private outlet would pay for a significant portion of costs depending on choices/locale. Would all costs be covered... for all persons... under all circumstances? - it appears, possibly not.

[waldo]

Thanks for the verification. From what I was finding online, what Waldo was saying just didn't make sense. I think the cost given is for a minimum number of credits to qualify for full time, but most people take more than the minimum number of credits. If they don't, they'll just be going to university that much longer/that many more years, so they'll still be paying more in the end.

Since the scholarship in question only applies for four years, anyone taking advantage of it would likely take more than the minimal credits required for full time so they could complete their degree in the four years.

didn't make sense... what didn't make sense? The cost figures presented on 2 Western Canadian University web sites that I linked to - UBC and UofA, showing recent costs for a full-term course load (fall/winter session). I must be missing something here... I don't know of any undergrad degree, following a full-term course load, that can't be completed in 4 years. No one said anything about graduate degrees.....

[Guest TrueMetis]

which I clearly proved with a quote from Canada's Supreme land commander..YOU WERE WRONG

That's refusing to go on a tour of duty. Not quiting. If an emergancy strike and you are told you are being deployed you are going no matter how dangerous it is.

which I also clearly demonstrated was not the case...YOU WERE WRONG AGAIN!

Try leaving the military before your contract is up and I'll see you at the court marshel. Also try joining a combat branch without every seeing active duty.

IT'S YOU WHO IS CHILDISHLY MOVING THE GOALPOSTS...clinging to a lost arguement...and like a child picking up the ball and running away home when they've lost....wa, wa, wa, waaaaa all the way home.. carry on

I just love it when people act like you. It makes taking down there arguments all the funnier.

[Bonam]

didn't make sense... what didn't make sense? The cost figures presented on 2 Western Canadian University web sites that I linked to - UBC and UofA, showing recent costs for a full-term course load (fall/winter session). I must be missing something here... I don't know of any undergrad degree, following a full-term course load, that can't be completed in 4 years. No one said anything about graduate degrees.....

Wrong again. Engineering Physics at UBC takes 5 years to complete, and that is at a higher course load than almost any other degree (6-8 courses per term). About half the students do it in 6 years instead of 5.

What was the point of all this? Oh ya, to access whether there are funding alternatives to the "Project Hero" initiative.

Of course there are. Anyone can afford education in Canada, whether it is through student loans, scholarships, co-op work, or whatever other method or combination of methods.

[waldo]

Wrong again. Engineering Physics at UBC takes 5 years to complete, and that is at a higher course load than almost any other degree (6-8 courses per term). About half the students do it in 6 years instead of 5.

oh snap! Yes, the UBC web-site shows exactly that... as I said, the 'full course load credits' are shown for all disciplines... as is the $5,168 full course load tuition cost for Engineering... I referred to it as being on the "$5K bubble". I said I wasn't aware of any undergrad degree that couldn't be completed in 4 years, following a full-course load..... and it would appear your particular choice is the single Engineering pursuit that can't be completed in 4 years (as is the case with Chemical and Biological Engineering, or Civil Engineering, or Electrical and Computer Engineering, or Geological Engineering, or Integrated Engineering, or Materials Engineering, or Mechanical Engineering, or Mining Engineering). If I really wanted to be as particularly anal as you appear on this point, I could, again, reinforce that I said, "I wasn't aware of"... which, in itself, doesn't fit to your "wrong versus right" assessment - does it?

Of course there are. Anyone can afford education in Canada, whether it is through student loans, scholarships, co-op work, or whatever other method or combination of methods.

so what? That has no bearing on the subject at hand... specifically to military personnel that have died while on/off duty, are there scholarship funding alternatives to "Project Hero"? Alternatives that would suggest, from a funding standpoint, Universities/Colleges are not filling a void by participating in "Project Hero".

[wyly]

I just love it when people act like you. It makes taking down there arguments all the funnier.

which you have failed to do miserably...my posts stand true and accurate...and your reading comprehension very suspect.. Edited March 31, 2010 by wyly

[Army Guy]

Most Canadian don't know what they're talking about much of the time. Many probably think we spend the same as in 2000....when in fact spending has pretty much doubled and continues to increase for the next two years faster than inflation. I'd complain if we weren't spending more than any time adjusted for inflation since the 50s and if the budget weren't steadily increasing...along with our capabilities.

You paint a pretty rosey picture, going back almost 10 years, your right the Forces budget has almost doubled in 10 years going from 10.6 in 2000, to almost 19.2 in 2009. keeping well above the inflation factor....

And yet even with staying ahead of inflation increases, the price of new equipment has more than doubled, in fact it has almost tripled in alot of cases. take alook at our orginal Leopard tank purchase each tank was est at 250 k per unit...our used Leapard II A4 ran close to 1 mil per, the cost of a brand new Leopard II A6 is over 2.5 mil per unit...So keeping ahead of inflation is a mout piont when talking about the way it effects the entire Forces budget...and how much new tech costs...

But let me ask you this how many of those years did DND go into the red, actually over spending it's budget to get all the jobs it was assigned ? The first years of the Afghan mission ran DND into the whole, and while the goverment did extend it's budget , it came at a cost to DND as well with cuts to training, equipment purchases etc etc....

How much funding should there be, and from where? We spend $21B on the military, billions on the RCMP and CSIS, and too little on the Coast Guard at about $250M a year. Despite our large size, we are a small country that can't afford to spend significantly more without raising taxes or cutting services.

How much more funding good question, one can not really answer that until Canadians tell DND what it is they want us to do...A new white paper would be nice, but then again white papers cost governments funding....without a white paper, or going off the old white paper then we will need more, how much more would depned on what major projects they want to fund, such as replacement LAV veh fleet,New Patrol veh, New Recce Veh, new Logistic wheeled vehs, New AOR's for the Navy, New destroyers , New SAR aircraft for the Airforce, replacement for F-18, That is what is needed today in order for them to come in on time ....There is dozens of other projects that need to be looked at as well....just to allow us to maintain what capabilites we have..

Yes, those magically in fact do give us projection power, as does our green water oriented and blue water capable navy. We are able to sustain troops abroad in a real war, a very rare thing in this world, and it's something that the National Post made mention of. They said that we're one of a few elite forces that can project a small force and keep it there as long as the political will remains.

Power projection is the abilty to land troops via the shore or via airbourne means and sutain them until further assets can be brought to bear or the mission is completed....normally equated with say an Aircraft carrier group, or a marine Amph Group, Having a few transport aircraft does not give you these capaibilites...it does give you the ability to drop troops any where, but getting them back is the hard part if things turn hostile....And our Navy is not large enough or have the firepower to support any landings for any great of time...let alone supply a ground force in combat.

Keep in mind our C-17 are not the only aircraft keeping Afghan in business, our airbuses and Herc fleets run steady to keep our force of 3500 troops equiped....we still rely on other Nations to bring in the heavy stuff..

That's a reality that we can see. We (Canada) were able to continue with Afghanistan, train troops in California, send 2000 people to Haiti quickly, police the waters off Somalia, be engaged in numerous other naval missions, take part in planning for the G8/20, and provide security for the Olympics....all at one time

Yes the CF has been busy everyone of us had some role to play in those taskings, but to maintain that pace we just can't without high rates of burn out....But to accomplish that it took almost all of the CF...had anything else come up we'd been Screwed....

What do you consider projection power? What exactly are we supposed to have? How many countries have even the capability of the C-17?...not many. There's a reason that the US isn't happy to see us go. There aren't that many countries with our capabilities. I hear it in the media over and over and over.

That big honkin ship, would be a start something in an LSD -17 would fit the bill, seen how we've already taken it out for a test drive serveral times already...some new destroyers to protect it...

C-17 owners is actually quit a few, The US , Britain, Austraia, Canada, NATO Straticgic airlift program, Qatar, UAE,India is looking along with South Korea....But there are many other coutries out there with simlar Stratigic aircraft of russian design...

And we learned a great deal from those things. There are now emergency plans in place throughout the country. I've seen them in action during flooding in my own small community. It in't all about the military when it comes to domestic disaster response.

I did not say it was...but in a major event, DND is the biggest show in the country, and we have had a hard time dealing with small events such as the ice strom , or Winnipeg floods....and would be very much overhemled in a major even..such as katrina, or earth quake...and while thier overwhelmed people are going to at risk becuase of it....

[Smallc]

And so again, how much should we spend, and where should it come from? That is the ultimate question. We don't have unlimited funds.

[Smallc]

How much more funding good question, one can not really answer that until Canadians tell DND what it is they want us to do...A new white paper would be nice, but then again white papers cost governments funding....without a white paper, or going off the old white paper then we will need more, how much more would depned on what major projects they want to fund, such as replacement LAV veh fleet,New Patrol veh, New Recce Veh, new Logistic wheeled vehs, New AOR's for the Navy, New destroyers , New SAR aircraft for the Airforce, replacement for F-18, That is what is needed today in order for them to come in on time ....There is dozens of other projects that need to be looked at as well....just to allow us to maintain what capabilites we have..

All fully funded under the current plan.

Power projection is the abilty to land troops

You were mostly right up to there. There are very few power projection militaries in the world. We happen to be one. We've proven it more than once recently. But, if you want sea projection, we should have that if the JSS is anything close to what was originally planned.

Keep in mind our C-17 are not the only aircraft keeping Afghan in business, our airbuses and Herc fleets run steady to keep our force of 3500 troops equiped....we still rely on other Nations to bring in the heavy stuff..

Like what? What can't we carry? Between the CC-177, CC-130, CC-150, and the permanent civilian charter ship, what do we rely on others for? We didn't seem to need much help from others getting to Haiti. And so, how many other nations can do this? They can probably be counted on two hands.

C-17 owners is actually quit a few, The US , Britain, Austraia, Canada, NATO Straticgic airlift program, Qatar, UAE,India is looking along with South Korea....But there are many other coutries out there with simlar Stratigic aircraft of russian design...

Yes, the number of C-17 owners, is growing, but from what I've read, there are very few power projection militaries: The US, Russia, France, the UK, Australia, and Canada. There are very few other nations that can respond with speed and power. We can.We couldn't before.

You seem to want to paint a picture of us sucking. I don't see it, and I doubt Canadian see it after Haiti.

[Wilber]

The ability to project power is relative. Just south of where I live in the Puget Sound area the Americans have three infantry brigades, seven specialty brigades, a ranger battalion and a special forces group based at Ft. Lewis. Just across the road, McChord AFB is the home of two airlift wings operating 50 C-17's to get them where they need to go.

Just up the road there is Naval base Kitsap which consists of the Bangor Trident sub base and Bremerton, home of a carrier strike group with a Nimitz class carrier as its flagship. Just up the road from that is NAS Whidbey Island.

All of this within 280km of where I live and that is just army and naval assets.

Yes the US has 10 times our population but they have far more than 10 times our military capability in the Seattle area alone.

[Smallc]

The US have about 30 times the military power that we do (if not a bit more) because they spend more than 30 times what we do. It is relative, but I said we could project power, I didn't say we have to be able to project lots of power. We have even been able to help the US at at times (hurricanes for example). Comparisons to the US really aren't fair for any country. Bill Maher not too long ago said that the US has more ships in its navy than the next 13 largest combined, 11 of those being American allies (we being one of those). You're right, it is relative, but we still have projection power, even if it's among the smallest of the group of countries who can project power.

Edited April 7, 2010 by Smallc

[msj]

I wonder how many Canadians would be willing to see a tax increase (or spending cuts to health care) in order to project power over the world like the USA does (even if it was only 1/10th as much).

Absurd.