Only a few years ago it was 'discovered' that in Vietnam that Blacks did NOT die disproportionally.

In fact it was more dangerous being a college graduate.

That's because the most dangerous job in the infantry is to be a new lieutenant. Another group that lost a lot of people was Air Force pilots.

I would imagine that if you researched the actual trades you'd find that whites are even more likely to be in combat. I heard that blacks are more likely to choose the trades in the military than whites.

Of course all military members are valuable and if you volunteer to be a cook, you're important.

Everything the lefties tell us turns out to be a lie.

If that's the case, then it would reflect on the poor job the union teachers are doing with education.

Military enlistees, by neighborhood income levels?
What about National income levels,or state by state income levels?

Who are "the poor?"

U.S. Census Bureau:

# The official poverty rate in 2005 was 12.6 percent, not statistically different from 2004.

# In 2005, 37.0 million people were in poverty, not statistically different from 2004.

# Poverty rates remained statistically unchanged for Blacks (24.9 percent) and Hispanics (21.8 percent) between 2004 and 2005.

The poverty rate decreased for non-Hispanic Whites (8.3 percent in 2005, down from 8.7 percent in 2004)

—————————————————-

From Curt Gilroy, the director of DoD's accessions policy in the Pentagon.

The U.S. military is not a "poor man's force."

That's the conclusion Defense Department officials reached following examination of enlisted recruiting statistics gathered over the past year.

<div style="border: 1pt solid windowtext; padding: 1pt 4pt;">The statistics show the number of African-American service members is dropping.</div>

The office is studying why young black men and women are not signing up.

The office also is studying the Hispanic population in America.

Census records say Hispanics are the largest minority group in the United States.

So far, only the Marine Corps has been able to get significant numbers of recruits from that community.

On the socioeconomic side, the military is strongly middle class.

More recruits are drawn from the middle class and fewer are coming from poorer and wealthier families.

<div style="border: 1pt solid windowtext; padding: 1pt 4pt;">Recruits from poorer families are actually underrepresented in the military.</div>

Other trends are that the number of recruits from wealthier families is increasing, and the number of recruits from suburban areas has increased.

<div style="border: 1pt solid windowtext; padding: 1pt 4pt;">Young men and women from urban areas are not volunteering.</div>

In fact, urban areas provide far fewer recruits as a percentage of the total population than small towns and rural areas.

The U.S. military is not a "poor man's force."

Bezu,

I love facts. Show the left facts and they react much the same way Dracula reacts when you shove a cross in his face. They throw a cloak over their heads so they don't have to see them and hiss in anger. In their case the cloak is the blind rambling rhetoric and political posturing of the left.

You can't raise a family on that where I live (Fargo ND)

Yes, you can.

And when you consider that most recruits come from rural areas as opposed to urban areas you realize that $30,000 – $40,000 is an average wage.

Looking at the graph Bezu posted, approximately 48% of recruits come from households making $45,000+. Given that the median income for all American households is $43,000 you can see that the balance between rich and poor recruits is pretty even.

There are other factors to consider here as well. A lot of students who get recruited aren't living with mom and dad any more. They're on their own and probably living in the sort of cheap apartment and working in the sort of low-wage job most of us start with when we move out on our own. Thus, a recruit could be from a "rich" family but show up as poor in these studies because he/she was living away from home at the time of recruitment.

We should also consider that rich households have fewer kids, thus fewer recruits.

I know the left can't tolerate the idea of a military made up of people who joined because they believe that this country is good and worth protecting/serving with their lives (because that wold devastate their "IRAQ IS VIETNAM!!!" parallels), but just because the left doesn't want to believe it doesn't mean it's true.

Plus, ask any soldier you want if they were just a poor, penniless dupe who got suckered into joining. They'll probably tell you to stick your snotty question where the sun doesn't shine.

Most soldiers, in fact, will tell you that the joined up to a) serve their country and b) take advantage of the monetary and educational opportunities the military provides.

Yes, you can.

With a household income of 35,000 dollars, good luck raising any kids in Fargo. Times will be tough. You certainly can't buy a house making that much. I make about that myself and have been shopping around for a home. No way I could make the payments. It is sad to think that a family with both parents working full time can't afford a home in a town like Fargo.

I have never thought the military was full of completely poor people. The military rides on the back of the ailing middle class, like everything else.

Military recruitment is largely based
on jobs and education offers.
Get training., get money for college.

Military recruitment is largely based
on jobs and education offers. Get training., get money for college.

Woof: As a leftie, you should support that; real benefits for the "poor and downtrodden" instead of just a handout. Maybe that's the part that bothers you; they really get lifted up, and are no longer dependent on Big Govt.

Maybe I missed out on some good deals

Maybe you don't manage your money well. Or maybe you're a socialist who thinks that you're entitled to everything.

So why then do you portray our troops taking advantage of things like training and college education money from the military as a negative thing?

Not poor people, rural people.