kpbaseballmom
10-Year Member
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2008
- Messages
- 149
How about someone figures out how to put a tent or tarp over the Grinder so the contractor can continue to work. This project makes watching paint dry look like the races at Belmont.
The focus on Military vs. Merchant Marine will eventually cause the school to be closed in my view.
I am curious how many alumni are still working in the maritime industry 10 yrs after graduation vs. 5 yrs out. I would guess that once the commitment expires you see a lot of people leaving the industry to do what they really wanted to in the first. Not there is necessarily anything wrong with that and it may not be any more any other school or industry, but when looking at sterile numbers it can add more ammo to those who would like to close it.
I'm not associated with USMMA, but have always had an interest in the place. Could you expound a little bit on what you mean here for those of us not from KP? I think it might help some of the prospective midshipmen too. Just curious. Maybe this would be better put in a new thread; however, I, for one, would like to hear some discussion on this topic. ....
The most recent statistic is 73% in Maritime employment after 20 years.
Forgive my DC cynicism, but I have a hard time believing that. How old is that statistic, what criteria is used for "maritime employment" and who compiled it?The most recent statistic is 73% in Maritime employment after 20 years.
Forgive my DC cynicism, but I have a hard time believing that. How old is that statistic, what criteria is used for "maritime employment" and who compiled it?
If 30% of the class goes in the military, that only leaves %70 percent to work in the maritime industry. Does everyone who doesn't go AD, stay maritime? I can tell you the answer is no. Does anyone leave the military return to the maritime industry? Some do, but certainly not all and I would wager the number is actually quite small.
I know when I graduated in 97, the definition of "working in the maritime industry" was so broad that it bordered on ridiculous.
I didn't mean that as a dig at you but to point out that a statistic by itself doesn't mean a lot. It is just a number. My issue is with how they come by that statistic and how they define "maritime". We got out at about the same time under probably the same rules and I know there was almost no concern about what job I was taking. I may have done one annual report to MARAD ... maybe. I recall some sort of paperwork about what jobs you could and couldn't take and I know anything with the government was good to go. Is that the same way they came up with the 73%? Under that criteria, theoretically I could be a park ranger in Utah and be "in the maritime industry"
20 years ago isn't as far back as it seems and we were probably already moving away from our maritime roots. You remember both Krinsky and Matteson and there was definitely a different vibe from one to the other.
I guarantee we we know each other. I was originally '95 too. I know more people that are what I consider out of the maritime industry than in.
Phil C
KP 95-1 (originally)
ck It wouldn't surprise me if that number was a little "generous" to serve a political purpose. If it was a MARAD number, I would be VERY skeptical.