Going to Yosemite? Get Your Passport Ready! 969
rev_media writes to tell us that CNN has a few updates to the Real ID act currently facing legislators. The Real ID acts mandates all states to begin issuing federal IDs to all citizens by 2008. Costs could be as much at $14 billion, but only 40 million are currently allocated. Several states have passed legislation expressly forbidding participation in the program, while others seem to be all for it. The IDs will be required for access to all federal areas including flights, state parks and federal buildings. People in states refusing to comply will need to show passports even for domestic flights.
Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Papers please! (Score:5, Insightful)
The slow slide to fascism began some time ago, but has really accelerated over the past six years or so. We have fewer rights now than ever before in the USA and I fear for where we are going.
For instance:
1) We now torture as part of imprisonment along with imprison people without the protections that the Geneva Convention provides and appear to detain people without formally charging them or letting them know what they are being charged with.
2) We have a fear mongering national obsession with security that despite all the money and bureaucracy spent and created still leaves us wide open to security threats while taxing business and limiting travel. Threat levels are increased without justification to apparently further political goals.
3) We have politicized education and science for political gain while at the same time stifled scientists from telling the facts/truth/scientific findings.
4) We have completely conflated religion and government funneling money into religious groups with strong ties into the government.
5) Taxation is only low for corporate and the most wealthy, while at the same time we have suppressed labor power and limited funding for intellectual and artistic pursuits.
6) We have rampant government corruption and funneling of government "no-bid" contracts to companies with strong ties to government.
7...... How much more do we have to add to really start becoming scared?
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
It was the war to retain our prior way of life, which we obviously lost.
Your papers please. (Score:5, Insightful)
remember when? (Score:5, Insightful)
Capt. Ramius: I would think they'll let you live wherever you want.
Borodin: Good. Then I will live in Montana. And I will marry a round American woman, and raise rabbits, and she will cook them for me. And I will have a pick-up truck, or umm... possibly even...a recreational vehicle, and drive from state to state. Do they let you do that?
Capt. Ramius: Oh yes.
Borodin: No papers?
Capt. Ramius: No papers. State-to-state.
Re:Papers please! (Score:5, Insightful)
Showing papers to travel within the country is not what a free people do.
Re:Papers please! (Score:2, Insightful)
For example, we still occupy Iraq...
2 + 2 = 5 (Score:1, Insightful)
GG
Vote for Ron Paul 2008 (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:So ... Basically... (Score:4, Insightful)
Captain Ramius: I suppose.
Capt. Vasili Borodin: No papers?
Captain Ramius: No papers, state to state.
Re:Papers please! (Score:5, Insightful)
Republicans....Democrats.... it does not matter. What matters is that we as a people take back those freedoms granted to us. Remember that the Constitution was not so much a document that granted individual rights, rather it was a document that described what government can and could not do. To paraphrase Jim Garrison who was speaking of Nazi Germany when he said that it was not a German phenomenon, "It is not a Republican/Democratic phenomenon, it is a human phenomenon and the slide to a proto-fascist state can happen here."
Stupid Fear Mongoloid (Score:5, Insightful)
But, Walsh said, "any state that's refusing to implement this key recommendation by the 9/11 Commission, and whose state driver's licenses are as a result used in another terrorist attack, should be held responsible."
So, if the next terrorists have one of these internal passports, what are the consequences for the people promoting the Real-ID program? Will they be held responsible? Another 9/11 and will the people running DHS be convicted of manslaughter? Can't have it both ways Cheeseoff!
Re:Papers please! (Score:5, Insightful)
Indeed. I should have qualified that to say that we have fewer rights now than at any time before in the last 50 years.
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Outrageous (Score:3, Insightful)
A passport is not a requirement (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Papers please! (Score:5, Insightful)
Finally ... a measure that's right on the button ! (Score:2, Insightful)
Just look at the facts:
- in the US, on average, one in two households has a firearm ... because they feel threatened by other Americans
- the US has the highest murder rate in the developed world
The facts are clear ... let's face it: Americans constitute a security risk.
Mandating photo ID's to be worn by all of then is therefore a spot-on measure, and probably the least we can do. Right?
Re:Wow (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Wow (Score:4, Insightful)
If he's a US citizen, he will, on April 15th, just like the rest of us.
high taxes != freedom (Score:3, Insightful)
2) the tax on the wealthy is still higher than the tax on the poor.
3) government funding of intellectual and artistic pursuits is not a characteristic of freedom.
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Wow (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Papers please! (Score:4, Insightful)
Not to be overly pedantic, parent and GP are discussing two seperate issues (I suggest we drop abortion from the topic of discussion.) True, rights are applied to a larger group of people, but the set of rights is smaller. To some degree this is inevitable (a woman/slave gaining rights means their husband/father/owner can no longer beat them as a "right"). But even in 1840, in the South, the idea that a person (then defined to include, white men above 21, now meaning any mentally functionally over 18 and emancipated minors) would have to show papers to travel would violate some notion of rights.
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
I think you and I are the only persons to realize this.
Al Queda struck a magor blow to the American way of life. While not an instant knock down, it may in fact be a mortal blow. More like a bee sting to a person allergic to bee venom.
We Americans have enjoyed almost total security, in that our three neighbors consist of two good friends (Mexico and Canada), and a weak pseudo enemy (Cuba). This being our only injury since the Spanish American war (concluded 1846). December 7 1941 was actually smaller than September 11 2001. The response to the attack is the only thing we Americans could not withstand, a damage to our freedom.
Like a bee sting, the root cause, is an over-active immune response to a relatively minor injury. This is driving a catastrophic systemic failure. The political body is consuming the peoples liberty due to an over reaction by the infotainment industry. Which in-fact creates a dangerous situation for the leadership.
The infotainment industry (facing a loss in power to alternative internet new sources) over-reacted to terrorist acts, causing the politicians to make drastic reductions in freedom in order to appear effective. This in turn provided a positive feedback to the infotainment industry. The infotainment industry in a downward spiral has lost it's past power and glory. With every minor terror threat the press over-reacts again seeking another spike in power. It's a run-away system.
All this over-reaction is causing a meltdown in the public confidence of congress (currently facing a 10% approval rating), the executive branch, and the press.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Good! (Score:4, Insightful)
The thing is that the "tinfoil hats" are sometimes right, in that governments do tend to abuse power. What happens when 15 years after your national mandatory DNA database is opened to insurance companies and corporations (after successful lobbying) and you can no longer get a job and or health insurance because you're too much of a health risk?
You think this won't happen? Look what is happening to the national "Do Not Call" list for telemarketers. They (the corporations) are fighting like hell to get permission to call people on it... and this is just the off chance of maybe getting a few sales. Imagine how much they will want hardcore information like your genetic predispositions? Nope sorry you can't be an airline pilot because it shows here you have an increased risk of early heart disease. We're not willing to invest hundreds of thousands into training you if in all likelyhood you can only work for us for 10 years... Oh look, you have an increased risk of type 2 diabetes, if you want health insurance you have to pay 10 times as much, and we'll only insure you until you're 40. Etc.
Sometimes some of the crap tinfoil hats say makes a lot of sense.
Re:Wow (Score:1, Insightful)
It's worth mentioning. (Score:5, Insightful)
This is security theatre -- worse still, it removes freedoms from us non-terrorists.
It gets WAY better, real soon now. (Score:5, Insightful)
Just a couple of years and we get a whole new class of people... legal, official, "dissidents."
But our Siberia will be a whole, whole lot warmer...
Re:Wow (Score:3, Insightful)
The only way this statement could possibly be true is if the terrorists you mention are actually elected U.S. officials. Otherwise, you are either fooled or trying to fool others.
Now wait a minute. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Papers please! (Score:4, Insightful)
and yes I am an american.
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
The data access and homogenization provisions are at least disconcerting, especially in the face of the whole thing being rather unnecessary. If documented illegals were the problem(one of the main things it is supposed to address is illegal aliens 'stealing' jobs from Americans), it might help address the situation, but for the most part, it's the undocumented illegals that are the problem, and the willingness of employers to hire them, not the ones that are trying to get government identification and pay taxes.
If it is a huge, expensive, pain in the ass and doesn't accomplish anything much other than making life more irritating, Congress must have voted for it.
Re:Vote for Ron Paul 2008 - ENOUGH (Score:3, Insightful)
I have to wonder how patient you are to have spent so much time posting these videos. I mean, slashdot will only allow you to post so quickly, and you have managed almost 20 posts in this discussion so far...
Re:Wow (Score:3, Insightful)
If the goal of the terrorists were to change our way of life, and that has happened ( because of our reaction to their terror attacks ), then how haven't they won? In other words, didn't they accomplish what they set out to do with terrorism?
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Only? Really?
The "papers, please" thing that we used to deride Russia about,
as in "you don't have real freedom, you are limited" is upon us.
The terrorists have won, in part. And we elected the people who
used that as a wedge issue to inspire fear in the "home of the brave".
I submit to you that it is equally possible that you are fooled
or trying to fool others.
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Even the Federal building access seems very questionable, it really doesn't matter who I am as long as I am not carrying an AK47 or some C4. If I get called for Jury Duty and need to show a passport to get to the court room... well that seems pretty stupid to me and I don't think I would comply even if I have a passport floating around.
If passports are going to be required universally for access to public spaces, then they should be given out for free along with citizenship like a social security card is.
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Just because someone else paid more for the shackles and chains doesn't mean anyone should be grateful.
Re:Wow (Score:1, Insightful)
So, feel free to suck MY dick.
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Wow (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Today, that generation is in decline; they have, for the most part, sold out the values they held as younger people, in favor of security for themselves, their lives, and their families.
There just aren't enough young people around -- not to mention actually voting -- to overcome the influence of the aging Boom generation. And many younger people realize this, and become more cynical about the entire system, less interested in doing anything to modify it -- which, perversely, actually gives the older people more power.
I don't think you're going to see a major change in the direction this country is going, until the demographics come back into balance, and that's not going to happen until a whole lot of people in their mid-60s die.
Re:Wow (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:remember when? (Score:2, Insightful)
Well I'm not going to argue it's 'crappy' or not, but it's still art. Popular artworks are most often THE primary informer of the people. That's why Art is good, necessary, and key part of our civilization. The people get so wrapped up in the details of the day to day life. Art should slap you upside the head, make you think outside your comfort zone, but never, ever, tell you WHAT to think. And that makes it beautiful, when art demonstrates that perfect balance.
In Soviet America (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, we're not able to live our lives as we did before. Therefore, by historical record of our Commander-in-Chief's own words, the War on Terror has been lost. We live in fear, we allow the federal government to impose Constitutionally illegal directives, imposing will both on the rights of citizens and states. And yet, if you point this out to the radical Right, they'll shout you down, reminding you--as loudly as possible--to remember the people who jumped out of the World Trade Center on September 11th.
Check the statistics. Several times more Americans died due to drunk drivers than terrorist activities in 2001. Yet no one is suggesting that distilleries and car manufacturers be bugged, wiretapped, infiltrated, or bombed out of existence. What will it take for America to stop being ruled by the iron fist of Knee-Jerk Politics? Will it take the end of the Union, the Great Experiment that seems to be in such peril? Will it take seeing the young men and women in uniform marching the "diaper heads" into the ovens? What will it take?
Re:Papers please! (Score:3, Insightful)
This is really irritating when there are enough Republicans to block the action we Democrats want to take, which for that matter require a veto proof majority with a Republican as president.
Some good action has been taken so far despite that. But nothing much will happen until next election and more Democrats and a Democratic president are elected.
rd
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
The biggest threat most Americans face is their own government, which imprisons a greater percentage of its population than even Stalinist Russia, and can knock down your door in the middle of the night with thugs armed with machine guns if they think you are engaged in non-state-approved recreation.
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
I think the real terrorists wouldn't give a shit about this. Iraq is the target rich environment. Its like having all the cows come to your home. So why go all the way to the supermarket for milk?
There are a lot of reasoning behind the recent terror attacks in both the US and Abroad. There's a lot to hate. Our support of Israel. Our foreign policy. Our position as a superpower. Our Culture. Ingrained hatred taught from childhood.
Tightening security measures changes none of these things. So from a "Win-Lose" perspective, no one wins.
We're becoming a huge jail, no one in or out without tons of hassle. The only ones that win from this is the Government.
Re:Wow (Score:3, Insightful)
Learn things, dummy.
Re:Papers please! (Score:5, Insightful)
Almost half of the Democrats voted No [campaigniran.org] on a resolution that would prevent military intervention in Iran without Congressional approval.
Here is a good commentary by Keith Olbermann [youtube.com] on the Dems and Iraq.
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
And I don't know how many of our "Comrads" here in the U.S. realize that Bush has been trying to piss off the Canadians ever since 9/11, big time. I live only four hours from the border, and work up there sometimes... and you cannot believe how he went out of the way to stab them in the back.
On 9/11 we would not allow any international flights to land in our country... they were too dangerous. So what does canada do, they take them, even in Toronto. Now any of those planes could have been compromised for all they knew, they could have lost many lives, but they did it anyway. Well, when I was working up there after 9/11, Bush thanked all sorts of nations for helping, and left out Canada. Don't worry, they are not too dumb to notice.
Bush does not want Canada for a friend, it is much easier for him to close off the borders if they become an adversary.
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Have fun making about $25,000/yr and having a personal equity of -$88,000. I'll be happy to pay $75,000 in federal taxes because that would mean that I'm making something near 7 figures.
If you think paying taxes is bad, try being below the poverty line (not that I am, but many are).
Re:Solution: Pick any other country. Move there. (Score:3, Insightful)
The French are proud of their democracy and consider themselves one of its founders and leading lights. (Frankly, with Rousseau and Montesquieu in the bag, they've got as much of a claim to democracy as the USA does.) And let me note that in France, ID is nationally issued and you're required to carry it everywhere. As an alien resident for a year, I was required to carry my passport and laminated visa (i.e. my French ID card) around wherever I went. (I did, sometimes.) Had I ever changed apartments, I would have been required by EU law to report my change of residence to the police. Yet I don't ever see the French complaining that their democracy is under threat because of IDs, and I've never seen any mention of the issue while glossing through either of the two big national political newspapers: Le Monde (leftist) or Le Figaro (rightist). If you wanted, you could make the conspiratorial claim that it's because they're in with the government; but I'd hazard just to guess that it's not perceived as a threat.
Do I like surveillance? God no! But please, let's just be sure to step outside the hyperbole and remind ourselves that a national ID card does not a police state make. And let's not talk in terms of who is or isn't the "greatest state," because quite frankly, all of us big rich Western democratic states have got our own problems. Sure, elements in the US are currently screaming "security! security!" as the executive branch grabs for power, but let's check out some of our friends: France has high unemployment as immigration spirals upward, Britain's got video cameras going up in every nook and cranny, Italy is trying to hold back an ex-prime minister who was making strides toward authoritarianism, and for God's sake, Canada is just trying to hold itself together. The way I see it, the best you can do is trade one set of problems for another.
So I've made my choice. This fall it's back to the frozen North with me. And national ID cards had absolutely nothing to do with it.
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Still untrue. We may be losing, but it isn't because some abstract concept is winning. It just isn't that simple.
That's a matter of semantics. There is no denying that 9/11 was a wildly successful attack, more successful than anyone dreamed even in 2002. The losses from the attacks themselves were largely confined to 3000 innocent lives, two skyscrapers, and four downed airliners. People even across the Middle East were lighting candles for us.
Our overreaction got us a new ineffective federal agency, an endless quagmire of a long bitter war that has killed more Americans than died on 9/11 and many times as many Iraqi civilians, new torture policies allowing "extraordinary rendition" and "enhanced interrogation" that have made the U.S. into a pariah across the world, a suspension of habeas corpus, and an undermining of the protections behind Amendments I, IV, V, VI, and VIII as well as numerous statutory protections in the federal realm relating to privacy, wiretapping, and individual rights to a fair trial- but we did get a nice rainbow color chart out of the whole thing. Maybe some "abstract concept" isn't "winning" but by any standard the 19 hijackers couldn't have asked for a reaction from the United States that would be more damaging to the United States.
Individuals vs systems. (Score:4, Insightful)
This is obviously going to be making a lot of broad generalizations, but I think that conservatives tend to be suspicious of systems (e.g. "the Government" as an entity, or its bureaucracy) but trust individual people that they agree with or find agreeable, ignoring that even a seemingly decent person might be warped by power.
Many liberals seem to take the opposite view; they distrust individuals and emphasize the inherent corrupting nature of power, but seem to trust (sometimes a little more blindly than I find comfortable) complex systems that lack a particular face or human qualities.
I think you see the same dichotomy in the liberal and conservative readings of history: conservatives seem to favor "great man" theories that emphasize individual leadership and the influence of small numbers of people on historical outcomes, while many liberal scholars seem to downplay the role of the individual and instead look at the progression of abstract systems (the progress of 'society', etc.).
Re:All This To Support Israeli Terrorism (Score:3, Insightful)
Jordan and Egypt have no issues with Israel at all and have had peace for years. Why? They recongize their right to exist and after crazy crap like this spewed [youtube.com] on hamas TV it only makes the situation worse as children are brainwashed by Islamic terrorists.
Re:Vote for Ron Paul 2008 (Score:3, Insightful)
Your local county officials probably have kinds in the same school as you, or might go to your church, or might be a member of the same gym or country club etc... Your Senator and President more than likely do not have any direct relations to their community.
Also, if you think back to your American history, the States created federal government, NOT the other way around. They realized that central government inherently leads to corruption and bloat, thus that's why the States were kept sovereign.
Different states can pass different laws. If you don't like the laws in your state, you can simply move to another! It's called "voting with your feet". If the federal government gets involved in creating too many laws, then one cannot vote with their feet because we have mass unison.
With the majority of lawmaking being done at the State and local levels, there is more room for experimentation, and innovation. Plus a government 2000 miles away doesn't know all of the local needs and have a pulse on the community like a government 20 miles away would.
Re:Papers please! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Just so you know (Score:3, Insightful)
In the UK public transport is great on commuter routes in and out of london (aside from the cost -- 35/mile), however long distance (>150 miles) costs a fortune, over $1/mile in some cases, and takes forever aside from city to city). Hospitals are collapsing, Education is a free-for-all, average house prices are 8x average earnings.
However we don't have Bush as a leader, so we're better off than America anyway.
Re:Wow (Score:2, Insightful)
We actually got that. Reasonably calm consideration was made. Perpetrators were identified, traced back to Al Quaeda camps in Afghanistan, and a global consortium was formed. The global consortium negotiated with the Afghan government for some time trying to reach an equitable, but peaceful resolution, ie: to make the Afghans tighten their internal security to close down Al Quaeda camps. When those negotiations failed, military action began, culminating in a ground offense. I was, personally, impressed with the restraint and reason demonstrated right up to the point where an interim Afghan government was installed.
After that, things went pretty haywire. Rather than attend to "winning the peace" in Afghanistan, and really helping the country get on its feet, someone got interested in Iraq. Rather than providing the resources to bring Afghanistan into at least the 20th, if not the 21st century, and ensuring that the Taliban be recognized as having harmed the country, the US decided to transfer those resources to a one-sided, "Go it alone" action in a country no one believed was connected to Al Quaeda.
What started as a good demonstration of diplomacy, consensus-building, and the unfortunate need for military action in some cases turned into a megalomanical witch hunt.
Lot's of bitching but a 64% voter turnout (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It's worth mentioning. (Score:3, Insightful)
So if your "point" is that requiring showing of a valid RealID compliant ID won't make anyone more safe, you are ignoring the protection it provides against alteration of validly obtained passports.
On a side note, I'm really disappointed in the slashkos community. The misrepresentation and overreaction to this particular issue is astounding. RealID [wikipedia.org] has nothing to do with establishing a federal ID. All it does is establish standards for state-issued IDs such that they can be used for federal purposes (in lieu of a passport or other federal ID). In addition, states are required to share their identity databases with other states. Of all the "pissing on the constitution" that the slashkos'ers have been complaining about - this one seems like a slam dunk thanks to the commerce clause.
Re:Wow (Score:2, Insightful)
They don't want to do this at all. bin Laden's been quite clear about what he wants, he wrote a damn letter on it.
The only mention of Sharia law in that is that he wants western governments to stop meddling in Islamic nations and let them introduce Sharia law if they want. I.e., he wants self-determination for Middle-East countries, which he believes, and looking at them he's probably right, will involve them deciding on some form of religious-based law.
He has never given the slightest indication he's interested in the Sharia law for Western countries. In fact, as Sharia law only applies to Muslim and can only be done by Muslims, it would literally be impossible to implement it in most Western countries, and rather pointless.
That's not to say there aren't idiots in various Western countries (Not the US, countries like France that don't integrate their Muslim immigrants.) that want it for their little subculture, but that's not what 'the terrorists' want. The terrorists don't want the US to have anything the fuck to do with them or their countries.
Re:Wow (Score:2, Insightful)
Render on to Caesar, what is Caesar's.
If you want to use government-issued money to invest in government-created corporations (many of which rely on government-created patents or copyrights for their business model) in a government-stabilized securities market [independent.co.uk], or buy real estate deeded and defended by the governement, you're in no position to call it "stealing" when the government demands some of its counters back as payment.
(Yes, yes, corporatate charters and most land deeds are issued at the state level, while money is a federal creation. We can argue seperately over which level of government can and should do what; for current purposes we can regard the whole thing as one large glob of government.)
Re:Wow (Score:3, Insightful)
A few nutjobs may want this. Most people recruited by the terrorist/insurgent/resistance groups just want the U.S. out of the Middle East. Bin Laden's original beef was the presence of U.S. forces in Saudi Arabia. (Yes, we're pretty much out of there now, but we're in so deep in Iraq and Afghanistan it doesn't much matter.) Plus the whole Israel/Palestine debacle, of course.
Um., you don't see the irony here? Let me help.
Freedom of speech is at the root of "western ideas of democracy and freedom". Therefore, anyone working against freedom of speech is campaigning for the introduction of a system that overthrows western ideas of democracy and freedom.
Ergo, you are arguing that you should be considered guilty of treason.
Re:Wow (Score:3, Insightful)
Maybe some "abstract concept" isn't "winning" but by any standard the 19 hijackers couldn't have asked for a reaction from the United States that would be more damaging to the United States.
Like I've been saying for a while, often you can take a Bush policy, look at it, and realize it is, literally, the Most Harmful Policy they could have done. They often walk the fine line of doing the most damage, while carefully being short of something that people would have risen up and stopped. It's a very fine line, and it's possible they've accidentally wandered over it too often for a Democratic Congress, but there are things that are very hard to explain.
For example, the response to Katrina. No, Bush doesn't dislike black people that much, and, as others have pointed out, that was known-in-advance disaster (At least, a known minor disaster, and, remember, people thought the hurricane itself would hit New Orleans until right at the end, so everyone thought there would be a different disaster, a leveled city instead of a flooded one.), and a great photo op. He could have ridden in mere hours after the hurricane, with food and water for everyone, yammered about God sparing the city, and then, when the flooding started and everyone realize what was going, been taken pictures of while handing babies up into helicopters and all sorts of shit, even giving people rides in Air Force One.
For someone whose ratings were starting to slip, it would have been very helpful and not the least bit dangerous to him. Hell, just a normal response would have been non-harmful. Instead he 'completely fucked it up' in ways that are near incomprehensible.
Other people attribute this sort of stuff to greed, or stupidity, or incompetence, or lunacy, or pettiness. An entire industry has sprung up to attempt to explain the policy decisions of this Administration, and people trying to explain each tree need to take a step back and look at the forest: George W. Bush, or at least his administration, is attempting to destroy this county. It's not a side-effect of anything, it is the actual goal.
There's even some fairly interesting circumstantial evidence of this: The right, for as long as I can remember, has projected their behaviors on the left. (The list is too long to go into, here, I have to run, but people know what I'm talking about. Think Foley, think K Street, think current obstructionism in the Senate, think Whitewater investigations into land deal vs. Sen. Steven's and others very real corrupt 'deals'. Things the right often does, the left mainly doesn't, and the right accuses the left of all the time.)
Well, how long as the right been accusing the left of hating America and attempting to destroy it? Did that little concept finally just click into place for you?
I don't know why they're doing this and I don't know what the end result is supposed to be. I suspect they think they can take and hold control once all faith in the current Republic is lost.
Next probable step in this process: Invade Iran. We're not losing Iraq fast enough, we need to get drawn into an even bigger war.
Re:Wow (Score:4, Insightful)
JOhn
Re:Wow (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Wow (Score:3, Insightful)
Now as far as inheritance tax, exactly how many times should the same dollar be taxed? 1, 2, 3 times? You made the $ we tax it, you invest the dollar we tax it you die we tax it. How many times should we tax it to make it fair?
Sales and fuel taxes are consumption taxes. If you don't spend then you don't pay. Personal property tax (vehicle tax) is non-existant on an older car in the places that do charge it.
9-1-1 tax, I assume you mean fire and police emergency taxes, those are usually included in property taxes. Are you really poor if you own your own home?
Yes it is hard to make ends meet on minimum wage jobs, but at the same time it doesn't take much just to live. The problem is everyone wants more, but at the same time aren't willing to change their situation to get it. You are not poor when you own a car, have a tv, relatively decent clothes, a cell phone, cable TV, a computer, money left over for alcohol and a smokes, the ability to eat out occassionaly, and a couple of kids.
God forbid you actually have to work for any of that or maybe actually have to make some sacrifices to improve one's situation.
Poor is when you have to decide do I pay the gas bill in winter for heat or do I buy medication. Poor is when you wonder where you are going to sleep tonight and whether or not you'll have anything to eat.
Most people in the US are not poor by any stretch of the imagination. Goto a third world country if you want to see what poor is. When they talk about the top 10% having 90% of the world's income that includes most the "poor" in the US.
Re:Wow (Score:2, Insightful)
The demographic argument, while interesting, is just wrong.
Regardless of their conceits, there was nothing unique about the Boomers. Like every youthful generation they reacted to their circumstances, which were ripe for bringing about big changes. Incredible post World War II prosperity, the stultifying corporate and political environs of the 50s, segregation, sexism on a scale most people today cannot fathom, the advent of things like the birth control pill and wide availability of drugs. And the main reason, the Vietnam war.
The difference you attribute to demographics has nothing to with the number of people in respective generations, it has everything to do with the difference between the Vietnam and Iraq wars - THE DRAFT.
The "values" we assign to Boomer youthfulness may or may not have been real. If they were, they were limited to a small slice of upper middle class kids in University who had the fear of being shipped off to an insane and pointless war held over their heads. I assure you that working class kids, the entire South, and good portion of the rest of the country's youth did not share in those values at the time and relished watching the "hippies" and protesters getting their asses kicked by the police on television.
You think the young people today do nothing because they have some defeatist notion that they will be outvoted by older people? I call bullshit on that. They do nothing because they have no skin in the game. Their military commitments have been outsourced to "volunteers" (read: poorer kids). Reinstall the draft and I bet you will see youthful political activism on a scale you can currently only dream about.
Every older American citizen could die tomorrow and you would not see any appreciable change along the lines you outline. In fact in might be worse. Due to no fault of their own, the last couple of generations have become accustomed to being surveilled, controlled, dumbed down, and distracted. You might be wishing for the elimination of the last generations of Americans that have any appreciation for, or memory of, what freedom was like.