US Lawmakers Eyeing National ID Card 826
According to Wired (and no big surprise, considering the practicalities of implementing massive changes in medical finance), US lawmakers "are proposing a national identification card, a 'fraud-proof' Social Security card required for lawful employment in the United States. The proposal comes as the Department of Homeland Security is moving toward nationalizing driver licenses."
Re:And what's the problem here? (Score:2, Informative)
Sorry but the license plates in the US are not standardized beyond a size and ratio.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_license_plate_designs_and_serial_formats [wikipedia.org]
I've had vehicles registered in South Dakota, Oregon, Washington and Alaska.
Alaska - Embossed serial reflective sheeting with three letters and three numbers - ABC123
Oregon - Embossed serial reflective sheeting with three numbers, a space and three letters - 123 ABC
South Dakota - Screened serial reflective sheeting with 1-9 two letters, a space and three numbers. The 1-10 are county by size. 10-66 one letter, a space and three numbers. The 10-64 are county by alphabetical, 65-66 are unorganized counties (Pine Ridge and Rosebud Reservations).
Washington - Embossed serial reflective sheeting with three numbers, a dash and three letters or three letters and four numbers
Re:And what's the problem here? (Score:4, Informative)
The basic problem with this and many similar measures is not that people disagree with the *intent* of the changes, they disagree that there is a connection between the intent and the action.
Having IDs which are harder to fake is probably a good thing. Fake IDs are the source of much fraud, and fraud is a big problem. Let's do something about it.
Now ask yourself the following question: Would you support this measure if it cost money and made IDs easier to fake?
See Bruce Schneier [schneier.com] for a thoughtful analysis.
Here, let me quote from that article:
Whenever anything like this comes up we keep asking the wrong questions. "We should ban liquids to make us safer", "we need to take naked pictures of all airline passengers to make us safe", "we should let border guards rifle through everyone's PCs to make us safe".
Everyone wants to be safe, there's absolutely no doubt about that, we should be in favor of all these measures.
But do you support expensive naked-photo camera systems if they make us *less* safe? Again, thoughtful commentary from people who have to actually make a living at this sort of thing is instructive.
Stop distracting us with the intent and convince us of the effectiveness.
Re:And what's the problem here? (Score:5, Informative)
Despite what you learn from fables in grade school, rights come from society. You have a right to life- but that right won't stop a bullet. You have a right to free speech- but that won't stop a bullet, or a broken jaw. Rights are an ephermal idea with no basis in nature. The only natural "rights" are the laws of physics. Rights only have any force when society organizes itself in such a way as to enable enforcement of them. The way it does so is via a government. Which does put government in an interesting dual position- its job is to enforce the rights of all, but its great power makes it possible for it to be a horrible violator of them as well. That's why it requires constant citizen oversight and correctional systems.
That also means what your rights are is a reflection of what society decides they should be. This list can expand or contract over time. For example, progressives believe that the right to life must include a right to health (or at least health care, which is as close as humans can come to a right to health) or else proclaiming such a right is meaningless rhetoric. And it looks like we just won that one. Sixty years ago blacks didn't have the right to go to a white school, only the lunatic fringe would argue against that now. 200 years ago you had the right to own the most powerful weapon of the day, I doubt many people would argue for the right of a private citizen to own a nuke now. Yet many people do argue for a right to own lesser weapons (guns), and society has mostly agreed on that. Seventy years ago you didn't have Miranda rights, now you do and have a right to be informed of them. Rights change over time, as society dictates. Nothing will change that, all you can do is argue for those that you truely believe to be important, such as free speech, be preserved or added.
Re:And what's the problem here? (Score:5, Informative)
What?!?! We have the highest per capita healthcare costs in the world!. Yes, higher than Germany, UK, Canada, and all the other "socialist" European countries.
Geez, educate yourself before you make a comment. It bothers the hell out of me when I see one of my fellow countrymen spewing out utter nonsense about foreign healthcare.
Re:And what's the problem here? (Score:4, Informative)
And unless he was threatening you with a weapon, you'll be tried, found guilty, and executed for murder as you deserve.
Maybe in your state, but not in mine.
There are several states in the US in which an intruder in a habitation is presumed to have hostile intent, regardless of whether he is threatening you or has a weapon.
Re:This ought to be good (Score:3, Informative)
You can get a standard ID at any DMV and register to vote. In fact, you don't even need a DMV ID to register to vote but a voter registration card is accepted as one form of proof of residence in many states.
What I'm saying is the state's already have ID's. The states are sovereign entities and have it covered. The Federal Govt was just supposed to provide some oversight to make sure states don't stamp on people's rights, provide a military and regulate interstate commerce.
Or did you go to public school? If so I could see why a state-run (but heavily federally subsidized) institution would want you to believe that the Feds are supreme beings. In fact their power was intentionally limited heavily in the early days for a F**KING REASON. Unfortunately they didn't quite realize that secret societies/political parties with massive wealth would always end up picking the candidates and not "the people" and the roaches came crawling in and infested every level of government down to your local post office. Welcome to USA, Inc.
I'm not for a pure democracy but I am for a lean mean efficient constitutional republic where squander and waste of tax dollars by or under the direction of elected officials is punishable in criminal court along with severe criminal penalties for attempting to sidestep the spirit of the constitution and step on the rights of citizens (or any man for that matter).
In this country it's not supposed to be "ruler" and "subject". We are supposed to direct, own and control THEM. The politicians are supposed to be puppets of the people, not sitting on the board of some megacorp and rubber stamping anything they want while trying to castrate the American people at the same time so they can't do anything about it.
I don't know about you all but I'm pretty fed up and starting to hit my wits end with this crap.
Re:How do Republicans support this? (Score:2, Informative)
The teabaggers would go ballistic, these are people ready to shoot at the census takers.
The incident you're referring to was in fact a suicide [cbsnews.com], not an attack by anyone, and certainly not by Tea Party activists.
Re:And what's the problem here? (Score:4, Informative)
Wrong. Here in Arizona, if someone enters my house, I can shoot him dead on sight. His actions and intent are unimportant; only his presence beyond my front door has any bearing. Texas is the same way, as are many other US states.
Please stop spreading false information. Maybe your crappy state (probably IL or NJ) doesn't allow you to defend yourself against intruders, but most states do.
Re:And what's the problem here? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:And what's the problem here? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:And what's the problem here? (Score:2, Informative)
Thanks for pointing this out. These assholes don't know the difference between criminals and law abiding citizens. Illegal aliens are ILLEGAL. They are screwing the LEGAL ALIENS waiting to get into this country. They are screwing the GREEN CARD HOLDERS. They are screwing the VISA holders. They are screwing the US Citizens. They are screwing YOU.
They aren't hapless morons that got lost and ended up in another fucking Country. They are here illegally and they know it.
This has nothing to do with immigration. This is illegal INVASION. See the Fall of Rome for more details on why that's FUCKING BAD you dickless twits.
Re:And what's the problem here? (Score:5, Informative)
There are a lot of big problems in our mishmash of vested interests that leads to so much wasted money.
* We have a legal system that allows for excessive damages in medical malpractice suits. This makes it mandatory for doctors to carry a heavy burden of insurance and that gets passed on to whoever is paying for the medical care. Doctors over-perform tests and over-prescribe drugs because of fear they may be sued.
* Prescription drugs are allowed to be marketed to consumers, driving demand and insurance costs where covered.
* Pharmaceutical prices are unregulated, allowing excessive profiteering.
* Hospitals are allowed to operate for profit. WTF?
* Hospitals are able to milk patients with inflated fees for basic items.
* Medical insurance companies are allowed to operate for profit.
* Mutual insurance companies are allowed to convert to for-profit status.
* Employer provided health insurance reduces the competitiveness among insurers because the employees don't directly feel the brunt of the costs and lack options from different providers that would drive costs down. This unnecessarily raises costs for private insurance. It remains to be seen how the new plan will save money here.
Re:Damn You George Bush!!! (Score:2, Informative)
Exactly. I fail to understand why nobody will just look at the facts. Where are the school records, the medical records, all the records that every. other. president. evar. has released??!
We can't even get an answer as to which hospital he was born in, so that it's lobby can be emblazoned in gold.
He's spent over 2 million of his own money keeping a $15 reprint of his actual birth certificate hidden away. I can't believe that people think a 'birth certificate' without a doctor's name/signature, attending nurse's name/signature, place of birth, etc. would be legitimate. A 'Certification of Live Birth' and a 'Birth Certificate' are not the same thing.
Hawii had become our 50th state in 1959 (BO supposedly born in 61), and was issuing Certification of Live Birth forms for anybody that came in wanting one, with or without proof a child had been born. Obama's mom had one generated when she got to Hawaii, well after his birth in Kenya, which is what automatically created the newspaper mentions of his birth.
Another funny thing, is the democrats in power had the nerve to hold a debate on whether John McCain (not my 1st choice, btw) was a 'natural born citizen' (due to his birth in Panama, on a US Military base), but laughed at the fact that Obama might not be one.
Re:And what's the problem here? (Score:4, Informative)
Please stay away from Arizona. I like the law here a lot, why do you want to protect the intruder? If you don't belong in a house then don't enter it, how hard is that to follow? Whenever places pass laws against Castle Doctrine there are always asshole criminals who break into someones house, get shot up but not killed, and then end up suing the poor homeowners. Also look at gun control stats and you will find that anywhere in the US that has increased gun control there is an increase in criminal behavior and places with less gun control usually have much lower rates of crime.
While you may feel safe calling the police and waiting for them to arrive when an intruder breaks into your home I prefer to actually be able to protect myself and if the intruder does not respond and run the other way after my warning then they will be having a close conversation with a bullet not long after. Many home invasions in Arizona result in the homeowner and others seriously injured or dead and many are also kidnapped (Phoenix is number 2 in the WORLD for kidnappings, Mexico City is the only other city in the world with more), I won't be messing around with any intruders that is for sure. Here is a link to an article about how Phoenix is the kidnapping capital of the USA:
http://articles.courant.com/2010-03-17/news/hc-freshperez-mexico-drug-carte.artmar17_1_drug-cartels-ciudad-juarez-border-town [courant.com]
Re:Lol. (Score:4, Informative)
The correct term for such invaders is illegal aliens. Please stop referring to them as illegal immigrants, as immigrants enter the country legally. Illegal aliens do not.
Re:And what's the problem here? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:It'll never fly... (Score:4, Informative)
Lemme tell you a little story:
I have an "authentic, long-form birth certificate, signed by the physician who delivered him and bearing an authentic raised seal". It was issued in California when I was born.
You know who won't accept it of proof of my birth? The State of California. Or, for that matter, any of the other 49 states, nor the federal government.
Why? The thing is a forger's wet dream. The blank form was a xerox of a xerox of a xerox (and so on), that was filled out on an IBM Selectric typewriter. There is an indecipherable scrawl in the space for the doctor's signature. Yes there's a seal, but it's really hard to make out after being compressed by a stack of papers in my parent's safety deposit box for decades. And I could order a copy of that seal from thousands of places on the Internet for less than $40.
What will these states take as proof of my birth? A certified abstract of birth, issued by the State of California. Much like the one Obama put out on the Internet. Why? It actually has some anti-counterfeiting technology in it.
You know who doesn't have a birth certificate from a US state? John McCain. He was born in Panama (he's a citizen, since he was born to US parents).
So, can we stop the birther bullshit and get on with trying to govern?
Re:And what's the problem here? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:It'll never fly... (Score:2, Informative)
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthcertificate.asp [snopes.com] You'll note how well snopes goes into this "conspiracy" For example, two different Hawaii newspapers printed a birth announcement for him. The whole birther thing, well its bull. I'm sorry.
Snopes sources should help you some.
Hinkelman, Michael. "Judge Rejects Montco Lawyer's Bid to Have Obama Removed from Ballot." Philadelphia Daily News. 25 October 2008.
Koppelman, Alex. "Sex, Lies and Creatively Edited Interviews with Sarah Obama." Salon. 5 December 2008.
Nakaso, Dan. "Obama's Certificate of Birth OK, State Says." Honolulu Advertiser. 1 November 2008.
Nakaso, Dan. "Hawaii: Obama Birth Certificate Is Real." Honolulu Advertiser. 27 July 2009.
Nakaso, Dan. "Hawaii officials confirm Obama's Original Birth Certificate Still Exists." Honolulu Advertiser. 28 July 2009.
Voell, Paula. "Teacher from Kenmore Recalls Obama Was a Focused Student." The Buffalo News. 20 January 2009.
Associated Press. "State Department of Health Declares Obama Birth Certificate Legal." Honolulu Star-Bulletin. 31 October 2008.
Associated Press. "Challenge to Obama Is Dismissed." The New York Times. 5 March 2009.
The Economist. "Born Under a Bad Sign." 28 November 2008.
'fraud proof' - yeah right (Score:3, Informative)
I stopped reading at 'fraud proof'. If it's gonna happen, it'll happen. But 'fraud proof' is a joke.
-SonicDawg
Healthcare used to be cheap. Believe it or NOT! (Score:2, Informative)
Not knowing the average age of posters I'm willing to bet it's somewhere around 30. Well I'm almost 60 and I can tell you that health care used to be cheap. A doctor's visit was $8 and insurance cost me around $30/month but most people didn't need it because we were more fit back then.
So what happened? In one word I'll tell you. Government!
First the government mandated that employers provide insurance to their employees. The insurance companies loved this since it brought them more customers. The side effect however was that having insurance meant that instead of simply putting a band-aid on it people went to the doctor or the emergency room and the insurance company got billed. Higher demand and assurance of payment meant that doctors and hospitals could raise fees. Higher costs forced up insurance rates. Unfortunately the higher costs put more burden on people with fixed incomes and the poor. And lets not forget the unions hand in all of this.
So government created Medicare and Medicaid.
This was fucking great for the doctors, hospitals and even the insurance companies. Doctors and hospitals could charge more for their services and the insurance companies could raise their rates. More money running through the insurance companies means more cash flow, always a good thing.
Meanwhile people began to believe that medical care was a right and not something you had to pay for. The disconnecting of the cost-benefit ratio was removed from the consumer and thrust into the hands of Insurance companies and faceless bureaucrats.
Things went along like that with ever increasing costs and more demands for government to do something. So in order to get elected the knotheads in congress made more poorly thought-out laws. They kept getting elected by knothead voters. And so it goes.
So now, not only is medical care extremely expensive but the government will now force everyone to buy insurance even if they are young and strong and don't need it.
And the costs WILL go up.
Cost cutting won't work and will result in less quality and less availability. Even more of the costs will be taken up by paper(computer)work. I do consulting for a large medical clinic and about 1/3 or more of the staff have nothing to do with providing health care. Their jobs are exclusively doing the work necessary to bill the insurance companies or the government for payment. The billing costs so much that people with no insurance at all get a greatly reduced rate for care.
So everybody, despite all of the assurances from the news parrots and government lackeys, costs WILL go up and taxes WILL go up to pay for it. Either taxes will go up or the debt will go up. My guess is both will go up. Increases in taxes and debt are unsustainable and eventually lenders will stop lending and taxpayers won't be able to pay.
I hear the economy in Argentina is improving.
Re:And what's the problem here? (Score:3, Informative)
Wrong. A significant amount of Americans foam at the mouth at the thought of a paternalistic government scheming to control more and more of our lives. It *IS* a slippery slope. Social Security and Medicare *ARE* socialism, and both programs *ARE* falling apart.
It's not our fault you're shit at governing yourselves.
That is what we're foaming at the mouth about. You'll have to excuse me, but I don't care to be European. My feeling for European society can be summed up with the words "sniveling" and "weak". I've never been there. My views are derived from discussions that I've had with Europeans. You don't have to agree with me, but neither do I have to agree with you.
I, on the other hand, have first hand experience of the USA so have a rather better basis for my views. Most of you are decent folks individually, it's just collectively that you have your heads shoved up your arses. We did it earlier than you, we did it bigger than you, and we did it better than you, then we got over it and realised that civilised countries care for their poor.
Hell, fuck the poor for a minute, civilised countries care for their veterans! Nothing about the USA annoys me more than the way you treat your veterans, pansy ass motherfuckers thinking your hard because you own a gun? Grow a set and start thinking about the people who REALLY fought for your country.