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, Funny)
Re:Wow (Score:4, Interesting)
Personally, I don't see it as a big deal. I already have a federal ID (passport) and have to show an ID when boarding a plane (state issued DL or passport or military ID). I also used to carry a federal (DOD) ID card. Never once have I thought that having to prove who I say I am as an invasion of my privacy or my rights.
Other than closing loopholes, I'm not sure why they require it to enter a federal park - are we afraid the terrorist will go after the deer and chipmunks?
It's not the chipmunks you have to worry about... (Score:4, Funny)
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.
AAAALVIIIIIINNN!!!!!!11 (Score:4, Funny)
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: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Wow (Score:4, Insightful)
If he's a US citizen, he will, on April 15th, just like the rest of us.
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Papers for Yosemite?! (Score:5, Interesting)
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:5, Interesting)
You're probably right, everyone at or below the poverty level deserves to be there. So it's not useful to feel sorry for them or try to help them get out of the situation.
I'm not arguing that no one is like this, but I'm arguing that there are probably a lot more than you realize. Unfortunately the people that get noticed are the people who abuse the situation, and as a result they make it harder for the other people who are in that situation through misfortune or who only have the natural talents to land a minimum wage job (which is substantially below the poverty level).
Watch In Pursuit of Happyness. Although everything turns out ok in the end, it's not a feel-good movie, and that was not its point. The point of the movie is to show how it is that you can try your absolute hardest and still fail through misfortune and bad decisions (which were only identifiable as bad in hind sight). If there weren't programs to help this guy get out of the situation he was in, he would not have been able to, as it was he had to risk everything he had, small as it was, on a long shot, and he got lucky. This is a true story.
Re:Wow (Score:4, Insightful)
JOhn
Eco 101 for the numerically challenged (Score:5, Interesting)
You don't get out much, do you? Check out http://www.westegg.com/inflation/ [westegg.com], and try the US from 1800-1850, and 1850-1900. Looking at the latter case first, what cost $100 US in 1850 cost $100.10 in 1900 - virtual price stability over half a century! In the former case, what cost $100 in 1800 cost less than $49 in 1850. Now read that last sentence over slowly for maximum comprehension - prices actually fell by half in the years 1800-1850.
From 1900-1950, prices roughly tripled. From 1950-2000, prices roughly went up by a factor of 7. So if you're trying to say that recent inflation has been less than it was in, say, the 1970's, I'll agree with you, but your original statement is pure nonsense.
Now maybe you mean cost of living. Yes that has gone up, but not so much do to increase costs, those have been steadily dropping as well in terms of real dollars, but in terms of people's expectations.
Now, this is truly hilarious. What is the substantive difference between "cost of living" and "inflation"? Here's the Statistics Canada definition of cost of living:
A cost-of-living adjustment is used to offset a change (usually a decrease) in the purchasing power of income. Cost-of-living adjustments modify future benefits, typically on an annual basis, to keep pace with inflation. These adjustments are usually linked to changes as measured by an index of movements in prices; the most widely used is the Consumer Price Index (CPI).
I'll be the first to admit that there are many different ways to measure inflation, although the CPI is often the most common. The "GDP deflator" is another popular measure; it is usually very close to the CPI figure.
Now, since you're clearly economically illiterate, let me fill you in a couple of not so widely hidden secrets. 1) Since both the US and Canadian governments are on the hook for huge entitlement programs, such as welfare, pensions, etc., all of which are subject to annual COLA changes, both governments have a vested interest in the keeping that COLA number as low as possible. Now, in 2003-2004, the average US household spent 34% of its net income on housing, 18% on transportation, and 13% on food; that's 65% of total disposable income. Doesn't leave a whole lot for those "wants" you rant on about, especially when you consider that health care and insurance/pensions eat up another 15% of income. (http://www.bls.gov/ro6/fax/cex_hou.htm) However, whenever you see "core CPI", it's usually accompanied by the phrase "not including volatile food and energy components". Meanwhile, housing expenses have been adjusted down to reflect the low rates people are paying on "teaser" mortgages that offered low initial rates, no down payment, no principal repayment, "overmortgaging" (i.e. providing a mortgage worth $130,000 on a $100,000 house - sweet, you've got $30k to buy a new car!), etc. Now, when those mortgages get reset this year and next (you have been reading about the sub-prime crisis, haven't you?), what do you want to bet that "volatile housing costs" will also be excluded from the government stats?
And that's not even discussing the "hedonic" adjustments, where beauraucrats attempt to divine how much recent improvements in processor speeds, lower RAM and disk costs, etc. have lowered the "real" cost of computing resources. (I'll be the first to admit that the 512k RAM, 10MB disk Mac that I bought for $3,000 Cdn in 1985 was far more expensive in real terms than the Dell Pentium4 running at 2.8 Ghz with 512 MB RAM, and an 80 GB hard disk for $800 Cdn paid two years ago.) However, how do you compute the decrease in the cost of living from having 4 blades on your razor instead of 2? From having 4 or 6 airbags in your car instead of 2? In short, the official statistics are giggered to produce a consistently
Re: (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 m
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Learn things, dummy.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
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: (Score:3, Informative)
> income
The low end of that, yeah. For 2007, per http://www.irs.gov/formspubs/article/0,,id=164272, 00.html [irs.gov] you pay "$39,148.75 plus 33% of the amount over 160,850" as long as you earn less than $349,700. That means that to hit $75,000 tax your taxable income needs to be about $270000.
The gross would be higher, of course. But in that range, the difference is pretty slim. For example, in 2006 personal exempti
Re:Just so you know (Score:4, Interesting)
In addition, our default sales tax is 21% (yes, you read that correctly). The vast majority of the price of petrol (gasoline) is tax. Oh - and did I mention that retail prices are higher here than in the US too?
You'd think these taxes would pay for lots, but our kids don't have enough classrooms, we don't have enough teachers, nurses or police, an entire city doesn't have clean water, our hospitals are inadequate and A&E patients are left on trolleys in corridors, we're only now getting some decent roads in the country, our public transport is the worst in Europe - people drive more km per person in Ireland than the US. Also, this performance gets a government re-elected for the third time.
Admittedly most people have jobs (~4% unemployment, that includes people who can't work or are between jobs). Still, it feels like we've almost got the social injustices of American-style capitalism with the tax burden of European social democracy.
Re: (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
Re:Wow (Score:5, Funny)
Military officers obey orders & procedures (Score:4, Informative)
But wait, we don't believe in conspiracies here. Hmm.
Genital-based identification scheme. (Score:4, Funny)
The way you can tell that you're interacting with a government agency is the distinct feeling that you're being fucked.
Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
It was the war to retain our prior way of life, which we obviously lost.
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Wow (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (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.
Re: (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)
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:4, Informative)
Sure, they would start with Iraq, Egypt, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia. They've tried, and are even succeeding in some cases.
But the major thing they hate is our support for dictators in the Middle East that block their efforts towards establishing new theocratic states, either by democratic vote or by coup. The U.S., even though it's "committed to democracy", would rather have a friendly dictator in place than a democratically elected government that rejects the USA. This can be a messy argument (is a theocratic state truly free? etc.)
Re: (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 cou
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)
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.
Re: (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 lin
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: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.
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.
Closing off the Canadian border... (Score:3, Interesting)
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: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.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: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:Papers please! (Score:5, Insightful)
Showing papers to travel within the country is not what a free people do.
Re:Papers please! (Score:5, Informative)
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:Papers please! (Score:4, Interesting)
I can clearly recall my 4th grade teacher talking about that when she was explaining why America is good and the Soviet Union bad. In the news, point by point, I see today's U.S. becoming the Soviet Union that she taught us was bad.
I also remember the class asking her why the Russians don't just vote for sombody who will fix all of that and her explaining that nobody they could vote for wanted to make it better. That too has a bit of a haunting ring to it today.
Here in Georgia, the state government isn't openly revolting against RealID but isn't exactly endorsing it either. I wonder how the Federal government feels about footing the bills for the international airport itself. I ask since if I'm not allowed to fly, I'll be damned if I'm going to let my state taxes pay for an airport.
Re:Papers please! (Score:4, Interesting)
Change from the USA. i.e. no one looked at me like I had two heads when I paid cash for a domestic plane ticket.
I'd also assume that it was much more restrictive under the Jaruzelski dictatorship in the 80s.
-b.
Re:Papers please! (Score:5, Interesting)
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:Papers please! (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: (Score:3, Funny)
They certainly do have that right.
If they want to live, all they have to do is leave the mother. And don't give me that liberal crap about how they "can't" leave and must therefore be protected by yet more layers of bureaucratic government. What you and your type are really about is a relentless drive for socialism, you goddamn commie pinkos!
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:Papers please! (Score:4, Insightful)
and yes I am an american.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
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."
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: (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: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.
Algebra (Score:3, Informative)
The word algebra even has an Arabic root. [nodak.edu] Perhaps we should call algebra "Liberty Arithmetic" in the post-9/11 world.
-b.
Re: (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.
Your papers please. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Your papers please. (Score:5, Funny)
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:remember when? (Score:4, Interesting)
Then I read your comment.
Short, simple, and elegant. In one movie quote you managed to sum up exactly what's wrong with this program, in a way that appeals even to those who DON'T think that all republicans are "Bushitler ts". Thank you for that.
Vote for Ron Paul 2008 (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Vote for Ron Paul 2008 (Score:5, Interesting)
But the wonderful thing about him is that, as a libertarian, he believes that the federal government has no role in deciding these issues. He would leave them up to the states to decide. In favor of women's reproductive rights? Create a petition to get the matter into your state legislature or constitution. Want single payer health care? Pressure your state representatives, or, again, get enough signatures to get it on your state's ballots.
Wow, people might actually start to feel like we have a representational democracy again, instead of a bunch of Washington insiders bought by corporate lobbyists!
Re:Vote for Ron Paul 2008 - ENOUGH (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (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 govern
Costs of passport (Score:4, Informative)
My passport cost me 97 dollars last time I got one, and not everyone has that kind of money lying around
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!
A passport is not a requirement (Score:4, Insightful)
Solution: Pick any other country. Move there. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The French are proud of their democracy and consider themselves o
I left america and I'm NEVER going back (Score:3, Interesting)
I left America five years ago to live in a European country. Granted, things aren't perfect but I would NEVER fucking go back and live in America again. The country is increasingly deluded, lazy, fearful (Slashdot company excepted), and awash with shit food. Don't even bother to argue - the Stop and Shop has lots of food, but it is mostly crap.
I make roughly $70,000 per year - so I'm a member of the middle class. Why the hell would I leave this Western democracy where my taxes actually generate a tangible benefit for me and my children in the form of healthcare that isn't contingent on my current employer? The food is generally fresher and the markets more diverse, if I pay for primary and secondary education for my kids it is a HELL of a lot better and the university fees are negligible.
The American middle class is getting totally fucked - and has been for years. What the fuck do your tax dollars buy you? What precisely does the current federal government do for the middle classes?
Re:I left america and I'm NEVER going back (Score:5, Funny)
Hey come on, they build freeways and bridges oh wait...
Round and round she goes.... (Score:5, Interesting)
Y'all are missing the real Catch-22 here. How could a passport substitute for Real ID? A passport is a federal document. Once Real ID is in effect, no doubt you will need one to obtain or renew a passport, no? So if you have no Real ID, you can't use your passport instead, because you will need the ID to get or renew the passport. Damned if you do and damned if you don't.
This battle isn't over yet by far, because in addition to the few states that have explicitly refused to participate, many others are discussing it in their legislatures, and some of those are leaning towards saying "drop dead" to the Feds as well. Sooner or later, we will reach a critical mass of states that represent a significant enough percentage of the U.S. population (and, hence, of voters) that would be classified as second-class citizens, and that will put the kibosh on the whole mess. I just hope those legislatures have some backbone....
You can keep up with the current status of Real ID legislation in the various states at the Real Nightmare [realnightmare.org] website.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
It's worth mentioning. (Score:5, Insightful)
This is security theatre -- worse still, it removes freedoms from us non-terrorists.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Fourteen of the 19 hijackers, including nine Saudi muscle hijackers, obtained new passports. Some of these passports were then likely doctored by the al Qaeda passport division in Kandahar, which would add or erase entry and exit stamps to cre= ate "false trails" in the passports.
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
Tempest in a teapot (Score:3, Interesting)
I will continue to oppose government invasion into the personal sphere -- for example, wiretapping, secret search warrants, and gag orders -- but I think it's time we accept that our public actions -- purchases, travel, employment -- are already public. They are meticulously documented and combed by all sorts of actors, and by and large the world has not collapsed into an Orwellian nightmare. Certainly, there are Orwellian aspects to our society, particularly with the current group in the White House, but that seems like a phenomenon independent from the stuff this Real ID would be used for.
Now wait a minute. (Score:5, Insightful)
Hey, even suicide airplane hijackers gotta relax (Score:4, Funny)
Yeah. Sounds plausible to me.
In Soviet America (Score:5, Insightful)
Lot's of bitching but a 64% voter turnout (Score:3, Insightful)
Operation Enduring Yodel (Score:5, Funny)
Re:So ... Basically... (Score:4, Insightful)
Captain Ramius: I suppose.
Capt. Vasili Borodin: No papers?
Captain Ramius: No papers, state to state.
Re:So ... Basically... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:So ... Basically... (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, the founding fathers committed an armed overthrow of the legitimate government. If you were to ask England, they were murderers, terrorists, and they committed treason. Had they not succeeded, they would have been executed as traitors to the crown.
The difference between a traitor and a patriot is often a matter of how successful one was. Fortunately for the United States, the people who started it's government did so because they wanted freedom from an oppressive government, rather than simply freedom to institute their own oppressive government. Unfortunately, there has been a sever slide towards tyranny in recent years.
We could use a few more patriots in this nation, even if it did result in some people dying in a revolution. The safest life is a solitary one in a padded cell, but I certainly wouldn't want to live like that. Besides, if it's acceptable for a soldier to fight (and give his life) to "preserve our way of life", why is it wrong to fight to better our way of life?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Funny thing though: you don't hear much about Swiss terrorists and their crime rates are extremely low...
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:Evil company: RealNetworks (Score:5, Funny)