|
M_Gargantua posted:I've been to Canada plenty of times and not even needed to show a passport in either direction either. Passports are almost a luxury item in NA I thought they changed that recently?
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 15:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 14:31 |
|
|
IRQ posted:I thought they changed that recently? I live in Montreal, and I can't cross over to either VT or NY without one. Same for my wife and 18-month-old son. EDIT: Ok, I've been corrected; apparently, if you're driving, you can usually get by with just a birth certificate. Passport is easier, though. Rupert Buttermilk fucked around with this message at 15:50 on Feb 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 15:46
|
|
|
The Cheshire Cat posted:The thing about passports in the US/Canada is that they're both HUGE countries compared to anywhere in Europe (I don't know where you live but I'm assuming Europe). So there's not nearly as much international travel happening compared to domestic travel - you can be on a flight for several hours and not actually have left the country, meanwhile in the EU a lot of people cross national borders every day just to go to work. I know that the whole purpose of the EU is that you DON'T have to go through cumbersome border checks all the time, but the point is that it's more of an attitude thing - in the EU it's a daily necessity; in NA you only get a passport if you're going on a trip. All this and it's going to be just as difficult to get a passport in terms of information needed as it is a state ID, with the added bonus of a state ID costing 20 bucks, while a passport costs over 100.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 15:48
|
|
|
As with most issues it boils down to a lack of worker protections, if you even tried to take that 5th Wednesday off to go to the DMV most minimum wage level jobs will fire you, even if they let you take the untime paid off that days work + the license is the difference between paying the rent or not for a large portion of the poor.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 15:51
|
|
|
socialsecurity posted:As with most issues it boils down to a lack of worker protections, if you even tried to take that 5th Wednesday off to go to the DMV most minimum wage level jobs will fire you, even if they let you take the untime paid off that days work + the license is the difference between paying the rent or not for a large portion of the poor. Just get in your gosh darned car and drive to the next town over on your day off it'll only take an hour or two is that really so much to ask? - Republicans
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 15:53
|
|
|
When I was 18 I got kicked out of my dad's house and had to go move in with my mom, but she lived in a different state. In a the very liberal state of washington, to be able to get a license starting from scratch I had to
If I had been working on top of it then yeah good the gently caress luck getting a stupid ID card if anything in your life happens. Thankfully I had my mom who could drive me everywhere on top of it, which I would have been hosed had i have to bus. Also there's no law saying you need to carry an ID, so, if you're black and you don't feel like getting in trouble, don't carry an ID and say nothing to police. They can take you in, but they won't cause of all the work if you just shut the gently caress up. Voter ID laws are intended to suppress poor people and minorities from voting.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 16:04
|
|
|
socialsecurity posted:As with most issues it boils down to a lack of worker protections, if you even tried to take that 5th Wednesday off to go to the DMV most minimum wage level jobs will fire you, even if they let you take the untime paid off that days work + the license is the difference between paying the rent or not for a large portion of the poor. Every job I've ever had required me to show a photo ID and social security card to gain employment there. I would think most working people have IDs already and the people having trouble getting ID are not employed (or not employed legally).
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 16:10
|
|
|
GutBomb posted:Every job I've ever had required me to show a photo ID and social security card to gain employment there. I would think most working people have IDs already and the people having trouble getting ID are not employed (or not employed legally). You're only legally required to get someone's social security number so you can pay taxes. The restaurant and construction industry would be dead if ID's were a requirement. Also non working people turns out have a right to vote too so what does working have to do with anything!!!
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 16:17
|
|
|
Veskit posted:If I had been working on top of it then yeah good the gently caress luck getting a stupid ID card if anything in your life happens. Thankfully I had my mom who could drive me everywhere on top of it, which I would have been hosed had i have to bus. Also there's no law saying you need to carry an ID, so, if you're black and you don't feel like getting in trouble, don't carry an ID and say nothing to police. They can take you in, but they won't cause of all the work if you just shut the gently caress up. Now just imagine if you had a kid or infirm relative to take care of and there's no useful public transit where you live (eg many of the shitholes passing voter ID laws).
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 16:32
|
|
|
Veskit posted:You're only legally required to get someone's social security number so you can pay taxes. The restaurant and construction industry would be dead if ID's were a requirement. I'm definitely not saying they don't have a right to vote. I was specifically commenting that working people would probably already have IDs so the hardships involved in getting ID shouldn't be employment related, but I've now been informed that a lot of jobs don't. Every job I've ever had has been in IT so when I was asked for ID I'd just give it over, assuming it was required.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 16:43
|
|
|
M_Gargantua posted:I've been to Canada plenty of times and not even needed to show a passport in either direction either. Passports are almost a luxury item in NA When? It's against the laws of both countries now unless you have an EZpass or whatever that are made for truckers to get through quickly. Sucks since a 10-year passport is like $150 which sucks when you don't have steady work.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 17:57
|
|
|
Krowley posted:To be fair, if I lived in the states I'd probably also be highly skeptical about the US government and how it wants to gently caress me over yet again Yeah but the stupid part is that people are afraid of the wrong parts of government. The parts people hate are all the appointed positions because "no accountability" or some bullshit, even though 99% of those people are just basic public servants just collecting a paycheck with no power or inclination to do some kind of crazy big brother poo poo. Meanwhile it's the elected officials that are screwing everyone over and yet no matter what they do they keep getting re-elected, because the media has trained people to think that the president is the only elected official who matters.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 20:24
|
|
|
njsykora posted:It's still extremely weird to me when I see election results declared with less than 10% of the vote having actually been counted. Huh? Why is that weird? A) it's usually 10% of precincts that have reported votes, and B) you can pretty reliably call results when your statistical model is trending close to reality.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 04:27
|
|
|
ultramiraculous posted:Huh? Why is that weird? A) it's usually 10% of precincts that have reported votes, and B) you can pretty reliably call results when your statistical model is trending close to reality. It completely goes against the way I understand elections to work, where in the UK the result is only announced once every single vote in a constituency has been counted so they can announce the exact numbers with the declaration.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 04:30
|
|
|
njsykora posted:It completely goes against the way I understand elections to work, where in the UK the result is only announced once every single vote in a constituency has been counted so they can announce the exact numbers with the declaration. The US still doesn't have exact vote tallies for an election that happened 16 years ago, so that ain't gonna work here.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 04:47
|
|
|
njsykora posted:It completely goes against the way I understand elections to work, where in the UK the result is only announced once every single vote in a constituency has been counted so they can announce the exact numbers with the declaration. The government never calls an election until it counts all the votes. The people calling the election are all private entities using public information in conjunction with their private polling to make a call. They've gotten it wrong before, like in 2000 with Florida. All the networks calling an election is, is them deciding that their prediction is statistically likely to be right. They even wait far longer than is necessary to call the winner. I'm going to preempt all the news outlets and go ahead and call South Carolina for Trump and Hillary with a too Early to Call for Cruz 2nd place finish. For my next trick, Hillary Clinton wins the November 8th election but it's too early to call which "swing" states she won. No Butt Stuff posted:The US still doesn't have exact vote tallies for an election that happened 16 years ago, so that ain't gonna work here. That's only because of an extraordinary ruling by the Supreme Court. Subsequent counts show that Gore won, but due to the close nature of the election and the use of idiotic paper push ballots we'll never know the exact number. Gyges fucked around with this message at 04:51 on Feb 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 04:49
|
|
|
Gyges posted:The government never calls an election until it counts all the votes. The people calling the election are all private entities using public information in conjunction with their private polling to make a call. They've gotten it wrong before, like in 2000 with Florida. All the networks calling an election is, is them deciding that their prediction is statistically likely to be right. A lot of the time it seems to be a pointless race to see who can call the election "first", like somehow it's more important to do it before everyone else rather than actually have the right results. I mean it's not like this is a new thing:  (Although to be fair, that case happened because print media needs to start the presses before the actual election is over if they want to be able to release on time the next day. 24 hour news networks and the internet don't have that excuse)
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 06:56
|
|
|
njsykora posted:It completely goes against the way I understand elections to work, where in the UK the result is only announced once every single vote in a constituency has been counted so they can announce the exact numbers with the declaration. It's not the government doing the "calling" at that point, though, it's the media. Does the UK not do precinct-by-precinct/county-by-county results as votes are counted? What's happening when a media outlet "calls" a race after the state closes its polls and with 10% or whatever precincts, which average like 500-2500 voters each depending on the state, have reported their official tally. This all usually occurs a decent while after all the polls in a given time one are closed, and it's not legally official until every vote is counted (which might not be for days if the state is waiting on absentee/mail ballots). Edit: As I'm posting this I'm wondering if you think 10% reporting means 10% of votes were cast?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 08:02
|
|
|
njsykora posted:It completely goes against the way I understand elections to work, where in the UK the result is only announced once every single vote in a constituency has been counted so they can announce the exact numbers with the declaration. The UK works in exactly the same way. Our previous general election was also projected after the exit polls, and then you will see the votes coming in county by county once fully counted. We do use the term "projected win" instead of "called", but once this happens all media outlets will just run with it.  Also just wanted to chip in and say that the other difference is that many European countries have mandatory ID laws requiring you to have one on you at all times when you're in public, even. They are just so much more common here. I wouldn't necessarily be against voting ID laws if they were incredibly easy to get.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 08:19
|
|
|
The UK is so lax with voter protection that I found out via my housemate that I was eligible to vote (I'd recently moved into the area), because he saw my name on the list when he went. No ID required or anything. No deep rooted fear about vote fraud either.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 12:45
|
|
|
EL BROMANCE posted:The UK is so lax with voter protection that I found out via my housemate that I was eligible to vote (I'd recently moved into the area), because he saw my name on the list when he went. No ID required or anything. No deep rooted fear about vote fraud either. There isn't any fear about voter fraud in the US either, it's conservatives' fear of minorities and poors voting.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 15:32
|
|
|
Whenever I hear all this hubub about voter fraud, my mind drifts back to 2000 and 2004, when there was also a lot of talk about dead people voting, as well as stuff about hanging chad. Really it's always the party who isn't in the whitehouse that makes all the noise about voter fraud. I also remember hearing a lot of stuff about electronic voting machines being calibrated to register votes for some candidates twice as much, or not register half of the votes for other candidates, and how easy it is to hack the electronic voting machines, and I doubt whether that problem's been solved at all.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 18:14
|
|
|
IRQ posted:There isn't any fear about voter fraud in the US either, it's conservatives' fear of minorities and poors voting. Yeah I've seen the issue covered before showing the data just isn't there to prove it happens. I thought LWT covered it some time ago, but must've been Daily Show and Colbert.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 18:45
|
|
|
The reason they're able to get traction with it is because your first thought is that you should need to have an ID to vote, it seems common sense. It isn't until you really dig into it that you realize what a mess it is trying to change it. It plays into a lot of fears people have of accountability, fear of impersonation, fear of impotence of their vote not mattering, etc.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 18:48
|
|
|
sweek0 posted:Also just wanted to chip in and say that the other difference is that many European countries have mandatory ID laws requiring you to have one on you at all times when you're in public, even. They are just so much more common here. I wouldn't necessarily be against voting ID laws if they were incredibly easy to get. So much this. When I first heard the voter ID laws, I didn't quite understand what the problem is, because everyone has to have ID anyway, right? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 19:19
|
|
|
Botnit posted:The reason they're able to get traction with it is because your first thought is that you should need to have an ID to vote, it seems common sense. It isn't until you really dig into it that you realize what a mess it is trying to change it. It plays into a lot of fears people have of accountability, fear of impersonation, fear of impotence of their vote not mattering, etc. Well depending upon where you live your vote basically doesn't count, or counts for far more. But the electoral college/winner take all being bullshit is another topic for another day.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 19:28
|
|
|
IRQ posted:Well depending upon where you live your vote basically doesn't count, or counts for far more. But the electoral college/winner take all being bullshit is another topic for another day. Yeah, I was going to put asterisks next to all of them with examples of how we actually do have all of those fears being materialized, electoral college making your vote not matter, etc but got too lazy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 19:57
|
|
|
Botnit posted:The reason they're able to get traction with it is because your first thought is that you should need to have an ID to vote, it seems common sense. It isn't until you really dig into it that you realize what a mess it is trying to change it. It plays into a lot of fears people have of accountability, fear of impersonation, fear of impotence of their vote not mattering, etc. That's why all the people pushing it keep talking it up as a "common sense" law (seriously they said it so many times just in that LWT bit); because as mentioned there's no data indicating this is an ACTUAL problem, so the only justification they have for it is that it just makes sense.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 01:55
|
|
|
If an ID was easy and free to get, I could understand wanting to see it at the polls. The problem is that most people who have ID automatically assume its easy and cheap to get, but it isn't. My dad was in an accident when I was only a couple months old that left him paralyzed. At one point he had an ID card, but it expired (something we both learned when he was flying for the first time in over a decade, and thankfully/surprisingly TSA was cool about it). Trying to get his ID afterwards was a nightmare. It was easier and required less paperwork for him to get his Social Security benefits than to get a state issued photo ID thanks to the new requirements. Also, my dad had my mom and I to do everything for him and take him where he needed to go at the times he needed to go there. Someone in a similar situation without that type of support likely just wouldn't vote because of the ID requirements. I actually think having to show ID would streamline the process too. As of now, they look names up on printed paper and handwrite things on it. Scan an ID, have it pop up the details, give the ballot and you go vote. Nice and streamlined, reduces errors, etc. Just give everyone in the country an ID for free and I will be totally on board with its use at the polls.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 18:17
|
|
|
Getting an ID for my son, who is autistic and was 17 at the time, was almost a huge ordeal. In Illinois, the requirements for an initial (as opposed to replacement or renewal) state ID (w/ a photo) are the same as the requirements for a driver's license, sans the driving portion. The problem is that some of it isn't very easy to get if you're not the head of a household or something. You need... One thing from Group A: Written signature. We used his Social Security card for this. One thing from Group B: DOB. We had his birth certificate. One thing from Gropu C: SSN. Again, we used his social security card. Two things from Group D: Residency. This was the tricky one. I was in a panic, because almost everything from Group D is mail of some kind, and who the gently caress mails a kid anything? Kids don't pay the bills, so there are no bills with kids' names on them. After searching through all of the mail we hadn't thrown away, we got lucky: he had an EOB from our insurance company because of a doctor's visit, and we found a pay check stub from his school/work program that had our address on it. A lot of people, more than you think, don't have easy, or in some cases any, access to a birth certificate. For some older people, there never was a birth certificate because they were born at home and for whatever reason, their folks didn't register at the courthouse because what's the need? Everyone knows this is Clem Nordermeyer! He's going to work at the mill, just like his pappy. Getting equivalent documents isn't always easy, and sometimes there are no equivalent documents. Yes, this is much less of an issue for younger people or people who are working. But those aren't the only people who have the right to vote. When you create laws that, as a consequence, remove rights from certain people, there'd better be a really good reason. The crime of voter impersonation isn't a good reason because it all but never happens. When you take that flimsy veil of a reason in the context that these laws tend to disproportionately affect people who tend to vote for one of the two parties in our system, and then add in a dash of "they've accidentally admitted why they're actually doing this on multiple occasions," well, you have a good case against voter ID laws.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
Well, that was fantastic. Depressing as hell, but fantastic.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 05:42
|
|
|
Demiurge4 posted:In the US people are still deathly afraid of the government and any attempt at standardized ID is somehow infringement. I don't really get it myself but whatever. Isn't this what Social Security numbers are?
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 06:56
|
|
|
xcore posted:Isn't this what Social Security numbers are? Nah, that's just your account number for $300,000.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 07:00
|
|
|
xcore posted:Isn't this what Social Security numbers are? The people who are afraid of the national ID thing and all that crap get really skittish when it comes to the SSN. Oh, they have one, but they will not give it out. I had a job as customer service for a health insurance company years ago. The quickest, most common way to find someone's policy was to search by SSN, because you just can't expect people to look at the god drat card with their policy ID on it, because gently caress, gently caress, gently caress! TOO MUCH EFFORT!! So we'd ask for their SSN, and the ones who are all scared of national IDs, one-world-order, number-of-the-beast bullshit? They start asking YOU questions. Why am I asking for that number? Don't I know it? No, sir. You just called me, your insurance company. I do not know who you are, so clearly I don't know your number. You're aware that Big Insurance Company is more than just one office with three customers whose voices are all distinctive, right?
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 07:28
|
|
|
tarlibone posted:The people who are afraid of the national ID thing and all that crap get really skittish when it comes to the SSN. Oh, they have one, but they will not give it out. in the military our socials are on any document we sign
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 07:45
|
|
|
Nostalgia4Butts posted:in the military our socials are on any document we sign Funny thing is, I found out many years ago that it's not uncommon for the spouses of military personnel to know their spouses' SSNs while being unaware of their own SSNs. In fact, the people under the age of 21 or so who were most likely to know their own SSNs without having to look it up were either militaryfolk or college students. I'm not a veteran, but I know that I didn't know my own SSN by rote until after a year or two in college, another place where that number comes in handy a lot.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 09:36
|
|
|
tarlibone posted:Getting an ID for my son, who is autistic and was 17 at the time, was almost a huge ordeal. There are also recourses written into the law for if you lose one and also can't access a copy of your certificate, and so on, just like they should. Needless to say, the whole issue is absolutely bizarre to me. Wouldn't it be easier for the Democrats to push for free state ID laws and have those suffice for several years (and also be useful elsewhere) than to register voters regularly? I dunno... probably somebody did a cost/benefit analysis of that somewhere.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 14:17
|
|
|
Enough last week's last week tonight talk, how was last nights last week tonight?
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 15:40
|
|
|
Pablo Bluth posted:Enough last week's last week tonight talk, how was last nights last week tonight? Pretty loving stellar.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 15:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 14:31 |
|
|
meristem posted:Needless to say, the whole issue is absolutely bizarre to me. Wouldn't it be easier for the Democrats to push for free state ID laws and have those suffice for several years (and also be useful elsewhere) than to register voters regularly? I dunno... probably somebody did a cost/benefit analysis of that somewhere. Well, many times, there is a free provision written into these laws that we're talking about. It's just nearly impossible to take advantage of it, that's all. But the main problem isn't so much the fee, it's the myriad of documents you need in order to secure the ID--as I demonstrated above, this isn't always easy to do even in circumstances like mine where you're dealing with a young guy whose entire life has been fairly well documented in one way or another. And, then there's the issue of where to go to get the ID. In Illinois, we go to a Secretary of State office (previously the Driver's Service Facility or DSF; most other states call this the DMV), and there really are plenty of them around. The problem is waiting in line, which isn't a huge deal. But in some places, such facilities are few and far between, not open that often, and since state budgets in general have been in a crunch, these are the kinds of places that get chopped when the state needs to save money. If you live an hour or two away from the only facility that can provide the ID you need, and that facility is only open every now and then, and you have a low-paying wage-earning job where taking off work isn't always easy or possible without repercussions from your managers? Well, this can become quite an ordeal. It is important to note, though, that in Europe, it makes more sense for everyone to always have an ID. You have sovereign nation-states that are roughly the size of large American states, and they're all connected to each other by land and sea borders, rail, road, etc. In the US, we border two countries, and most people don't live particularly close to those borders. Many, if not most, Americans will never step foot outside the USA, either because of economic reasons or because the US is just so freaking big. For this reason, the need for a national ID just isn't as big here.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2016 16:17
|
|