Slashdot Mirror


Going to Yosemite? Get Your Passport Ready!

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.

125 of 969 comments (clear)

  1. Wow by UncleWilly · · Score: 5, Funny

    $14 billion seems a little expensive, I'm glad I already have a passport.

    1. Re:Wow by nurb432 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, actually it did. Just no one noticed.

      It was the war to retain our prior way of life, which we obviously lost.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    2. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      At least you were free-range sheep before... soon you'll be factory farmed.

    3. Re:Wow by jamstar7 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't think YOU would have to pay the $14 Billion.

      If he's a US citizen, he will, on April 15th, just like the rest of us.

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    4. Re:Wow by thynk · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Errrr... I don't think that's the price EACH... rather for price for all of them.

      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?

      --

      Good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment.
    5. Re:Wow by lawpoop · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Otherwise known as the War on Terror. The terrorists won; we have lost our freedoms. They have changed our way of life.

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    6. Re:Wow by datapharmer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      wow. I really wish I had that last mod point still... just don't know how I would have modded you... we need a "sadly true" option.

      --
      Get a web developer
    7. Re:Wow by Brian+Gordon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's approx $46.26 per person (according to census.gov numbers). That's more than 6 hours of work (at my minimum wage).. nice to know that the next time I go to work I'll earn nothing that day so that people can be forced to register their movements within their own country.

    8. Re:Wow by ElectricRook · · Score: 4, 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.

      --
      - High Tech workers, please say NO to Union Carpenters, their Union sees fit to control our compensation.
    9. Re:Wow by falcon5768 · · Score: 4, Interesting
      best part, you can use your passport to get a real ID, in compliant states.

      So in order to get your "Real ID" you have to possibly use a passport as one of your multiple documents, but if you dont HAVE a "Real ID" ID you only have to use your passport to get in and not the 3-4 other forms of ID you need JUST to get the Real ID license.

      I had this same issue of stupidity getting my "Real ID" license from the NJ state DMV. In order to get my new license because of the federal rules, I needed a official copy of my birth certificate (one with a seal) which meant I needed to go to the court in the city I was born in. This was along with a bill with my official address, my credit card, and my bank card (since they refused to use my school work ID DESPITE it being a officially accepted means of showing ID by both the state AND the federal governments and pointing out this fact to them by UNDERLINING the print on her sheet showing her what she could use.)

      You know what I needed to get my birth certificate, which counts for the most points in documents?

      Picture ID with my name on it. Didnt matter from where. And could have been easily forged.

      That was it.

      This system is completely fucking flawed, and I swear it will be a Real ID toting terrorist who next strikes the US. Because our government is full of idiotic assholes who think safety comes from a stupid piece of plastic.

      --

      "Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."

    10. Re:Wow by GodsBlood · · Score: 2, Informative

      You don't have to show proof of your ability to drive a car, a State ID works just fine, they're like $4 (here in IL).

    11. Re:Wow by mcpkaaos · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The terrorists won; we have lost our freedoms. They have changed our way of life.

      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.

      --
      It goes from God, to Jerry, to me.
    12. Re:Wow by Pentrant · · Score: 2, Informative

      FYI - The Spanish American War was concluded in 1898.

    13. Re:Wow by maxume · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You don't think it's a problem because you think the ID proves who you are. It doesn't. It demonstrates that some authority went to some level of trouble verifying that you are who you say you are, to the extent that you can trust that the paper was not forged. In the case of many government papers, it is indeed a pretty reliable indicator, but it is still pretty easy for corrupt officials to create very authentic papers with false information on them, information that happens to appear in very official databases. REAL ID does little to address the fraudulent issue of official cards(and makes such a card that much more valuable).

      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.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    14. Re:Wow by lawpoop · · 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.

      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?
      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    15. Re:Wow by Duhavid · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The *only* way?

      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.

      --
      emt 377 emt 4
    16. Re:Wow by bigpat · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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? Closing loopholes? What loophole would that be? I suppose they are most concerned about people visiting national monuments in the capital and such and doing bad things to them... not that knowing what someone's name and last known address really prevents people from doing bad things, but it sure does make politicians look like they aren't quite so stupid when they can identify the bad guys after the fact.

      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.

    17. Re:Wow by Keys1337 · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I'd say the poor get fucked the worst. Their contribution is smaller yet hurts the most. Sales taxes, semi-hidden taxes on utilities and gas. Pain in the ass regulations.

      You're welcome.

      Just because someone else paid more for the shackles and chains doesn't mean anyone should be grateful.

    18. Re:Wow by jfern · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Oh, you actually thought this was supposed to stop terrorism? No, it's to make you think that the government gives a shit about fighting terrorism, while they're training the next Bin Laden, or the next Nicaraguan Contras.

    19. Re:Wow by Keys1337 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't see how anyone should be expected to be grateful for you're contribution. Should they also hate you for paying for blowing up civilians, kidnapping/rendition programs, torture etc. You seem a bit angry about your tax bill, you should take that out on the people who threaten to stick you in a cage if you don't pay.

    20. Re:Wow by Kadin2048 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This time they spun it quite well, they got us to swallow it all bait and hook it's way down there this time. The timing was also quite effective, The nations youth and middle class are some of the most distractable Americans in history. I don't think the difference is really "distractability." The difference is demographics. In the 1960s and 70s, the Baby Boom generation was in its youth.

      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.
      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    21. Re:Wow by rdoger6424 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If they cracked down in the '50s but we rose back in the '60s, what's to say that there won't be kickback in the '10s for this crackdown?

      --
      "Hello 911? I just tried to toast some bread, and the toaster grew an arm and stabbed me in the face!"
    22. Re:Wow by Enahs · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The sentiment comes partially from George W. Bush's public speeches following September 11. In a nutshell, since the terrorists hate us for our freedoms, we should go on living our lives as we have, otherwise the terrorists have won.

      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?

      --
      Stating on Slashdot that I like cheese since 1997.
    23. Re:Wow by ZWithaPGGB · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yep: The war against statism. The people have become sheeple who want the government to keep them safe, so they have willingly given up the right to keep and bear arms, the right to privacy, the right to be secure against unwarranted searches and seizures (see the "War on drugs"), and now the right to freedom of association (movement).
      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.

    24. Re:Wow by Dun+Malg · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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?
      The parks/Federal Buildings thing is about leverage. When citizens of all those "holdout" states with non-federally-compliant state IDs go on vacation for 2 weeks to Jellystone National Park imagine what will happen. Dad drives up to the entrance in the family mini-van packed with the wife, 2.4 screaming kids, and a bunch of camping gear. The NPS Ranger at the booth takes a look at his NH driver's license and says "sorry sir, but you have to have a federally recognized ID to enter the park." So there they are, staying at the Best Western that night, looking at a long drive back to New Hampshire because their state doesn't want to comply with the federal standard. It's a load of crap, sure, but it's the way the feds do things.
      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    25. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I just don't get it. I mean sure, I bet some terrorist hate our freedom. And to those terrorists, they've won. But I figured those terrorists were just the ones made up by some sarcastic lefty or some misguided right-winger.

      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.

    26. Re:Wow by metaslashdot · · Score: 2, Funny

      The good news: at least you got to elect your officials this time 'round. Next time they'll just load up the Access database in the Diebold "voting machines" and crank out their own results.

      --
      hello cruel world
    27. Re:Wow by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Thank you for thinking that the $75k the Government stole from you was something you were doing and not something that was being done to you.

      Learn things, dummy.

      --
      Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
    28. Re:Wow by John+Jamieson · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "We Americans have enjoyed almost total security, in that our three neighbors consist of two good friends (Mexico and Canada)"

      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.

    29. Re:Wow by stinerman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Fair enough. Here's the deal: let's change places. I don't and have never paid a dime in federal income tax.

      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).

    30. Re:Wow by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The terrorists have won, in part.

      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.

    31. Re:Wow by srmalloy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It will be interesting to see the effect of the RealID mandates on our court system if the federal courts are unable to get a sufficient pool of jurors due to people who are summoned to jury duty being turned away because they don't have "proper" ID when they go to the court building to present themselves for duty.

    32. Re:Wow by cammoblammo · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yep, the military earned it's pay that day.

      --

      Cogito, ergo sig.

    33. Re:Wow by nahdude812 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Aah, love to hate the poor.

      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.

    34. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I remember desiring a detailed investigation into the crime and calm, measured action being taken.

      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.

    35. Re:Wow by DavidTC · · 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.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    36. Re:Wow by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 2, Insightful

      the $75k the Government stole from you

      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, 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.)

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    37. Re:Wow by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Their goal is to convert the world to Islam using force if necessary and turn every country into an Islamic state following Sharia law.

      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.

      I would like to see campaigning for the introduction of Sharia law or any other system that overthrows western ideas of democracy and freedom made treason.

      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.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    38. Re:Wow by DavidTC · · 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.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    39. Re:Wow by Milican · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Don't forget the inflation tax. Everyone pays that one, but the poor get screwed by it the most. Your home, your car, your savings, your retirement... it all gets eaten away by the Fed and their inflation. The poor get screwed the most because most of the time their wages don't keep up with inflation, and that keeps them poor.

      JOhn

    40. Re:Wow by Brian+Gordon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The only reason we use federal money is because they stick us in a cage if we don't.. "what is cesar's" isn't just cesar's stuff, it's things of real value that cesar has no right to.

    41. Re:Wow by ocelotbob · · Score: 2

      and have to show an ID when boarding a plane (state issued DL or passport or military ID)
      Untrue. You can, right now, go to any airport in the country, and fly without a state issued DL, passport, or Military ID. The only additional things they do is they swab your bags for explosives and pat you down if you don't fly with ID. I just did it last week, added maybe 5 minutes to check-in time.
      --

      Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

    42. Re:Wow by Charcharodon · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Last time I checked the federal tax rate was progressive. 10%-35%

      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.

    43. Re:Wow by BZ · · Score: 2, Informative

      > Paying $75000 in federal taxes equates to making somewhere around $300000-500000 in gross
      > income

      The low end of that, yeah. For 2007, per http://www.irs.gov/formspubs/article/0,,id=164272, 00.html 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 exemptions start to phase out once your gross is over 150,500 and are gone completely when your gross is at 273,000. That's if you're single. If you're married those numbers are higher by about $40,000. Similarly, most deductions phase out starting at a gross of $156,000 or so. See http://www.taxguideonline.com/ContentPages/ID_Phas eOut.html for some more numbers.

      And as you said, that excludes FICA (medicare & social security), etc. Those add at least $6,000 to your tax burden once you're over $80,000 or so gross income (even ignoring the employer half). So really, you need only $250,000 taxable income to easily hit $75,000 in federal tax.

    44. Re:Wow by Charcharodon · · Score: 2, Interesting
      For an interesting take on exactly how "Poor" we are in the US. Take a look at this global wealth ranking site.

      http://www.globalrichlist.com/

    45. Re:Wow by Stu+Charlton · · Score: 3, Informative

      Arguably, certain terrorists view Islamist theocracy as the only legitimate form of government. That would not be a very free state.

      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.)

      --
      -Stu
    46. Re:Wow by WindowlessView · · 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.

      --
      Leave the gun, take the cannolis.
    47. Re:Wow by Qrlx · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes, the federal income tax rate is progressive. But come now, federal income taxation is not the only tool in the taxman's shed. (Though, with the abolition of the inheritance tax, a move that stands economic justice on its ear, at least so far as the Founding Fathers were concerned, there is one less tool.)

      "Sales and fuel taxes are consumption taxes." Great, I guess I'll stop eating, stop putting fuel in the car so I can drive to work, and stop buying clothes. :)

      As for the 9-1-1 tax, that shows up on my phone bill (or at least it did when I had dialtone.) And yes, you can be poor and still have a phone, and a car. And you'll pay the same $100 to renew your registration as someone making orders of magnitude more. Admittedly this may not exactly be a tax, per se, it probably varies from state to state. But the burden is carried proporionately more by those with less wealth.

      As others have stated it's a matter of relative terms. In other words, so what if a poor person in America would be rich in some third world country, it's not like they can just move there and presto! become rich. You can't just add up the wealth, you have to look at cost of living, purchasing power, etc. Not to mention they probably wouldn't let you in the country since you'd just take a job from a citizen.

      I'm sure you know all this. What I can't understand why you're so combative regarding the simple fact that, when you add it all up, our tax system is regressive.

      For example, FICA: If you make over about $75,000 a year you max out your FICA contribution and they stopy deducting it from your payroll. Over $75K , the more you make, the less you pay, percentage-wise, to FICA. That my friend is the very definition of regressive.

      Now you can argue all you want the reasons for the cap, and how much should we be taxed in the first place, but no amount of squirming is going to change the fact that the overall tax burden is regressive.

      Not that I have any suggestions on how to fix it (aside from eliminiating or heigtening the FICA cap and reintroducting the means test for social security eligibility), but it is in society's best interest to enable the working poor to become the working middle-class, and identifying one of the obstacles, namely, a regressive tax structure, seems like a good place to start.

  2. Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Did America lose a war I didnt hear about?

  3. Papers please! by BWJones · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Papers please!

    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?

    --
    Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    1. Re:Papers please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As an old guy who grew up in the 50's and 60's I must say this nation is beginning to sound (and act) like the nation I was taught to fear... the soviet union.
      Showing papers to travel within the country is not what a free people do.

    2. Re:Papers please! by BWJones · · Score: 5, Informative

      "What happened was the gradual habituation of the people, little by little, to be governed by surprise, to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believe that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that, even if people could understand it, it could not be released because of national security. " ~ an anonymous German Professor from 'They Thought They Were Free: The Germans 1939-1945', by Milton Mayer

      --
      Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    3. Re:Papers please! by goldspider · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And if you think any of that is going to change by electing Democrats, you've got another thing coming.

      For example, we still occupy Iraq...

      --
      "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    4. Re:Papers please! by gardyloo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      We have fewer rights now than ever before in the USA Careful. African Americans and women can own property, vote, and enjoy the rights that white males do. Gay marriage (and civil unions) is legal in some states now. A woman's right to choose the fate of her unborn child is protected. There are probably more rights which are guaranteed now which I can't think of off the top of my head. So although I agree that things aren't perfect in this country, most of the points raised by the parent poster are in no way new, and some things are much better than they have been at various points in the country's history.
    5. Re:Papers please! by BWJones · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And if you think any of that is going to change by electing Democrats, you've got another thing coming.

      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."

      --
      Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    6. Re:Papers please! by BWJones · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Careful. African Americans and women can own property, vote, and enjoy the rights....

      Indeed. I should have qualified that to say that we have fewer rights now than at any time before in the last 50 years.

      --
      Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    7. Re:Papers please! by lawpoop · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You're totally correct, but I don't really want to say anything that would dampen the vigilience of the American people against tyranny. For example, In Hussein's Iraq, women were allowed to drive cars, walk around alone, go to school, become doctors, etc. He had a secular progressive state in a region full of Islamic theocracies and kingdoms. However, that doesn't mean that Hussein wasn't a brutal dictator who ruled with fear, megalomania, torture, secret police, etc. etc.

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    8. Re:Papers please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yes, not to mention that unborn babies have the right to choose whether or not they want to live

      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!

    9. Re:Papers please! by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 3, 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.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    10. Re:Papers please! by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Change from when?

      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.

    11. Re:Papers please! by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I hate to say this,and it's a horrible thing to say, but it's gonna take another Kent state massacre by government police before americans get off their lazy asses and do something. americans do not do anything except bitch about things until the government steps way over a line. It will take several innocent young lives killed on the lawn of a university by police or military before any middle class person will do anything.

      and yes I am an american.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    12. Re:Papers please! by sjames · · Score: 3, 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.

    13. Re:Papers please! by ralphdaugherty · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, the democrats have really been disappointing since they took control of congress.

            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

    14. Re:Papers please! by cyberkahn · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually the difference between the Republicans and Democrats is the difference between Coke and Pepsi, one is sweeter than the other but both equally corrosive. As long as Americans still believe in a false left right paradigm then we will be polarized and allow them to keep doing what they are doing.

      Almost half of the Democrats voted No on a resolution that would prevent military intervention in Iran without Congressional approval.

      Here is a good commentary by Keith Olbermann on the Dems and Iraq.

    15. Re:Papers please! by echucker · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ....except youth is too disinterested to demonstrate. The downward spiral continues.

    16. Re:Papers please! by DavidTC · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I propose the following since corporations don't pay taxes, only customers do, Corporations just pass on the added cost of additional taxes to customers, duh. We drop all corporate taxes and tax the shit out of ever citizen.

      I know you're being sarcastic, but have you ever noticed that, of the people who say 'corporations don't pay taxes, they just pass them to along to employees and customers, we should stop double and triple taxing everyone', no one ever says, "So, um, why don't we just tax the corporations,and only the corporations, then?"

      This solution would seem the most logical of all. No individual has to worry about taxes unless they're running a business, and, hell, people running businesses already have to worry about a lot of paperwork. But normal people wouldn't have to worry about withholding or deductions or any paperwork, and wouldn't have to figure out their income after taxes when job hunting and budget making, it seems like it would be sane to put all the taxes on the entities already doing the paperwork.

      I mean, companies shouldn't mind, they 'aren't paying the taxes' to start with. And, yet, they apparently do mind, which suggests there's something slightly wrong with the concept they can and do just pass them on to other people.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  4. Your papers please. by arthurpaliden · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sir, your papers are not in order, please come with us..... No, this is not happening in 'Soviet Russia' this is happening in the United States of America One of the things that the US goverment kept on about during the cold war was that in the United States you did not need 'internal travel documents and passports' because it, the United States, was a free country..

  5. remember when? by lecithin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Borodin: Do you think they will let me live in Montana?
    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.

    --
    It could be worse, it could be Monday.
    1. Re:remember when? by c6gunner · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Your post should be rated +20,000 Insightful. Prior to reading it, I really didn't much care about this ID program. I didn't see it as a big problem. And the fanatical rantings of some of it's opponents (both here at slashdot, and elsewhere) were starting to convince me that all those opposed to it were a bunch of drooling morons.

      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.

    2. Re:remember when? by mgbastard · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Good on you for getting the idea, but it's a sad commentary on people that you needed a quote from a crappy Tom Clancy film adaptation instead of being able to merely arrive at this position through logic.

      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.

      --
      Anyone seen my low uid? last seen 10 years ago while panning the #@$# out of Taco's 'web based discussion system'
  6. Re:Your papers please. by Skreems · · Score: 4, Funny

    You still won't, to travel between states. As long as you're not on an airplane. We're still free, honest.

    --
    Slashdot needs a "-1, Wrong" moderation option.
    The Urban Hippie
  7. Vote for Ron Paul 2008 by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't agree with all of his politics, especially his stances on abortion and public health care, but he may be the least authoritarian out there. If you think that most Democrate will be better, they're just as bad.

    1. Re:Vote for Ron Paul 2008 by lawpoop · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I don't agree with all of his politics, especially his stances on abortion and public health care... I don't agree with Ron Paul about a lot of things, either.

      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!
      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    2. Re:Vote for Ron Paul 2008 by SonicSpike · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You do realize the further away your government is from you, the less accountable they are to you, right?

      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.

      --
      Libertas in infinitum
  8. Costs of passport by Dr+Reducto · · Score: 3, Informative

    If they require a passport to do some of those things like fly or enter public buildings, that will signifigantly impact poor people.

    My passport cost me 97 dollars last time I got one, and not everyone has that kind of money lying around

  9. Re:So ... Basically... by Y-Crate · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yes, allowed to travel EVEN IN THEIR OWN STATE, in many cases.
    Oh how far we've come from: Capt. Vasili Borodin: 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 pickup truck... maybe even a "recreational vehicle." And drive from state to state. Do they let you do that?
    Captain Ramius: I suppose.
    Capt. Vasili Borodin: No papers?
    Captain Ramius: No papers, state to state.
  10. Stupid Fear Mongoloid by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 5, Insightful
    From the article:

    "For terrorists, travel documents are like weapons," Chertoff said

    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." What a fucking fear-mongerer!

    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!
    --
    When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  11. Re:Outrageous by Gyga · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Congress for passing it, Bush for not vetoing it.

    --
    I don't preview or spellcheck.
  12. A passport is not a requirement by gelfling · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A passport is a fallback document if you don't have one of these Federal ID's pretty much like today if you don't have a photo ID to get on a plane. Now I'm sure my state the Great State of Redneck-NorthCarolinastan will determine that getting one of these Federal ID's is even more expensive but I'm sure they'll accept a hunting license or a document from any Baptist Church in a pinch.

  13. Finally ... a measure that's right on the button ! by golodh · · Score: 2, Insightful
    How many of you realise that Americans are just about the worst security risk on the planet after AK-47 toting Pashtun tribesmen?

    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?

  14. Solution: Pick any other country. Move there. by soldoutactivist · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There was a time when I couldn't imagine living in another country, not even as an exchange student. I've even turned down fantastic job offers from other countries because they simply weren't in America. But almost everyday now something happens, a law is passed, or another degree shaven off of what once made this country great is added to "Why isn't this the greatest country in the world anymore?" The next time a foreign job offer comes around, I'm probably going to take it, there's just not enough reasons not to these days. And even if one doesn't, Vancouver, BC is a very beautiful city. Get out while you still can.

    --
    The downside of being killed is the upside of being dead.
    1. Re:Solution: Pick any other country. Move there. by edisk1353 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Let's not get too over the top here. No, I'm not a fan of Real ID either. I think it's expensive, kind of draconian, and largely unnecessary. But I am an American who has lived for recent multiyear segments in Canada and France, and let me put it this way: you can't escape totally from surveillance or ID cards, or any of those other little baddies that come from governments of various stripes. Governments are people, and people aren't perfect.

      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.

  15. I left america and I'm NEVER going back by Anonymous Coward · · 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?

    1. Re:I left america and I'm NEVER going back by Dunbal · · Score: 5, Funny

      What precisely does the current federal government do for the middle classes?

            Hey come on, they build freeways and bridges oh wait...

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  16. Round and round she goes.... by Stanislav_J · · Score: 4, 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 website.

    --
    "Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket." -- Eric Hoffer
    1. Re:Round and round she goes.... by untaken_name · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's kind of hard to take an argument seriously when the arguer doesn't know the difference between abdicate and advocate. I mean, I even AGREE with you, except for the abdicating part. Just, please, please, please don't use words unless you are certain that you know what they mean. Please. Don't do it for me; do it for you. Unless you're trolling, I can't be bothered to check your history. In that case, by all means, continue.

  17. high taxes != freedom by blitz487 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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. 1) high taxes is not a characteristic of freedom.
    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.
  18. It's not the chipmunks you have to worry about... by benhocking · · Score: 3, Funny

    It's the squirrels!

    --
    Ben Hocking
    Need a professional organizer?
  19. Re:Finally ... a measure that's right on the butto by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Every Swiss home has an assault rifle, and it's expected to be operational. Also every man is expected to be proficient with those weapons.
    Funny thing though: you don't hear much about Swiss terrorists and their crime rates are extremely low...

  20. Re:I fly with no ID all the time. by w0ss · · Score: 2, Interesting

    like most things in life all is not what they would have you believe. Your airline will require you to show ID if you check bags(I do not check bags although I am even exempt from that with the airline I fly due to frequent flyer status). Once you get to the man/women who asks for your ID say I have no ID and show him your ticket, they will ask did you lose it usually. At that point I like to add in a no I didnt but good thing I don't have one because that line sure is shorter. They will give you evil looks one lady even asked me are you doing this to get the shorter line and asked me again if I had ID. I just smiled and said nope no ID. They then put "SSSS" on your ticket and you get the fast lane. At some busy airports this can save 10-15 minutes of standing in line.

    For those that don't know at most airports being a selectee is easier than not being one. You save time by not taking off your shoes(if the airport is equiped).

  21. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  22. Re:So ... Basically... by karmatic · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm sorry, but the more I hear of him, the more Thomas Jefferson sounds like a dangerous, deranged psychopath.
    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?

  23. Re:Outrageous by doggod · · Score: 2, Informative

    The Democrats recently elected to Congress have already showed their spinelessness. Just last week they voted to give the President sweeping new powers for warrantless spying on citizens -- just because he asked for it.

    The thing is, hoping for representative in Congress with spine is a bit like, well, maybe hoping for a non-Catholic Pope. I don't know how Ron Paul happened, we can call him the exception that proves the rule, I guess, because other than him there isn't a backbone anywhere in the bunch.

    But there's a good side to that. Spinelessness implies that they can be influenced. If they start hearing from enough constituents that white needs to be black, you can bet they'll be in there tomorrow introducing a bill to change the names of the colors. So, if you're really fed up and if you really want to change things, the way to do it is to get in there and start making noise. Hand-wringing on forums won't do it, we need deluges of messages landing on the website email handlers of the Congressweasels.

    Fortunately, there's an easy way I've found to do that. Over at http://downsizedc.org/> they have a tool you can use to send a personal message about all these worrisome topics. You just put in your zip code, and it will automatically route your messages to the two senators and the one congressman who represents you. And using the tool doesn't automatically line you up for a bunch of spam, either, I can attest to that. Although you can, optionally, sign up for their own email alerts, which I've found to be useful.

    I used to think that if I continuously yammered to Congress about stuff, they'd all just put me on their "bothersome twit" list, and everything I sent would be ignored. But that ain't how it works. The squeaky wheels really do get greased! For evidence, you can look down through the list of campaigns they've been pushing and see how many have success stamps on them. It's all on account of the growing group of bothersome twits like me!

  24. Re:Good! by Dunbal · · Score: 3, Insightful

    think on all of the crimes that would be easier to solve if you had DNA ot match to already in a database.

          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.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  25. It's worth mentioning. by Inoshiro · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Every single 9/11 terrorists highjacker had a valid passport.

    This is security theatre -- worse still, it removes freedoms from us non-terrorists.

    --
    --
    Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
    1. Re:It's worth mentioning. by Keebler71 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      A semi-true but very misleading statement (at least in context of this debate) - the 9-11 terrorists did indeed have passports, some of which had been fraudulently altered to allow them to enter the US without attracting additional scrutiny. From page 253 of the 911 9-11 Commission Report

      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 really disappointed in the slashkos community. The misrepresentation and overreaction to this particular issue is astounding. RealID 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.

      --
      "It takes considerable knowledge just to realize the extent of your own ignorance." - Thomas Sowell
  26. It gets WAY better, real soon now. by poptones · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Federal law denies passports to many people based on (for example) whether they owe a state money for child support. This is going to get real interesting when those people become locked out of the legal system entirely because they can't get a passport and live in a state not participating in this grand new fascism. The fascism that has denied them their civil right to come and go becomes the fascism that denies them their civil rights entirely on a federal level... just because of financial obligations. So much for the fourteenth amendment.

    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...

  27. Re:Evil company: RealNetworks by Dunbal · · Score: 4, Funny

    You'll be waiting in line at the airport, and the Real ID reader will say "Buffering..."

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  28. Tempest in a teapot by Pendersempai · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I know this is probably a contrarian point of view here on Slashdot, but I guess I don't see the practical difference between mandatory, ubiquitous state-issued ID (driver's licenses) and mandatory, ubiquitous federal ID (passports, birth certificates, social security cards, and... dun dun DUN... Real ID). Already, you can't get on an airplane without a government-issued identification card, or open a bank account, or take out a loan, or begin employment, or enter the country, or buy a car. If you are like the overwhelming majority of Americans, you buy everything by credit card. Private companies track every purchase, collate them all, match them with your supermarket loyalty cards, and mine the data for all sorts of personal information. There is already nothing to stop the government from buying access to those databases. In fact, they probably already do.

    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.

    1. Re:Tempest in a teapot by freezingweasel · · Score: 2, Interesting

      > I know this is probably a contrarian point of view here on Slashdot, but I guess I don't see the practical difference between mandatory, ubiquitous state-issued ID (driver's licenses) and mandatory, ubiquitous federal ID (passports, birth certificates, social security cards, and... dun dun DUN... Real ID).

      The big problem is that this, all by itself will be enough id to completely impersonate you. You're footing the cost for a system that will make it easier for others to scam you. People are also ticked that the same government that wants to spy on citizens more and more, who doesn't want citizens to know what it's doing wants to know everything about what they're doing.

      While right now, a national database can be made based on a social security number, with each person tracked and other numbers (state driver's license, non dl-id cards issued on a state by state basis) having a single ID makes it easier than ever to commit invasive (and illegal) spying on American citizens. We're offically supposed to be free of unreasonable search and seizure. Until there is good reason to suspect you of a crime, the government shouldn't be searching through your activities.

      Another problem is that this id, if built into a "trusted" system can be used to ruin lives of people. The national ID allows the creation of the national database, the "permanent record" every kid used to fear in school. What happens when for some malicious reason, someone with access to this puts something bad in the database about you? Will you be able to get it out? Will you be allowed to look at your own record to see if it's correct? Consider the problem, as more jobs go overseas and work is harder to find, of trying to find a job after some fake crime gets added to your record. The employer won't bother looking into court records, but will pass to look at one of the other 50 people begging for the job. Of course, if the court records are integrated with this database, and easily corrupted, you're really out of luck.

      The national ID would be a good thing, in that a single ID would be prerrable to having 50 IDs. Imagine having everything tied to the one card, want to get groceries? Swipe the citizen card and the screen lists your credit card accounts and debit card. Select where you want the pull to come from and walk out. This could be used in place of loyalty cards. You would still pay at Books A Million for a loyalty membership, but why issue a new card when there's already a unique # assigned to you?

      Of course, once everything depends on this id, the person who loses it is REALLY in trouble. The market for fake driver's licenses is already high. Imagine the market for card copying, swapping the data in your card to a 2nd with someone else's picture on it for use online. Will you be jailed if you're caught driving without it?

      The fears around this ID are:

      The # of ways this could be misused outnumber the ways where it would be of actual benefit (massive ID theft, smears)

      Given the ID system will not prevent terrorist action, given the 9/11 peoples' papers were in order, and the people proposing it know this, there's clearly an ulterior motive. If those pushing the id refuse to disclose this motive, should they be trusted? Perhaps it is a bid to just make things simpler on corporations, and they're embarassed (or afraid) to admit it openly. Regardless, this is too much money to spend on something about which the purpose of is being lied about.

      (Hmm, wasn't Clinton in trouble for lying about something that DIDN'T cost the taxpayers big? Heh, if we started impeaching or getting rid of everyone in government who deliberately lied, how long would it last?)

  29. Genital-based identification schemes of Africa. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    A number of African tribes of the Congo Basin use a genitalia-based identification scheme. A portion of their religious beliefs suggests that a human face can be altered by spirits to make one person appear as another. Thus they do not believe that you can tell individuals apart by their facial appearance alone. Because of this, they often identify one another by their genitals. Apparently they believe that the spirits cannot alter the appearance of a man's penis, or a woman's vulva.

    Dr. Marc LaFrance, Dr. Sylvia Daiken and Dr. Peter Price have written a number of papers on this subject. LaFrance and Daiken are both professors of sociology, and Price is an economic historian. Price's work focuses on how this pervasive role of genitalia within their societies affects their productivity, and their ability to maintain a primitive economy within the tribe.

    Maybe America should consider using a similar scheme. It would likely be a lot cheaper than the passports, and all that.

  30. Now wait a minute. by iminplaya · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Didn't the USSR lose the cold war?

    --
    What?
  31. Re:Papers for Yosemite?! by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 2, Funny

    A passport to visit a Mount Rushmore without Ronald Reagan in the line up of talking heads is un-American. :P

  32. Algebra by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 2, Informative
    We do use their numerals though, as a consequence of using the algebra they developed.

    The word algebra even has an Arabic root. Perhaps we should call algebra "Liberty Arithmetic" in the post-9/11 world.

    -b.

  33. Re:Vote for Ron Paul 2008 - ENOUGH by forkazoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I like Ron Paul. However, you do him no favors by posting the same video link many times in one discussion. You would do him no favors if you posted the same video link one time in many discussions, but you can only manage to annoy people by posting this many times. Now, I'm going to go and repost this response many times in hopes of drawing moderator attention. Despite the fact that we support the same candidate, I would like to see you modded into oblivion so I don't have to see any more of your posts, and that is a shame.

    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...

  34. AAAALVIIIIIINNN!!!!!!11 by tepples · · Score: 3, Funny

    are we afraid the terrorist will go after the deer and chipmunks? The attacks on 2001-09-11 highlighted "Islamist" terrorism. This movement happens to come from a part of the world where men wear a long nightshirt called a thobe in public. What do the Chipmunks wear?
  35. Re:Papers for Yosemite?! by Enderandrew · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Penn and Teller did a Bullshit episode on Mt. Rushmore and patriotism that was quite interesting. The 4 faces chosen where supposedly chosen because they were responsible for extending the frontier of the country, but also because they hated Native Americans. There are those who suggest that carving the faces of these 4 particular men into native land was a galactic fuck you.

    --
    http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
  36. Hey, even suicide airplane hijackers gotta relax by sizzzzlerz · · Score: 4, Funny

    You know. You're giving your life for Allah tomorrow so you wanna relax by taking in the falls and scenery at Yosemite. You drive up to the Big Oak Flat entrance and the ranger asks for your ID and boom, you're immediately arrested for being on the watch list. Boo-yah! Score one for DHS!

    Yeah. Sounds plausible to me.

  37. Re:state tally by ChronoFish · · Score: 2, Interesting

    That's because Red Voters don't know what they're voting for. They hear the word "democrat" and they instantly shutout everything that follows and replace it with whatever Rush Limbaugh is spouting that day.

    It's always seemed ironic to me that the poorest voters in the nation support the party that favors the wealthiest.

    Individual freedoms? Most red-necker don't want government telling them what to do... Yet when they hear "democrat" they think "limited gun access". For some reason this outweighs every-other freedom and personal rights to privacy that the "Red Party" is eager to trounce over.

    -CF

  38. Genital-based identification scheme. by Kadin2048 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Well, we're already working on it.

    The way you can tell that you're interacting with a government agency is the distinct feeling that you're being fucked.

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
  39. Re:Your papers please. by Aaricia · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Actually you don't even need any form of identification for domestic travel (yet). Airlines do not have the jurisdiction to ask for some form of ID.

    Don't believe it?

    I travelled from LAX to SFO last July and just wanted to see if it is possible. I got send over to a special line for "no ID" people and got searched thoroughly but it was still faster than standing in the normal line. This was on Southwest.

    Just try it. It will make a point against the real ID.

    Note: I am a white male and was decently dressed but had an evil german accent. It would be interesting to hear reports from people with a middle eastern complexion.

  40. In Soviet America by starX · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The government terrorizes YOU.

  41. Re:So ... Basically... by freeweed · · Score: 4, Funny

    When Tom Clancy begins to be insightful, you know your country is fucked.

    --
    Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
  42. Individuals vs systems. by Kadin2048 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think it's "trusting people" vs "trusting systems."

    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.).

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
  43. Closing off the Canadian border... by rsidd · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Is it that easy? What about towns like this one?

  44. Re:All This To Support Israeli Terrorism by Billly+Gates · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Israel has a right to exist and defend itself.

    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 on hamas TV it only makes the situation worse as children are brainwashed by Islamic terrorists.

  45. Re:Just so you know by zoney_ie · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Wah wah wah. Here in Ireland the income tax rates are (for a single person), 20% on the first €34,000 and 40% on the balance. Admittedly there are tax allowances (everyone gets them automatically but you need to inform the tax people if you're eligible for greater allowances) which reduce the tax payable and also there are various other tax reliefs for having a mortgage, paying rent, etc. - though these calculations aren't automatically used on your tax payment, even though your payments are automatic (taken directly from your wages).

    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.

    --
    -- *~()____) This message will self-destruct in 5 seconds...
  46. Re:Just so you know by isorox · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Same in the UK, 32% above $10K, 41% above $75K, 17.5% on purchases, 310% tax on petrol (yes, over 3 fold, works out to be about 20/mile for a small car).

    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.

  47. Lot's of bitching but a 64% voter turnout by gatkinso · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Hmm. Pointless to complain about the erosion of freedoms when many don't use them anyway.

    --
    I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
  48. Re:Not just fiction. by Fred_A · · Score: 2

    Since KIA's have been given posthumous citizenship I'd say you're wrong there. Obviously they needed to be citizens or else they couldn't have entered the cemetery without the required passport.

    --

    May contain traces of nut.
    Made from the freshest electrons.
  49. Military officers obey orders & procedures by nido · · Score: 3, Informative

    Most the military takes what it does very seriously. Then there are the political officers. In the months before 9/11, the Cheney administration changed the procedure so that NORAD had to get permission from the Secretary of Defense before they could intercept an off-course airplane. Before the civilian air traffic controllers & NORAD did the intercept thing on a regular basis.

    But wait, we don't believe in conspiracies here. Hmm.

    --
    Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly.
    www.teslabox.com
  50. OT: A lot safer than dealing crack. by Kadin2048 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Actually according to some researchers (mainly Sudhir Venkatesh, who's heavily quoted in Freakonomics ), most drug-gang members make far sub-minimum wage -- they'd make more money working at McDonalds, if that was the goal. And your chances of getting killed while dealing much higher than they are in Iraq (1 in 2000 as opposed to allegedly 1 in 4 if you're dealing crack, although the latter sounds a little high). The best explanation I've heard for gang activity is psychological; it's a prestige job, one you do for respect and a lack of attractive alternatives, not one you do for money.

    While an Army private doesn't get paid hugely well, they don't do horribly either, particularly when you consider that their salary is almost entirely "take-home pay" (they're not paying for food/rent/healthcare). Plus, it's just not that easy to spend money when you're deployed, which is also when you make the most bonus pay (and get some decent tax breaks -- in an unusual show of decency by the government, combat pay is tax free). Although the pay-per-hour isn't great, it's not unusual to come back from deployment with a sizable amount of savings.

    Is soldiering as profitable a career as borrowing money to get a business degree and working for a corporation? Not nearly. But it's not as bad as it's sometimes made out to be, if that's what you really want to do. The problem with the military right now is that they've basically tapped out the supply of 'risk junkies' who actually want to do the job, and have started to deploy people who are only in the service because they thought it was an easy way to get a college education (and who had no real interest in being in the military outside of that). IMO, this is why there are far worse morale problems in the Army than in the Marines -- the Marines were always fairly clear in their recruiting what you were signing up to do, and drew people who actually want to do 'crazy Marine shit;' the Army (until recently) was billing itself as a disaster-relief and college scholarship program, leading to accusations of a bait-and-switch.

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
  51. Get Sued, Can't Respond by resistant · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've had roughly the same thought on this, although I didn't know that passports could be denied to people who allegedly owe money to a state for child support. The thought I had specifically was what happens when a person without a passport (perhaps for the reason you mention), and who lives in a problematic state, is sued in a Federal court? Is he to be utterly denied the ability to respond, because he can't even enter the courtroom? Is it Constitutional to, for example, require him to retain counsel to represent him remotely because he can't enter the courtroom grounds himself? What about compelled or even voluntary witnesses in Federal criminal cases? This entire affair is opening up a real can of worms, as you (implicitly) pointed out.

    --
    A truly excellent pizza parlor is a delight unto the heavens. Treasure the sauce and the toppings!
  52. Operation Enduring Yodel by StikyPad · · Score: 4, Funny

    Bah passports.. I'll just show my military ID. If they question it, I'll just say I'm bringing democracy to Yosemite.

  53. Eco 101 for the numerically challenged by Brickwall · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Last time I checked inflation has been consistently the lowest it's been the last twenty years than in any other time in our nation's history.

    You don't get out much, do you? Check out http://www.westegg.com/inflation/, 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

    --
    What was once true, is no longer so