Slashdot Mirror


US Immigration Bill May Bring a National Biometric ID Card

schwit1 sends this quote from the Wall Street Journal: "Lawmakers working to craft a new comprehensive immigration bill have settled on a way to prevent employers from hiring illegal immigrants: a national biometric identification card all American workers would eventually be required to obtain. Under the potentially controversial plan still taking shape in the Senate, all legal US workers, including citizens and immigrants, would be issued an ID card with embedded information, such as fingerprints, to tie the card to the worker. ... A person familiar with the legislative planning said the biometric data would likely be either fingerprints or a scan of the veins in the top of the hand. It would be required of all workers, including teenagers, but would be phased in, with current workers needing to obtain the card only when they next changed jobs, the person said. The card requirement also would be phased in among employers, beginning with industries that typically rely on illegal-immigrant labor."

619 comments

  1. Papers Please! by Nesman64 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I must see your papers.

    --
    coffee | nose > keyboard
    1. Re:Papers Please! by Xiph · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Wonderful how only the workers need ID-card.
      Maybe Benito Mussolini was on to something with the comparisons between corporatism and fascism, now you'll find out in USA.

      --
      Blah blah sig blah blah blah irony blah blah
    2. Re:Papers Please! by cayenne8 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      While I applaud the idea of FINALLY starting to do something about illegal migrant workers in this country, I do not favor a national ID card. It is bad enough that they try to use SS as one, but, I do not want a sanctioned national id.

      Sure, they'll start off requiring it ONLY for workers, but I'm sure they'll soon find creative ways to use it. I'm sure you can use it then to check for flight access. How about with cashing checks or even credit cards, nifty way to track purchases....maybe even stores will start to want to use it too as a replacement for courtesy cards, nice way to track what you're buying. Hey, that might even work with nationalized health care, I mean we can now see that you buy WAY too much alcohol and cigarettes, I think we'll withold some of that care from you due to life choices.

      Yep, I'm sure the govt types will be able to come up with new, nifty ways to use a national id....in so many ways to help our poor law enforcement community. At the very least, you might even could use them to safeguard who logs onto the internet..?

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    3. Re:Papers please! by scrib · · Score: 1

      It would work until someone managed to fake it, or bribe the people checking them, or an employer hires someone "under the table."

      I know privacy != freedom, but remember:
      (freedom - privacy) != freedom

      --
      Help! Help! I'm being repressed!
    4. Re:Papers Please! by confused+one · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's you need an ID card to work. "They" want to disenfranchise you, they deny you an ID card. Then you can't work. No work, no money. No money, you become disenfranchised. Then you don't exist.

    5. Re:Papers please! by Pojut · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I posted this yesterday in a different story, but it seems appropriate for this one as well:

      http://haacked.com/images/TerroristsHateFreedom.gif

    6. Re:Papers Please! by metus · · Score: 1

      *hand wave*
      These are not the Illegal Immigrants you're looking for.

      --
      m00
    7. Re:Papers please! by Ornlu · · Score: 1

      The ACLU's already been campaigning against it for years: http://www.aclu.org/pizza/ Yes, the potential privacy violations are astounding. Yes, a national ID is a terrible idea. Yes, it's unconstitutional.

    8. Re:Papers Please! by xaxa · · Score: 5, Informative

      Sure, they'll start off requiring it ONLY for workers

      That's not really an "ONLY", is it? The British government started off requiring them only for international (non-EU, IIRC) students and air-side airport workers. (The students is because there are loads of international students registered on fake courses at fake universities.)

      There are some useful arguments here and here.

    9. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HAHAHAHAAAHAHAHAA!
      Oranges and Tomatos too!

    10. Re:Papers please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they're going to track us, I want to be able to track them. I demand full transparency in the government. Seems fair.

    11. Re:Papers please! by scrib · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Love the link!

      I think US lawmakers have forgotten the Declaration of Independence: "ALL men are ... endowed ... with certain unalienable rights..." Infringing on the rights of US citizens just so you can infringe on the rights of non-US citizens even more is tragically misguided.

      --
      Help! Help! I'm being repressed!
    12. Re:Papers Please! by rhsanborn · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Ummm...actually, that's exactly what they want to do. They want to force employers to only hire people with "papers". The idea being that illegal immigrants can't get "papers" and will therefore be unable to work. It's actually a two phased plan. They require employees to have this ID card, they also require employers to check that employees have said ID card and are verified to work in the US. It's currently difficult to prove that an employer knowingly hired someone who isn't allowed to work in the US. This allows the government to prove that employers didn't check their employees worker status, which is far easier to prosecute.

      The ultimate goal is that illegal immigrants won't be allowed to work here. The unfortunate side effect is that immigration is going to be even more of a nightmare for people who are legal to work in the US. And suddenly, many Americans are going to find themselves having to get lawyers and work out paperwork when their cards don't come up valid, or they lose them, etc.

    13. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice. ID.
      It takes you across borders. Makes it possible to vote. Makes more people pay their taxes (instead of just you), because employers and banks are requested to identify you for who you really am. And I am proud to be me.
      Can we offer you the euro as well? Our experience with it are pleasant, just like with the ID card.

    14. Re:Papers Please! by characterZer0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      do something about illegal migrant workers in this country

      Yeah, we need to get rid of all those people harvesting the food we eat. That will fix everything!

      --
      Go green: turn off your refrigerator.
    15. Re:Papers Please! by cthulu_mt · · Score: 1

      I may lose my card at some point. Can I opt to have the chip put directly into my body?

      --
      Virginia is for lovers. EVE is for griefers.
    16. Re:Papers Please! by Third+Position · · Score: 1

      While I applaud the idea of FINALLY starting to do something about illegal migrant workers in this country, I do not favor a national ID card. It is bad enough that they try to use SS as one, but, I do not want a sanctioned national id.

      The problem would be much more appropriately dealt with by applying penalties to employers, rather than employees. Make the penalty for knowingly hiring an illegal immigrant 10 years in prison, and that practice will stop fast!

      Of course, if you're a cynical bastard, you might conclude Congress took this approach knowing damn well the public would reject it, allowing them to say, "well, we tried - but you guys rejected it", allowing them to kick the whole issue down the road again.

      But our government would never do such a thing, would it? Would it?

      --
      American Third Position
      Finally, a real choice!
    17. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While I applaud the idea of FINALLY starting to do something about illegal migrant workers in this country, I do not favor a national ID card

      Then what do you want them to do about "illegal" workers?

      Personally, I'm in favor of putting anyone who hires so-called "illegal" workers into jail for a very long time. This includes all of the management involved up the chain - from manager doing the hiring right up to CEO of the company where "illegal" workers were hired. The entire management chain is held liable for the hiring of any "illegal" worker and every individual offense carries a minimum sentence of a decade.

      You would find that there would be no need for a national ID card, and the "illegal" worker problem would disappear in about a week.

      You would also see the US suddenly get interested in loosening up our legal immigration policy once again because the "illegal" workers would no longer be masking the number of jobs that need to be filled. (You'd also see a sharp jump in the cost of everything you buy from apples to electronics - don't think that you aren't reaping the benefits of "illegal" labor every time you go to the supermarket, or a restaurant, or buy something that's been shipped here from overseas. You are. Every time).

    18. Re:Papers Please! by BarryJacobsen · · Score: 1

      I may lose my card at some point. Can I opt to have the chip put directly into my body?

      Sure can! It comes in this neat little configuration that looks like three lowercase g's. Wait, I'm looking at it upside down.

    19. Re:Papers Please! by Shakrai · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The idea being that illegal immigrants can't get "papers" and will therefore be unable to work

      Yeah, that'll work. Just the other day I stopped at the corner and picked up a guy named "Jose" to help me put up drywall, alas he didn't have a social security card and wasn't able to accept the greenbacks I was offering him. Guess I'll have to hire someone with papers next time.

      And suddenly, many Americans are going to find themselves having to get lawyers and work out paperwork when their cards don't come up valid, or they lose them, etc.

      Why would that bother anybody in Congress? Most of them are lawyers after all. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours.....

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    20. Re:Papers Please! by furby076 · · Score: 1

      It is bad enough that they try to use SS as one, but, I do not want a sanctioned national id.

      Too late...SS has already transformed (many many years ago) into a national ID. It's how you get a job (legally), get benefits (until they run out), pay your taxes, get loans, track your criminal record, track your passport, etc. It's a very good way of tracking people because it's a huge freakin number that is used on a 1:1 ratio.

      However, social security has a major flaw...our cards have absolutely ZERO ways of gauranteeing the person holding the ID is actually the person using the ID (except age....i don't think I could pass for a 75 year old person...since I am 33).

      Giving this card a method to be used as an ID will help.

      BTW - jsut in thought. By law we are all required to have social security numbers from birth. We are not all required to have drivers license's, but many states require people have some kind of gov't id card by the age of 18. That means if you live in one of those states you have to get a drivers license, non-drivers license, passport, military id or welfare card by the age of 18...that is an extra ID (and some would say tracking) form. By putting a picture on your social card then people who would prefer not to be tracked can live their entire lives with only ONE form of ID (social)...anyhow I digress.

      My point is this id will help prevent fraud, amongst other things. I am down for a bit less fraud

      --

      I do not support "The Man". I also do not support your irrational stupidity
    21. Re:Papers Please! by digitig · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Then you can't work. No work, no money. No money, you become disenfranchised

      No, then you just start receiving Government handouts and they know you'll vote Democrat for the rest of your life.....

      And how were you planning to vote, with no ID card?

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
    22. Re:Papers Please! by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      ONLY for workers? In other words, if you want to earn a living, you will be having one.

      You may rest assured that it will even be easier to make something like this mandatory for people living on social security. After all, they should be grateful for what they get, so whatever you force on them is acceptable.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    23. Re:Papers Please! by mdm-adph · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The ultimate goal is that illegal immigrants won't be allowed to work here.

      I really don't see corporate America ever allowing this to happen. It'll either be painfully easy to circumvent these cards, or there'll be so many loopholes and exceptions that they won't have any power.

      --
      It is by my will alone my thoughts acquire motion; it is by the juice of the coffee bean that the thoughts acquire speed
    24. Re:Papers please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't understand why a national ID card is any worse than a state ID card or military ID. Wouldn't it contain information that the Federal Government already has about me?

      What's the big deal?

    25. Re:Papers Please! by moosesocks · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sorry, WHAT? How is this any different from the I-9 verification forms that you're required to complete when starting a new job?

      I honestly can't see how this is any worse than a Social Security card, passport, credit card, or drivers license. If you don't have one of those things, you're probably living completely off the grid anyway, and won't be affected by this at all.

      I'm mindful of civil liberties, but fail to see how this would do anything to change the status quo, apart from cutting down on counterfeiting.

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    26. Re:Papers Please! by Shakrai · · Score: 0, Troll

      And how were you planning to vote, with no ID card?

      Democrats have consistently opposed efforts to require voters to prove their identity before going to the polls. Where have you been?

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    27. Re:Papers Please! by digitig · · Score: 1

      Sure, it can be implanted in the lower intestine. When somebody wants to scan it, just assume the position.

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
    28. Re:Papers Please! by samkass · · Score: 1

      ...except when they [added "Woman's Rights"|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964#Women.27s_rights] as a part of the Civil Rights Act to try to sink it, since obviously no one would support that...

      --
      E pluribus unum
    29. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is this actually different from an SS card? Other than the fact that Social Security cards (being a simple slip of paper) are incredibly easy to forge. In order to work legally in the US, you need to pay taxes, and to set up your income tax withholding, your employer needs your social security number.

    30. Re:Papers Please! by Loki_1929 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Actually, Democrats have routinely opposed attempts to require some form of ID to vote (apparently it causes issues with double-voting, dead people voting, etc). So really, the two posts above your's are perfectly coherent with the available information.

      The only question is, what's the alternative? A third party that can't hope to get anywhere in the rigged game set up by the two major parties? Vote in the Republicans and let them have yet another go at breaking every promise? Sit home and whine? I don't know about you, but I'm searching for something to have faith in in our political system and I'm not coming up with a whole lot of realistic choices.

      --
      -- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
    31. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow a bit paranoid are we...they can do all that now without a national id card...you have a SSNO, a credit report, your calls wire tapped, a driver's license...and probably talk about everything you do on twitter or facebook so people can already find out everything about you. A national ID card is nothing more than a way for the feds to track people/jobs rather than just the state level. You should stop being so paranoid and worry about something fun....they are going to do what they want anyways, so you can't really control that. I would worry more about the warrentless wiretapping and getting waterboarded than them having yet another id that will do nothing really...the govt can find out anything they want about you now.

    32. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless you're disabled, you're not going to get lifetime benefits. At most you're looking at a year, usually less.

    33. Re:Papers Please! by ebuck · · Score: 1

      Look, if you don't like a Social Security number, you shouldn't like this. It's just a fancy Social Security number. Either it will be duplicated or under monitored. Meanwhile anyone who doesn't have one will be forced to start a small business (usually off the books) and that will drive the illegals to take over our last accessible avenue of capitalism available to the common man.

      If you can't work, you buy a few used cars at a reasonable price and put them out on the side of the road. Someone buys them and you've made your wage. Then you spend the rest of your time avoiding taxes by not reporting an income. By keeping workers outside of the labor pool, you are guaranteeing a black / gray market. It's like people can't remember what Prohibition did, and are ready to give it another try in a different market. Meanwhile law-abiding car sales centers take a hit because they can't undercut enough to offset someone who skips out on their taxes.

      Car sales is just one example, expect to see it expand.

    34. Re:Papers Please! by bonkeydcow · · Score: 1

      It's not the corporations demanding the ID card. It's the fascist politicians.

    35. Re:Papers Please! by Hadlock · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Right, and currently you need a SS card to work so your employer can pay their share of your SS. Your SS card already has your full name on it, which they can cross reference with your driver's licence and any references you list. The problem is that employers don't always do this (especially with more obvious possible immigrants, like those who don't speak english and don't have a name on their SS card that fits their ethnic background). Right now counterfeiting a SS card is pretty easy. All you're doing is raising the bar on what counterfeiters have to do to sell their ID cards.
       
      How many construction companies are really going to scan the veins (for the card, as suggested by the article) of their spanish speaking construction workers?
       
      Adding another ID card does nothing but add more paperwork, more complexity, and more counterfeits. It doesn't solve the root cause and at best it's a band-aid for immigration problems.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    36. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The ultimate goal is that illegal immigrants won't be allowed to work here.

      At the top of the power pyramid, the ultimate goal is money and power. Immigration is merely the smokescreen. When this project is completed -- like nearly every other government project -- the business of government will be richer and more powerful, not the other way around.

      You're not in the business of government, are you?

    37. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Then they'll stop hiring people even illegally and pay them by the day, because the employers will still need workers and the immigrants will still need the money, what you should ask for is the numbers that actually prove that it will help in any way. So far I can only see a better tracking method and a measure to send american jobs to americans only. Anyway, what's wrong with the old system? Won't the papers be processed the same way, no matter what type of ID?

    38. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reminds me when I was a kid in Soviet Union. They used to request papers for us to travel from city to city and from one Soviet Republic to the other, and then you had to register to the nearest political police office when you moved to a new place.
      Now things are becoming exactly like that in the USA. First, every time a police officer stops you for random checking or because you ran a stop sign, they ask you for a proof of citizenship or legal status. Then, we have to show our biometric secure state issued driver's licenses or IDs (like those from NY state) to travel by train or airplane and to enter any federal controlled building. Now they will have RFID/Biometric federal ID cards that you will need if you want to work or to be eligible to any federal provided service such as medicare, etc.
      Yeah, we should stop war on terror now and surrender our defeat as the terrorists already won: they destroyed freedom in America, forever.

    39. Re:Papers please! by girlintraining · · Score: 0

      Yeah. You posted it as a reply to a thread I made, and you stole my thunder, you insensitive clod. :)

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    40. Re:Papers Please! by Hurricane78 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Which of course is futile, since they hire people without papers anyway. Just like in every other country where you need papers to get a job.

      And they know that. So it’s not to keep off the “illegal immigrants” at all.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    41. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same thing

    42. Re:Papers please! by girlintraining · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Remember kids, privacy != freedom

      It's been well-established that a lack of privacy discourages people from peaceful assembly and accessing other tools necessary to the success of a democracy. When we have designated protest zones in cages tipped with razor wire and a hundred cameras covering every angle, and people being profiled by the FBI and investigated as potential subversives for doing this, it becomes clear that privacy, while not being the same as freedom, is essential to it. One cannot survive without the other.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    43. Re:Papers please! by Kymermosst · · Score: 1

      Yes, it's unconstitutional.

      Since when has that mattered? I can name several unconstitutional activities of the federal gov't without even thinking hard.

      --
      "Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives" should be a convenience store, not a government agency.
    44. Re:Papers Please! by Kjella · · Score: 2, Interesting

      So how exactly would you deal with an illegal alien that says "I don't need a work permit, I'm a US citizen and no, you can't see my birth certificate or anything else that proves that I am." And even if the birth certificate is issued by the hospital and not the government, it's practically useless without some kind of credible identification which 99 times out of 100 means government issued. Denying you this card should be on equal level with the government denying your identity and denying your citizenship, and if so you're in deep shit one way or the other.

      Here in Norway we have a national ID for all residents, not just permanent residents or citizens. If anything it's a help against ID theft and ID confusion. If some other person with my name has taken up a loan and is moving around, nobody will come knocking at my door because it's issued to person 456132123 and not 4561621650. Of course anyone can steal my id as well as one based on name but it'll mostly hurt just that person.

      P.S. There's still quite a few people that in whole or part do black labor, usually it's either unemployment fraud, disabilities fraud, tax fraud (like people do their regular work but take cash and pretend they didn't work) or just getting extra income that isn't taxed by people with legal residence. And from what I understand illegal aliens work quite a bit in food shops, extra clerks, cleaning, various manual labor where's it's not so obvious where the money is going...

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    45. Re:Papers Please! by Wiarumas · · Score: 1

      You don't need to see his identification. *waves hand*

      --
      I will bend like a reed in the wind.
    46. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's you need an ID card to work. "They" want to disenfranchise you, they deny you an ID card. Then you can't work. No work, no money. No money, you become disenfranchised. Then you don't exist.

      Blank is Beautiful.

      Max Headroom: the show was set 20 minutes into the future, but 20 years ahead of its time.

    47. Re:Papers Please! by rhsanborn · · Score: 1

      And I agree, aside from the ease of counterfeits (how hard is it to fake a SS card). The real necessity is placing the responsibility on employers to check employees worker status. Currently, an employer has to "knowingly" employ an illegal immigrant to be prosecuted, and proving someone knew something is awfully difficult. They can usually claim the employee lied about his status.

      This would require employers to validate worker status, and would be easier to prosecute. I don't understand why it would be particularly difficult for an employer to validate that the name on a SS card matches the number and that other pertinent demographics looked reasonable (age, sex, etc).

    48. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Currently, legal immigrant or legal non-immigrant temporary workers who do not have a green card already must have an "employment authorization document", which is a similar card to the proposed--it contains a fingerprint and bar code, and you have to present it to an employer before you can be hired. Just like this current system does not deter employers from hiring illegal immigrants and illegal immigrants from obtaining jobs, the proposed new card won't stop them either. I don't see the point.

      About the only positive thing that may come out of it is that if US citizens are inconvenienced in the same way as legal foreign workers are now, the procedure for getting a work permit/id card might actually become more efficient and less error-prone simply because US citizens will complain, and US bureaucrats and law makers will listen because US citizens can vote. We legal foreign workers can't vote, so no one gives a rat's ass when a mistake from the System causes us grief.

    49. Re:Papers Please! by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Now what is the real problem with illegal migrant workers in the United States and how will this solve them?

      Black market activities. Being a black market who sells in illegal goods they people doing this will not ask or use these ID card nor do they put them on Payroll.

      Under the counter payments. Well they are getting payed under the counter to avoid taxes. Those people will not ask for the cards either.

      Immigrants with criminal records. If they are still criminals they may still find a way into the country and do the Above.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    50. Re:Papers Please! by wgaryhas · · Score: 1

      If the vein information is stored on the card, an illegal ID could include correct biometric information.

      --
      "For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." - H.L. Mencken
    51. Re:Papers please! by Ornlu · · Score: 1

      I didn't say it mattered, I only said it was true.

    52. Re:Papers please! by Steauengeglase · · Score: 1

      Easy, it is the fear of new forms of prosecution that is the problem.

      I can recall getting fined about 10 years ago by a cop for not having a drivers license while walking at night (I still wonder about the legality, but apparently it is a city ordinance for dealing with kids and curfews). Imagine that mindset on a federal level with federal prosecution behind it; say under the guise of making sure that teens are not working after-hours on their part time job. The money you could rake in would be ridiculous, both local, state and federal for a single instance.

    53. Re:Papers Please! by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The more unfortunate side effect is that the price of your garden salad will probably quadruple. All of this in the age old quest to stop more Catholics from immigrating.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    54. Re:Papers Please! by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      Except one of the senators working on this bill is a republican. Opps.

    55. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Save America!
      Lynch your Congressman

    56. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry man, I only have a pipe

    57. Re:Papers Please! by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      You ALREADY need papers if you want to work, drive a car, vote, or even walk around in the states that require you to carry ID on you (those being Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont, Wisconsin). What's new?

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    58. Re:Papers Please! by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      Keep losing your Patriot(TM) Worker's Credit SS RFID card? Just get it tattooed to your forehead in a handy 2D barcode, now with wrinkle-correction!

      InCertainCasesBurningAndItchingMayOccur. Smoke. DoNotOperateMicrowaveOvensWhileUsingRFIDImplantRequiredByBarcodeSystem. YourCommunityThanksYouForConsuming. Smoke. AlwaysReportNonConsumersAndCreatorsOfContentForTheBenefitOfSociety. AreYouSmokingYet?

    59. Re:Papers Please! by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      Save America!
      Lynch your Congressman

      I can see this the next election - a bunch of people change their last names to "Lynching" or "Lin Ching" or something like that, and their campaign slogan is "Election 2012: Vote for Lynching for The President and Every Senator and Congressman on the ballot".

      Expect to see that as the Republican strategy ...

    60. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know many native born citizens who aspire to be maids and migrant farmers.

    61. Re:Papers Please! by Gerzel · · Score: 1

      You should be. If you are a US citizen then you damn well should be in the business of government as it is YOUR government.

    62. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Surely illegal workers wont need one? People who are willing to hire illegals now will still hire them card or not - it will just serve to drive wages lower still.

    63. Re:Papers Please! by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      Make the penalty for knowingly hiring an illegal immigrant 10 years in prison, and that practice will stop fast!

      This is perhaps the stupidist thing I've read today. You think just because somethng has a penalty attached, people stop doing it? Ya, that worked out REAL well when there were penalties to buying or consuming alcohol.

    64. Re:Papers Please! by Culture20 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      do something about illegal migrant workers in this country

      Yeah, we need to get rid of all those people harvesting the food we eat. That will fix everything!

      You're old enough to remember when American teenagers used to work the fields for extra cash during the summer, aren't you? Or maybe corn detassling done by American preteens? It's all migrant workers now. Fast food is filled with non-English speakers. Mid-scale restaurants need bilingual head-chefs these days (and no, I'm not talking about Mexican restaurants). Kids can't get the jobs they used to get these days.

    65. Re:Papers Please! by jfried · · Score: 1

      Remember when we use to say how bad the Soviet Union was because you needed papers to travel.

    66. Re:Papers please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember kids, privacy != freedom

      Roe v Wade, disagrees with you.

      Substantive Due Process (derived from the Fourteenth Amendment) has routinely been held as emanating a constitutional right to privacy. The U.S. Constitution is a tenet of our freedom.

    67. Re:Papers Please! by Eggplant62 · · Score: 1

      Someone explain how this works for a person in my situation: I work from home in Detroit transcribing and editing medical reports dictated at a hospital in Anchorage for a company based in Utah. I've never been to the hospital or the company that I work for in person so how would anyone check whether the fingerprints or vein mapping are actually mine? This so Orwellian that it makes me want to vomit.

    68. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Geesh, what crappy mods!

      You state facts about the Democrats, provide balance by talking negatively about the Republicans. Discuss the challenges of 3rd parties, and the negatives of doing nothing.

      And you're marked a Troll. Unbelievable.

    69. Re:Papers Please! by Shotgun · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Immigration isn't difficult to control. Just go around to all the constructions sites and haul in all the workers that can't speak English. No, this isn't a troll. Those that can't speak English at all will either have some very fresh papers saying they can work here, or they will have a concerned family member monitoring them.

      But even then. This is a lame excuse for a national ID card. The "illegal immigrants" are here because they can make more in a month here than they can in a year at home. Our government could stop this illegal immigration in its tracks with a little patrolling of the border. But guess what; nobody in power wants to stop the flow of CHEAP labor. If they wanted, REALLY wanted, to contol the flow, they could set up a VISA system to control the work.

      An American employer would submit a request to a government agency responsible for vetting and admitting the immigrants. The same agency would have oversight of working conditions and seeing that the immigrants receive fair pay. The work gets done, everything is legal, and everyone's rights are protected.

      It's a simple solution that would be much less expensive than the current law enforcement model, and much less obtrusive that the current or future scams of making every citizen carry work papers. It won't happen though. "Illegal immigration" is just a red herring to distract people into surrendering their civil rights.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    70. Re:Papers Please! by socz · · Score: 1

      American teenagers? If you live in the southwest, they were never working the fields because they weren't native to the land. You have a pretty good mix of people who aren't "American" (white). Now if you really want to get down to it, that was JUST the SW. The rest of the country had slaves doing the work.

      The biggest problem is trying to pretend we're greater than what we are. Most people don't want to break their back in 100 degree weather. That's why most rather not work than work at a fast food joint. And guess who is willing to do that? People who need money to survive, not a kid who wants to save up for a car, especially not an "American teenager" who's had it easy.

      --
      My abilities are only limited by my imagination
    71. Re:Papers please! by ThosLives · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think this highlights the difference between 'privacy' and 'anonymity.' Subtly different concepts. I think when most people scream 'privacy!' they are really advocating anonymity.

      Privacy is being able to do things without others knowing about it. Anonymity is being able to do something without people knowing who you are. Notably privacy implies anonymity, but anonymity does not imply privacy. Case in point: if you are speeding in traffic, people know that there is someone speeding - it is not a private activity. However, they don't know *who* is speeding (even if they see you - you are still anonymous) so that is an anonymous activity.

      (Sadly, the problem is that most people want anonymity because they don't want to suffer consequences for their actions. I can't say I advocate anonymity in all cases - some activities should have consequences. What I would rather argue is if there should be consequences for certain actions in the first place. If that problem is solved, then privacy/anonymity concerns would be irrelevant.)

      --
      "There are a dozen opinions on a matter until you know the truth. Then there is only one." - CS Lewis (paraprhase)
    72. Re:Papers please! by shipbrick · · Score: 1

      "privacy != freedom"

      Perhaps, but privacy does allow for freedom. If one has privacy then it doesn't matter what they are doing, even if they are doing something illegal, they are likely to not get caught and thus are "free" to do what they please (of course depending on the crime, but I'm thinking nonviolent, not affecting others, such as say drug use).
      In Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 , the Supreme Court ruled that the 4th amendment included a person's "reasonable expectation of privacy". What 'reasonable' means, IANAL, but I think the SCOTUS was right that the founding fathers meant the fourth amendment as a kind of privacy. I think that privacy is a strong driving force behind at least a few amendments within the bill the rights, and privacy in many respects is strongly interrelated with various aspects of freedom.

    73. Re:Papers Please! by rhsanborn · · Score: 1

      The trick is that it's easier to prosecute employers. Currently an employer can claim the day laborer said he was legal. I'm unsure of the actual laws, but I think they can get away with several excuses. If you force every employer to validate the citizenship and work status of every worker, then you can prosecute the employer who can't show that he's done this.

    74. Re:Papers Please! by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      Except one of the senators working on this bill is a republican.

      Yeah, such staunch right-wingers as Charles Schemer.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    75. Re:Papers Please! by StayFrosty · · Score: 1

      Instead of making new, more Orwellian ID cards there should be a penalty (jail time) for people responsible for hiring illegal immigrants without doing proper checks.

      --
      "Frequently wrong, never in doubt."
    76. Re:Papers Please! by Zantac69 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      God - you are a fucking idiot. Quit freebasing the Kool-Aid.

      --
      1331461 is only semiprime *sigh* Alas - I am just short of 1337.
    77. Re:Papers Please! by guruevi · · Score: 1

      Dunno what the big deal is though, this law would bring nothing new.

      As a legal immigrant I already have such a card. It has biometric information encoded in the biggest magnetic strip ever (practically the whole back of the card) as well as a visible picture and a visible fingerprint. The biometric information you can get out of the magnet card: prints for all 10 fingers + palm and retina scans, home country, alien number, birthdate, sex, immigration status, date of approval and when approval expires. DHS also keeps on file my blood type, pre-existing conditions, results from blood tests (STD's etc.), original birth certificates, marriage certificates, both US and foreign police reports, birth certificates, children and parents, transcript of interviews, foreign and US school records...

      So they want to phase it in among 'illegal' immigrants? Well, that's gonna be difficult since they're ILLEGAL. They already are circumventing the current laws which state that you have to get such a card (also known as a green card or work visa) before you even start working in the US. Most of them would not be eligible to work in the US anyway but they're here anyway.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    78. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What an amazingly retarded idea. Create more laws for people who obey the law.

      Listen very carefully, people who do not obey the law are not going to start doing so because you created a new law for something that is already illegal..

      MOST of these dudes are paid cash under the table. How do you stop that? OH YEAH thats right you cant.

      All it gives you is another way to harass owners of companies that exploit these workers. Why are they exploited? Because they keep their mouths shut and do not want to go 'home'. You already have laws to mess these dudes over. They are called tax laws. I can guarantee they haven't paid ANY taxes on those workers. Of those they did 'pay' its wrong and fraudulently filled out. These guys will figure a way around your system. Want them to stop? Make it unprofitable.

      Listen very carefully again government, your fixing the wrong problem.

    79. Re:Papers Please! by paiute · · Score: 3, Funny

      Save America!

      Lynch your Congressman

      How did you know?

      http://www.house.gov/lynch/

      --
      If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
    80. Re:Papers Please! by Zantac69 · · Score: 1

      So you did one of two things:

      1 - Exploited illegal labor from the black market and paid him a black market wage
      2 - Utilized a alternative labor pool to get the job done and sent a message to "legitimate" contractors that their rates are too high for the work required.

      --
      1331461 is only semiprime *sigh* Alas - I am just short of 1337.
    81. Re:Papers Please! by operagost · · Score: 1

      I'm 100% white and I worked on a farm as a kid. I don't now because I decided to sweat my butt through college, instead.
      These people are being exploited. They are often working for less that minimum wage. It's not that citizens won't do the job: they just won't do it for less than minimum wage or under the table. I'm tired of us doing nothing. Everyone who wants to do nothing is doing it because they want more power or money; they don't care about these people. Those who care would rather we either secure the borders or remove the quotas entirely. If we simply let everyone in who wanted to, those who don't have criminal records would submit to reasonable checks rather than risk their lives crossing rivers and deserts-- and the few who decided to still do so would be a lot easier to manage.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    82. Re:Papers Please! by Miseph · · Score: 1

      Don't worry, if it ever comes to a vote, neither he nor any other Republican will vote for it because it doesn't have enough bipartisanship.

      There are hundreds of Republican amendments to the current health care bill. Clearly they weren't allowed in the room.

      --
      Try not to take me more seriously than I take myself.
    83. Re:Papers Please! by Low+Ranked+Craig · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Typical government reaction to a problem: Making life harder for those who follow the rules, and not really impacting the relatively small percentage of people that are / cause the problem. This is how government always reacts. Couple of examples:

      I can't get sudafed at the store without showing ID, signing a register and waiting in line at the pharmacy. Bunch of people still making crystal-meth.

      I can't legally own a hand-gun in Chicago, yet 400 people a year get murdered with one.

      I, for one, advocate enforcing the laws that already exist...

      --
      I still cannot find the droids I am looking for...
    84. Re:Papers Please! by shadowfaxcrx · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why don't we flip what you just said. "How is this any different from the I-9 verification forms that you're required to complete when starting a new job?"

      Exactly. We already have verifications in place to ensure that an employer's workforce is legit. They're already being ignored by employers who want cheap labor. Why do we think a *different* verification process which still relies on the employer's honesty is going to work any better than the one we already have? It won't, because the meatpacker who's knowingly hiring illegals today is going to knowingly hire them tomorrow too.

      So either the sponsors of this legislation are stupid (a possibility which I cannot at all discount) or there is an ulterior motive to this legislation (again, something I can't discount).

      At best this is going to be a colossal waste of money and a bureaucratic nightmare of tangles, as the government will have to pay to distribute these cards, and will then have to spend inordinate amounts of time fixing the database errors that prevent people from getting work.

      At worst this is going to be used to punish people the government is angry with. And I don't mean (necessarily) some Orwellian conspiracy where you either vocally support the government or you don't get to work anymore. I just mean "Oh. You cheated on your taxes back in 1995. Your work papers are revoked."

      Whether or not you believe that the government would ever intentionally oppress its citizens, why should we allow the government to install the machinery that would facilitate it?

      --
      "I disagree with you" does not equal "flamebait."
    85. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      isnt to funny that all those americans who laughed and pointed when a similar story was published about the UK's ID cards, now have much less of a smile

    86. Re:Papers Please! by rhook · · Score: 1

      Right, and currently you need a SS card to work so your employer can pay their share of your SS.

      Actually you are not required to give your SS number to your employer, your tax id number works just fine (and is more secure) for tax purposes.

    87. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I won't take the mark of the beast!

    88. Re:Papers Please! by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      > I don't know about you, but I'm searching for something to have faith in in our political system and I'm
      > not coming up with a whole lot of realistic choices.

      Well... some believe the second amendment came from the belief that the people may need to overthrow this government, should it become tyrannical. Given the devolution of political discourse down to a game of splitting up issues down lines that force nearly everyone to vote based on who they don't hate the most....

      you could consider faith in the overthrow of tyrants. The actual act of it may not be realistic now, but, all it takes to become realistic is a growing number of faithful.

      -Steve

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    89. Re:Papers Please! by ArcherB · · Score: 1

      I must see your papers.

      Isn't it required to show "papers" now when starting a job? I have had to provide a Social Security Card for every job I've worked. All this law attempts to do is ensure that the "papers" are legit.

      And I'm so sick of the "Papers Please" quote. It's as if requiring someone to prove who they are, like when paying taxes, cashing a check, or boarding a plane somehow makes us a Fascist state and 6 million Jews dead. It is nothing more than a poorly disguised implementation of Godwin's Law.

      Strange, showing papers in the past has never prevented me from taking advantage of any of Constitutional Rights.

      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
    90. Re:Papers Please! by ArcherB · · Score: 1

      Wonderful how only the workers need ID-card.
      Maybe Benito Mussolini was on to something with the comparisons between corporatism and fascism, now you'll find out in USA.

      Is bringing up Mussolini an implementation of Godwin's Law?

      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
    91. Re:Papers Please! by ArcherB · · Score: 1

      It's you need an ID card to work. "They" want to disenfranchise you, they deny you an ID card. Then you can't work. No work, no money. No money, you become disenfranchised. Then you don't exist.

      They have one now. It's called Social Security card. The only difference I see between that and this is that the old, paper SS card doesn't have biometric data, meaning anyone can use your SSN, making your live a living hell come tax time. I've seen it happen. It really sucks to see a friend of yours try to explain to the IRS how she worked 17 different jobs in three different states, and only paid taxes on one of them.

      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
    92. Re:Papers please! by ShakaUVM · · Score: 1

      >>I can recall getting fined about 10 years ago by a cop for not having a drivers license while walking at night (I still wonder about the legality, but apparently it is a city ordinance for dealing with kids and curfews).

      I've always found it amusing (and not in a good way) that a card giving you permission to drive an automobile is now needed for permission to walk around on a sidewalk.

      Laws like this have been overturned occasionally for being unconstitutional. Homeless rights activists in particular do this kind of work. I looked into it when a security guard gave me shit for not having an ID on campus - when walking back from the pool. It is (or was) illegal in San Diego to not have at least $20 on you at all times. I think that might have been overturned as well, I can't remember.

    93. Re:Papers Please! by misexistentialist · · Score: 1

      You don't see how having to carry another ID and enter your fingerprints into a government database is different? You're right that illegals will not be affected since they live mostly off the grid, but how is that a justification for a program designed to prevent illegal immigration? Oh right, you have nothing to hide, so you will bend over when asked by the man with a badge.

    94. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Given the state of employment conditions, and the level of desperation workers are experiencing, it could prove inconvenient to compare vein patterns on a card to someone who became a recent amputee on the job.

    95. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Halt! Papiere bitte!

    96. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought you were just supposed to get a number tatooed on your forehead?

    97. Re:Papers Please! by operagost · · Score: 1

      It's a very good way of tracking people because it's a huge freakin number that is used on a 1:1 ratio.

      Actually, they've duplicated numbers. You can imagine the problems.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    98. Re:Papers Please! by Reziac · · Score: 1

      How long before the disenfranchised underground economy becomes more important than the "legal" economy??

      Okay, so that's a stretch, but I can see it becoming far more significant than it is today, and unless there's an enforcer under every bush, this may even *increase* the undocumented-worker problem.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    99. Re:Papers Please! by operagost · · Score: 1

      By law we are all required to have social security numbers from birth.

      Nope. Not from birth, not ever.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    100. Re:Papers Please! by sycodon · · Score: 1
      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    101. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is an even more unfortunate side effect. People who fled here to try to earn a living for their families and escape poverty in extremely violent parts of the world but where unable to wait for barriers to be lifted through traditional routes will now be encouraged to seek alternative means. If people thought undocumented workers were criminals now for fleeing poverty to work in fields and factories, wait until they can no longer do this and then underground organizations open their doors up to provide that assistance. I wonder when we will start demanding that our leaders address the real issues that lay in foreign policy. It still amazes me how personal responsibility never is a factor for the exploiter and always is for the exploited.

    102. Re:Papers Please! by kheldan · · Score: 1

      Do not want!
      This is already starting to sound like another case of "give up some of your freedom in exchange for more security", which is of course a fallacy. Why don't they try properly enforcing the laws already on the books instead of moving us ever closer to living in a police state? This year it'll be a national ID card with biometrics. Next year it'll be RFID chips surgically implanted, probably "for the sake of the children" or some such nonsense.

      --
      Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
    103. Re:Papers Please! by Loki_1929 · · Score: 1

      If it makes you feel any better, I have massive karma, so it's no loss. Maybe metamods will fix it? Who knows.

      --
      -- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
    104. Re:Papers Please! by conspirator57 · · Score: 1

      i think part of the point is that these things are occurring today and this measure does nothing to address this state of affairs. thus making it yet another power grab / rights infringement that does not accomplish its alleged intended purpose.

      --
      "If still these truths be held to be
      Self evident."
      -Edna St. Vincent Millay
    105. Re:Papers Please! by jefu · · Score: 1

      "Now repeat after me as we say our next three words in Turkish...
      Towel
      Bath
      Border
      May I see your passport please? "

    106. Re:Papers Please! by operagost · · Score: 1

      Citation?

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    107. Re:Papers Please! by icebrain · · Score: 1

      I like that solution.

      0. Establish a new immigration system. No arbitrary restrictions or quotas on origin; fill out your paperwork properly and pass your background check (basically, don't be a criminal) and you get your visa and, if you desire, a work permit, tax ID, and residency (after a period of time). Limited exceptions on case-by-case basis for those seeking asylum.

      1. Announce new system; everyone in the country legally can apply and have their status updated. Anyone here illegally has __ months to leave, fill out paperwork properly, and re-enter. Anyone here illegally after the deadline is immediately deported and permanently barred from further entry (unless a "first offender" seeking asylum as above).

      2. Secure the border. If that means a wall and armed sentries, then so be it. Everyone entering goes through a customs checkpoint. It's absurd that we demand proper security and customs facilities at airports, but get outraged that anyone even suggests monitoring land borders. It's like securing the back door to your house, but leaving the front door and garage wide open.

      Benefits:

      -Everyone gets proper legal protection from OSHA and FLSA. No abusive conditions go unreported because of fear of deportation.

      -Everyone pays taxes. Those with families would be paying the sales and property taxes to send their kids to school, state and federal taxes would cover the roads they use, etc. Cuts down on freeloading.

      --
      The meek may inherit the earth, but the strong shall take the stars.
    108. Re:Papers Please! by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Exactly. In fact, I would expect this to *increase* the "undocumented worker" problem, once the underground economy caught up.

      Nope, the problem isn't that we provide them jobs. The problem is that we let them stay at all, let them come back repeatedly if we do bother to kick them out, and give their kids entitlement citizenship. No other country in the world does that; everywhere else, your birthplace means nothing, you're simply a citizen of wherever your parents are.

      Second, our deportation process has no teeth. They turn right around and run back over the border again with no real fear of consequences. So... how about this: first time, we strip you buck-naked (and I mean this literally, take everything they own), tattoo your ass so we'll know you next time, and throw you back. Second time, you get a year at hard labor without pay, doing the really dirty and dangerous jobs no one else wants. Third time, we shoot you.

      The problem would vanish overnight.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    109. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right, and currently you need a SS card to work so your employer can pay their share of your SS.

      I haven't seen my SS card in 25 years and I've had no trouble getting a job. My passport is good enough (list A). The SS card shows up on list C, but so do birth certificate so even without a passport I still wouldn't need my SS card to work.

    110. Re:Papers Please! by Omestes · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Some problems with the idea of overthrowing the American government;

      1) The government has more force to throw at you than any dissenting group could hope to match. The government has pretty much a monopoly of force.

      2) Armed revolutions generally don't have possitive results. Name a single revolution after the French Revolution that saw generally positive results.

      3) It is the low road, and pretty much says that you completely given up on the American people, or on any chance of fixing the American discourse.

      4) It is the lazy way.

      5) People will get hurt. Innocent people will get hurt. Your personal political ideology generally never trumps the lives of others. And if you go into it with an "us vs. them" motive, your ideology is probably flawed and tyrannical.

      I personally dread the day when people take up guns against their elected government. First because the term "elected", by picking up guns your saying that you know better than the voters, which to me, is tyrannical. Its part of the stupid modern "tea party" line of bullshit, democracy is fine until people vote for people I don't like.

      Second, who would get control of the new government? Liberatarians, actual socialists, the anarchists, Christian fundamentalists? All of these sections are disenfranchised feeling currently. And some small subset of each of these groups would be willing to fight, and more problematically, enforce their ideology on others. Someone is going to mention "restoring the Constitution" or some such empty phrase, which leads to the question "whose interpretation of it?". No interpretation is an objective truth, all are equal, no matter how much you disagree with them. Its like arguing whose interpretation of the Bible is right, and we all can see how those arguments turn out.

      Third, who are you going to fight? If you managed to oust the president and all of congress, people will just vote them back. The Government is only a problem on the surface, but the real problem runs much deeper. The American people are the "problem", how do you fix that? I doubt an armed revolution will work.

      I'm scared of your use of "faithful", when it comes to the potential killing of people, you'd better have much more than faith.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    111. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It does address the root cause in a less direct way: once you have in place a viable way for employers to check the status of their employees, you can fine the cr*p out of any employer caught hiring illegal workers. Right now, it's hard to go after the employers because they are not required to check that the documentation employees present is valid. If the employee presents a cheap counterfeit SS card, the employer is off the hook. The new ID will be harder to counterfeit, and the employer may be required to actually check it or risk large penalties.

      I do have some concerns, though: I don't think employers should be required to check the biometrics, due to the cost of buying the scanner or the inconvenience of having to send applicants to a government office. Counterfeiting can be kept down with a reasonably well-designed card, even if the biometrics are rarely checked. We don't need a counterfeit-proof system, just one that is a little more robust and that obligates employers to at least check the ID and confirm that the SS # is valid and matches the name on the ID.

      I would like to see very punitive fines for employers, though. Get caught with 10 illegal workers whose ID you didn't verify and you lose your business.

    112. Re:Papers Please! by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      So how exactly would you deal with an illegal alien that says "I don't need a work permit, I'm a US citizen and no, you can't see my birth certificate or anything else that proves that I am."

      It's a hard problem to solve because it's not worth solving (not to mention unsolvable). Better questions would be, "is he committing crimes?", "is he working?", "is he paying his taxes?". If "No,Yes,Yes," count him and increment the headcount for his Congressional district.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    113. Re:Papers Please! by tuxgeek · · Score: 1

      Can we get NO break at all?
      Several years ago the republican congress & pres were all on board with the national ID card to stop terrorism
      Now the WTF congress & pres? want a national ID card to stop illegal immigration
      Holly shit batman! WTF !!

      I know this next bit will draw some fire but I have to anyway
      Thinking back from my childhood & church going days, I recall something called the Mark of the Beast. Something that is forced upon everyone and without it you cannot buy or sell. This proposal looks like a good start to "phase in", as they put it, the very thing that would prevent everyone from buying and selling without it. Now if these fucks can think of a way to make the thing global to effect everyone and tie it into religeo/political ..

      No paranoia, just an observation

      --
      "Suppose you were an idiot...and suppose you were a member of Congress...but I repeat myself." Mark Twain
    114. Re:Papers Please! by conspirator57 · · Score: 1

      i hear previous implementations using IBM hardware had some negative side effects back in the 1930s and 40s.

      i'd rather not help you find the remaining bugs, thanks.

      http://www.ibmandtheholocaust.com/

      --
      "If still these truths be held to be
      Self evident."
      -Edna St. Vincent Millay
    115. Re:Papers Please! by magus_melchior · · Score: 1

      I honestly can't see how this is any worse than a Social Security card, passport, credit card, or drivers license.

      This argument assumes that there are no consequences to yet another form of government-issued ID, or one that would supersede/replace the aforementioned as a requirement for employment. If these forms of ID are already in place and work just fine, why bother devising another ID scheme and thus another vector for identity theft?

      --
      "We are Microsoft. You shall be assimilated. Competition is futile."
    116. Re:Papers Please! by conspirator57 · · Score: 1

      the funny thing is that Americans and our politicians used to mock the Soviet Union for this practice and how it meant the Soviet population were no more than slaves... my how times and fashions have changed.

      --
      "If still these truths be held to be
      Self evident."
      -Edna St. Vincent Millay
    117. Re:Papers Please! by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "I can't legally own a hand-gun in Chicago, yet 400 people a year get murdered with one."

      Really? Why not? I thought the recent SCOTUS ruling against hand gun ban laws in D.C. would pretty much have cleared the way for handgun ownership in all 50 states by now...?

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    118. Re:Papers please! by grahamd0 · · Score: 1

      Remember kids, privacy != freedom

      Yes, however !privacy == !freedom

    119. Re:Papers Please! by clarkkent09 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      He did neither of those things. He entered into a voluntary agreement with another individual on a rate of labor that was acceptable to both of them. It should be none of anybody else's business.

      --
      Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
    120. Re:Papers please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can recall getting fined about 10 years ago by a cop for not having a drivers license while walking at night

      Back in around 1990 (I was 20 years old at the time) I was walking from my apartment to the local convenience store to by something to eat. It was late at night. A cop stopped me and when I couldn't produce any ID he handcuffed me and threw me in the back of his cruiser. Another cop showed up and they stood around talking, every once in a while opening the car door and asking me how I was going to prove to them who I say I was and how I could prove that I didn't have any warrants out for me or anything. The cops were both verbally abusive assholes. Eventually they just let me go with a stern warning that if they catch me out without ID again, they would arrest me.

      The thing is, ever since then, I have told that story to plenty of people. Most people from a middle class background simply refuse to believe me. It is crazy just how out of touch so many people are with the reality of life outside of their comfy middle class suburbs. Cops already routinely harass people for not having "their papers." But it doesn't occur in the suburbs so most people don't even know that it happens. If you want to see just what a police state we live in, go get an apartment in the lower income part of town.

    121. Re:Papers Please! by TheCarp · · Score: 4, Interesting

      > 1) The government has more force to throw at you than any dissenting group could hope to match. The
      > government has pretty much a monopoly of force.

      Currently true. Personally, I think that this is exactly the situation that the second amendment tried to avoid. Sadly narrow interpretation has hamstrung it and left us in this sad state.

      Of course, I simply pointed out the second amendment as evidence that this state of affairs was not intended and that it is the right of the people to overthrow despots. I never said a revolution HAS to be violent. I would be happy to convene a new constitutional convention.... or 50 (no, I don't particularly want a strong federal union... if anything, maybe something like the EU)

      > 3) It is the low road, and pretty much says that you completely given up on the American people, or on
      > any chance of fixing the American discourse.

      Low? Maybe. Its not so much the people as the bureaucracy that I have essentially 0 faith in. They have shown absolutely no real interest in representing what I see as liberty in any meaningful way. if anything, they approach whats left of liberty as an unfortunate hinderance to their ideas, rather than a core value.

      I have 0 faith that they have any intention to do anything but maintain their dominance, and line their own coffers.

      > I personally dread the day when people take up guns against their elected government. First because the
      > term "elected", by picking up guns your saying that you know better than the voters, which to me, is
      > tyrannical

      This presumes fair elections. I submit that the system of choosing who ends up on the ballot AND the system of voting itself, constitute systematically unfair elections that highly favor the hegemony of two parties that are willing to collude to break up issues between them as a method of effectively shutting out any voices but their own.

      As such, I don't, personally, recognize the legitimacy of said elections. I pay my taxes, of course, because they are the biggest gang in town and I am genuinely afraid of their thugs. That should not be construed as I actually consent to their governance or consider them "my government", any more than I would MS13 if they came into my shop and told me I had to pay for protection from their thugs too.

      Personally I advocate the progressive marginalization of the government as an entity, as a new form of revolution. De-legitimization in the eyes of the masses, replacement of their functions by other entities where possible, wholesale subversion of their "laws" when applicable. Just as I would for any other armed gang of thugs.

      As an anarchist (of the libertarian socialist variety), I have no desire to force my ideas on anyone but... I certainly don't advocate being a collaborator with thugs. I do however advocate self defense, and being prepared enough so that, should the day come, they need to think twice about clamping down and restricting liberty too much further.

      If they simply did not attempt to use their thugs to enforce social engineering, I would happily treat them like any other legitimate organization which might need a force to defend itself but, otherwise respected others.

      -Steve

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    122. Re:Papers Please! by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "BTW - jsut in thought. By law we are all required to have social security numbers from birth."

      Nope, they do pressure parents to do that, but no you do not have to have one. Once you get in the program, you really can't get out of it, but you can claim things like religious reasons..etc. In these cases, you cat a TIN (Tax Identification Number)...you don't have to pay SS if you never join it. It is difficult, but can be avoided.

      Also, I learned a LONG time ago working on some very HUGE databases...you can not depend on SS as a primary key...

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    123. Re:Papers Please! by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      Where's Leela?

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    124. Re:Papers Please! by moosesocks · · Score: 1

      Because we have many inconsistent ID schemes that are difficult to verify and easy to counterfeit?

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    125. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know the details but a simpler workable way would be to put a picture on the card and employer can log into a secure website to see if it is the same picture in the record?

    126. Re:Papers Please! by eleuthero · · Score: 1

      Immigration is a nightmare. I have a family friend who has been waiting for his green card for several years. They finally got to the front of the list but because of a filing error on the part of immigration, they got sent back to the beginning of the process (their file - immigrants from Guatemala - had been corrupted with data from an immigrant from Ethiopia... processing error on the part of the gov't). They are still waiting for soc's and the 18 year old son is about to head to college (where he will have to register as an illegal even though he is legal (missionary visa) in order to take classes).

    127. Re:Papers Please! by TemporalBeing · · Score: 1

      I personally dread the day when people take up guns against their elected government. First because the term "elected", by picking up guns your saying that you know better than the voters, which to me, is tyrannical. Its part of the stupid modern "tea party" line of bullshit, democracy is fine until people vote for people I don't like.

      Elections only work when the elected actually listen to the people electing them, and not corporations, etc.

      The sad part is, that both the Republicans and the Democrats have gotten to the point where neither are really paying attention to the people, listening mostly to whoever gives them the most money for their re-election campaigns, during which both candidates spew a bunch of promises which after getting elected they turn around and break nearly all of, blaming the other party as a result even though they were the ones that made the compromise on their promise.

      Sadly too, most in Congress have never know a job outside of politics. It's all they do, and all they will do until they retire - or in some cases die. They have no interest in doing anything else.

      This could probably be mostly fixed by putting in term limits on Congress; since it would force a faster turnover of who could be elected or re-elected. But unless the people get behind it, and vote it in as a Constitutional Amendment (requiring 3/4ths of the States to pass) it'll never happen - it's just not in the elected official's interest to do so. (Yes, the people could pass do it - you just have to get it on the different ballots before the people; alternatively, the State Congresses could do it, or the Federal Congress could do it; but the later two have no interest in doing so.)

      --
      Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
    128. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe the traditional form ran along the lines of :
            "Papier, Bitte!" or "Papies, tovarisch?"

      Somehow the even more old-fashioned prologue : "Greetings, Citizen.", seems to have fallen somewhere along the way. Probably too outdated and inefficient for these modern corporate - but not necessarily more logical - times.

    129. Re:Papers Please! by mikael · · Score: 1

      If it is anything like the integrated database and ID card system that the UK was proposing, it would cross-link the registered addresses of your car, the property that you owned, your registered council tax address, term time address, home address, previous holiday addresses, current and previous car registration plates and car models, all your children and dependents and the schools/hospitals that they attended. If any one of these was inconsistent, you would be flagged for further investigation.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    130. Re:Papers Please! by owlstead · · Score: 1

      There are ways to attack that kind of problem: you sign the data on the card. Of course, this would mean that you would have to distribute the certificates somehow, e.g. by putting them on an SSL protected server.

      If you don't want the complete data to be copied you also include a key pair on the card. You make sure that the private key is hard to extract and sign the public key along with the data. You can use the private key for a challenge response protocol.

      This is more or less what the current ePassports do...

    131. Re:Papers Please! by clarkkent09 · · Score: 1

      Kids can't get the jobs they used to get these days.

      Do you really think businesses hire illegal immigrants because they prefer to have illegal workers who can't speak English rather than legal ones who can? I pay a Mexican guy to cut the grass on my front lawn once a week. He may be legal or illegal, I neither know nor care. I pay him a good deal more than the minimum wage and I would certainly be willing to pay the same to an American teenager or adult to do the same job. Guess what, even in times of high unemployment, American citizens of any color are just not willing to do those kind of jobs. My only choice is to hire an immigrant or to do the job myself. There is a reason why there are 10 million at least illegal immigrants here, which is that there is a high demand for them mainly because nobody else is willing to do those kind of low skill/low pay jobs.

      --
      Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
    132. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it's "my" government, then why do they need guns to convince me to obey their rules?

    133. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The ultimate goal here has nothing to do with illegal immigrants. Illegal immigration is a problem caused by govt to cause a reaction from the people who will demand something be done allowing the powers that be to institute their solution which in reality was the goal of the whole endeavor.

      Problem, Reaction, Solution.

    134. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...except you can't get handouts without your ID! Betting it works like this: First, they require all workers to have one. Then they phase in the ID as a necessary form of identification for welfare, and tell us it's because the illegal immigrants aren't working any more (they can't, without a card!) but are still leeching off our social security funds. Once you're required to have a card for both government assistance and a job, it will be easy to cut off anyone they don't like, continue the border patrols/strengthen border "defense" (like not letting American citizens back in from Canada without proper ID and a 2-hour wait... hah!), force ID requirements for other "important" things like setting up accounts with utility companies ("don't wanna let those squatters turn on power in YOUR name!")... not all of it will be federal-level gov't BS, but I'd rather not let them start it. *gets the tinfoil hat-maker ready to go*

    135. Re:Papers Please! by Omestes · · Score: 1

      I agree with your formulation of the problem, but it doesn't move the onus of guilt away from the electorate. Everyone knows the problem, but everyone still votes for the incumbent, everyone still votes for corrupt party A or corrupt party B (though the difference in results for each is negligible, only the rhetoric differs).

      Education, or lack thereof, can take some blame. I find it troubling that there is a direct, and very strong, correlation between amount of money spent on advertising, and political success. Hinting that most people are the antithesis of informed voters, either that or most voters are highly susceptible to cheap psychological advertising gimmicks (which also is an education problem).

      The media can also take some blame, for setting up a false "us vs. them" dichotomy. Democrats are not the enemies of freedom, nor are Republicans. Democrats aren't socialists who want to repress religion, and Republicans aren't fascists who want us to live in a theocracy. The media likes the fear of "the other", it is one of the most primal human triggers, and serves VERY well to get people to watch your content, and hence your sponsors. The media used to be more responsible, but it has become nothing more than a souless, amoral, corporate monolith looking out for nothing but profit. (Yes, Rupert Murdoch would be selling Liberal propaganda if he could make as much money from it).

      The corporations have pretty much taken over government, as well as the media. With the amount of money they are able to spend on promoting their interests, even if they are completely contrary to our interests, their voice is much louder (and important, since being reelected costs huge amounts of money, because advertising=election) than us "real" people could ever hope to compete with.

      So I'd say the real problems are education (the media would be toothless with a decent eduction being common), to much access for non-people individuals versus access for the people who government supposedly exists for, and the blind greed of politicians who worry more about sticking around than actually helping us.

      Granted the politicians involved in this all have good intentions, and ideological premises to claim how ethical they are. Think the Reagan era "what is good for corporations is good for America" line of rhetoric.

      The thing is, EVERYONE recognizes exactly what I just said. Find the most partisan drone that you can, and they will agree with me, but continue to act in a way that allows this system to exist. This is the mystery.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    136. Re:Papers Please! by sabre86 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Alternatively, we simply wipe out the human race. No more problems.

      Why should someone fear the consequences of coming to the US for work or just to live? Rumor has it that it's a country with "liberty and justice for all" and "the land of the free" and things like that.

      Of course, I figure you're trolling, as no serious person would suggest battering, defacing, enslaving and then murdering a person simply for crossing a line on a map.

      --sabre86

    137. Re:Papers Please! by snowgirl · · Score: 1

      Immigration isn't difficult to control. Just go around to all the constructions sites and haul in all the workers that can't speak English. No, this isn't a troll. Those that can't speak English at all will either have some very fresh papers saying they can work here, or they will have a concerned family member monitoring them.

      This may apply in your particular area, but it does NOT apply over the entire USA. Particularly in New Mexico, where there are children born, who get to the 1st grade without speaking any English... "those are anchor babies" Some, yes, but New Mexico is also full of a Spanish-speaking population that has been around so long that these Spanish-only children have grandparents with full American citizenship.

      Not to mention that this would be a gross violation of discrimination based on national origin. The US Supreme Court has already ruled very clearly that English-speaking requirements are only valid if English is absolutely required to perform the work being done. Construction jobs do not require English... especially when the foremen are guaranteed legal immigrants or native-born Americans who also natively speak Spanish.

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
    138. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then you can't work. No work, no money. No money, you become disenfranchised

      No, then you just start receiving Government handouts and they know you'll vote Democrat for the rest of your life.....

      And how were you planning to vote, with no ID card?

      You don't need an ID card to vote. You look up your name by address on a list. That's it.

    139. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      #1 is an assumption, and a big one.

      You act like the person was abused and paid poorly. Many of the people I know that go by Home Depot or whatever corner they happen to be on pay them very well (+10$/h). Food and drink is even provided. You take care of them.

      The reason why this occurs is because it is usually a PITA to find 'legitimate' contractors in the first place, and their rates are too high. Not to mention when you need something done quickly you can't get the 'legitimate' contractors to come out when you need them, or it is extra.

      We can argue about #2, but saying the illegal labor was exploited is not always true.

      Those illegal laborers that you want to protect from exploitation also work pretty damn hard, and some have a fantastic work ethic. Something which seems to be disappearing from the 'legitimate' labor pool.

    140. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The most important aspect of the cards is that they will be required to buy food in the US. The only real hang-up at this point is that the Senators from Monsanto are demanding that this provision require that at least 40% of the food must be genetically engineered by the year 2015.

    141. Re:Papers Please! by roman_mir · · Score: 2, Interesting

      3. Needed a job done, found a person who was looking for one and paid him an amount that both agreed to. Capitalism, pure and simple. If only governments and large corporations could understand this.

    142. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Immigration isn't difficult to control. Just go around to all the constructions sites and haul in all the workers that can't speak English. No, this isn't a troll. Those that can't speak English at all will either have some very fresh papers saying they can work here, or they will have a concerned family member monitoring them.

      -1 Fucking Ignorant Racist. First, I have seen workers fail E-verify (likely illegal) that spoke perfect English and were more Americanized than myself, a pasty white person that never left the US. Second, there is little reason to think that someone with poor or no English but valid papers - and this is a HUGE group, you ignorant cockfuck - would need a fulltime chaparon. Third, assuming this person had a chaperon, what construction company or business lets your bring your babysitter on site? Who pays them or has the time to babysit a forign-language speaker 120 hours each week. It may take a few minutes to learn your way from a house to a jobsite but it can take years to learn a language. What law enforcement operation would allow for intervention of this babysitter on someone else's behalf? If you want to inspect worksites, that is OK. What you can't do, and what would cost even the government untold dollars in lawsuits, is use a litmus test that mutes and imbeciles and foreign language speakers would fail. As much as I hate our government, pricks like you show how it could be worse.

    143. Re:Papers Please! by Khyber · · Score: 1

      You must be a fucking republican to only have such a response and no rational basis behind it. Just for your reference, since you're apparently either too young or too fucking ignorant to know about it - Republican strategy is to lie cheat and steal.

      BTW Palin was never pregnant with Trig - Two months before she 'gave birth' she was as flat as a fucking stone wall ON EVERY TV PROGRAM SHE APPEARED ON.

      Then suddenly TWELVE INCH LUMP OUT OF NOWHERE IN A ONE WEEK TIME SPAN.

      Bullshit. You're drinking the kool-aid, pal.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    144. Re:Papers Please! by scot4875 · · Score: 1

      Hey, that might even work with nationalized health care, I mean we can now see that you buy WAY too much alcohol and cigarettes, I think we'll withold some of that care from you due to life choices.

      I'm actually all for this. If you choose to engage in risky activities, why should I subsidize it? Oh wait -- it's only "personal responsibility" when it applies to other people, right?

      And yes, that means I think that if you can't afford to pay out of your own pocket for a smoking- or alcohol-related issue, you should be denied access to even the emergency room. Leave that for responsible people who aren't actively trying to destroy their lungs or liver.

      Similarly, if you're in a car accident and aren't wearing a seatbelt, you shouldn't get jack shit for your injuries, even if the other driver was at fault. You chose to take the risk; now you live with it.

      --Jeremy

      --
      Jesus was a liberal
    145. Re:Papers Please! by Khyber · · Score: 1

      "even walk around in the states that require you to carry ID on you"

      No. learn about full faith and credit before speaking any further - I've also lived in several of those states and can guarantee you the moment a cop asks you "ID Please" you can go "Show me yours first and prove your government position by showing me your payroll" will get them to back down quickly (two court cases, both in Georgia after leaving the airport.) You have the right to make a government agent properly identify themselves. They have no power to ensure you properly identify yourself.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    146. Re:Papers Please! by ahabswhale · · Score: 1

      There's this thing called a social security card that does the same thing, all without any biometrics. The fact is that employers who depend on illegals are glad they are illegals so they can pay them below minimum wage. There is virtually no penalty on the employers side for not following existing laws.

      So the truth is that they just want biometrics on everyone in the country. That's the real purpose here.

      --
      Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
    147. Re:Papers Please! by Reziac · · Score: 1

      This is no different, other than scale, than entering my home without permission, taking my property and resources, squatting permanently in my living room, and expecting to be allowed to do so without fear of consequences.

      Of course, a lot of states have done the same thing there as we've done with the border -- made it the homeowner's duty to retreat.

      So, no, I'm not trolling... after living in SoCal for 25 years and watching the situation go from iffy to bad to irrecoverable, I've gone from my original position of sympathy for the poor immigrants, to being all for gun turrets at the border.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    148. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you already need all those to work, why do they need to another card to the mix?

    149. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ummm...actually, that's exactly what they want to do.

      They require employees to have this ID card, they also require employers to check that employees have said ID card

      And suddenly, many Americans are going to find themselves having to get lawyers and work out paperwork when their cards don't come up valid, or they lose them, etc.

      Or they're taken away through infractions due to other legislation put in place.... later on.

      EDUCATE YOURSELF!

    150. Re:Papers Please! by psych0fred · · Score: 1

      You do understand that there are limits on the number of people and time it takes for a reason don't you? They are two-fold, to keep the door open for non-immigrants to compete (inexpensive but educated labor from poor countries), and more importantly because it takes 6 years for an immigrant to assimilate the culture of the country they are emigrating to. Without that cushion/buffer the result is cultural accommodation and not assimilation. In case you don't know what that means, it means the emigrants replace the existing culture rather than learn to adapt to it. When you are coming from a third world country that means making this first world country more and more like a third world country.

    151. Re:Papers Please! by Shakrai · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      The government has more force to throw at you than any dissenting group could hope to match. The government has pretty much a monopoly of force.

      And the Redcoats were members of the most powerful army on the planet at the time. What's your point?

      People will get hurt. Innocent people will get hurt. Your personal political ideology generally never trumps the lives of others.

      It's a safe assumption that people are already being hurt if things ever get to the point that revolution is called for.

      I personally dread the day when people take up guns against their elected government. First because the term "elected", by picking up guns your saying that you know better than the voters, which to me, is tyrannical.

      You do realize that the voters will has already been subverted in the United States, right? Our elected officials choose their voters, not the other way around. There are also times when the will of the voters DESERVES to be overturned. Or do you think that Jim Crow was justifiable because it happened to command popular support?

      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey

      I hope you appreciate the irony of choosing that as your signature line while condemning the notion of revolution against an oppressive government.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    152. Re:Papers Please! by Pretzalzz · · Score: 1

      They've never checked ID when I've voted...

    153. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "They" can't just deny an ID card out of hand, without a reason. If some bureaucrat (another thing I've never understood about conspiracies, how do they manage to get every bureaucrat in the country in on the scheme?) is stopping you from working, take them to court. If they really have no motive beyond "we don't like you" for stopping you from working, a judge will get them in line in a heartbeat. Unless you're dealing with a staggeringly vast conspiracy that controls every bureaucrat at the office where you're getting your ID card and every judge who might hear your case, and this conspiracy is focusing all of its resources on personally disenfranchising you (and what makes you so special that you deserve this much attention?), "they" can't plausibly stop you from working.

    154. Re:Papers Please! by sabre86 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I appreciate the civil reply.

      It's considerably different. For one thing, merely crossing the border doesn't deny you of or remove any of your property or resources. There are definitely immigrants who steal and/or defraud the government, but those are crimes the justice system can handle. For another, concept of a domicile doesn't scale up to a state level because it's rooted in private ownership. Places accessible to the public are public and in a free country, that means anyone can travel there.

      Governments are neither private individuals, with living rooms to protect, nor corporations. They don't have owners or stockholders to whom they have an obligation to provide profit or gain to. Governments, specifically the US Government, are put in place to ensure the liberty and welfare of all they have jurisdiction over to the best of their ability.

      I've got to return your previous comments. Frankly, governments and nations are pains in the ass. They draw arbitrary lines, they tell people what to do and how to live for no good reason and they ban all kinds of behavior, to the extent that pretty much everyone in the United States has committed a vast array of criminal acts. As such, there's only one good reason to have a government -- they manage to limit the behavior of people with the attitude you espoused. Murderers and slavers who can't respect the human dignity of their fellow man. People who insist their property is worth more than the freedom or very life of another human being.

      Who the hell are you to demand the blood and liberty of another? What are you so scared of that you'd enslave and kill to keep some arbitrary group of people from standing inside some arbitrary circle?

    155. Re:Papers Please! by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      Republican strategy is to lie cheat and steal.

      Amen. They're just horrible. That's why I vote democrat. *Their* strategy is to steal, lie, and cheat. It's TOTALLY different.

    156. Re:Papers Please! by digitig · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing you've never lived in a place with mandatory ID cards.

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
    157. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Heller ruling technically only covered areas under Federal-only jurisdiction like Washington DC. There is a case at the Supreme Court right now that seeks to incorporate the Second Amendment more generally, such that the states will have to respect it. Most observers seem to think that will happen, but who knows, those guys tend to spend their time formulating complex opinions that back up what their gut was telling them before the case even began.

    158. Re:Papers please! by shermo · · Score: 1

      Do you mean !privacy => !freedom?

      Then logically freedom => privacy

      --
      Insanity: voting in the same two parties over and over again and expecting different results
    159. Re:Papers Please! by Stormy+Dragon · · Score: 1

      Those that can't speak English at all will either have some very fresh papers saying they can work here, or they will have a concerned family member monitoring them.

      Or they could be US citizens from Puerto Rico or the US Virgin Islands.

    160. Re:Papers Please! by TemporalBeing · · Score: 1

      Education, or lack thereof, can take some blame. I find it troubling that there is a direct, and very strong, correlation between amount of money spent on advertising, and political success. Hinting that most people are the antithesis of informed voters, either that or most voters are highly susceptible to cheap psychological advertising gimmicks (which also is an education problem).

      I don't necessarily think it's such a lack of education, as it is that people just don't see any viability in other political parties. It would probably be of great benefit to the US to move away from a 2 party system. It'll certainly increase the competition in elections, and probably make people more interested as well. The problem with the two party system is that people typically get forced into thinking they have to vote for one or the other, making it more difficult to unseat someone that needs to be unseated. Most probably don't agree with Republicans or Democrats on a number of issues, and there probably is another political party that already exists they do agree with but either don't know about (education) or don't think is viable b/c of how much the two parties are against each other so its seen as not viable.

      The media can also take some blame, for setting up a false "us vs. them" dichotomy. Democrats are not the enemies of freedom, nor are Republicans. Democrats aren't socialists who want to repress religion, and Republicans aren't fascists who want us to live in a theocracy. The media likes the fear of "the other", it is one of the most primal human triggers, and serves VERY well to get people to watch your content, and hence your sponsors. The media used to be more responsible, but it has become nothing more than a souless, amoral, corporate monolith looking out for nothing but profit. (Yes, Rupert Murdoch would be selling Liberal propaganda if he could make as much money from it).

      Agreed, and probably far more true than you realize.

      So I'd say the real problems are education (the media would be toothless with a decent eduction being common), to much access for non-people individuals versus access for the people who government supposedly exists for, and the blind greed of politicians who worry more about sticking around than actually helping us.

      True. Companies should be stripped of their ability to influence elections in any way, and at a minimum have their ability to influence law severely limited as well. That'd probably resolve a number of problems. But as long as companies can influence the elections they will also be able to influence law.

      The thing is, EVERYONE recognizes exactly what I just said. Find the most partisan drone that you can, and they will agree with me, but continue to act in a way that allows this system to exist. This is the mystery.

      They do so b/c it is in their interest to do so (my original point); and they will continue to do so until we the people make it no longer their interest to do so.

      --
      Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
    161. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i have yet to work for a company that will hire me without a social security card, though social security is supposedly a voluntary system.

    162. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's illegal to require ID to vote in the U.S. The Left consider verifying you are the voter you claim to be scares away the poor and minorities.

    163. Re:Papers Please! by shiftless · · Score: 3, Interesting

      t's considerably different. For one thing, merely crossing the border doesn't deny you of or remove any of your property or resources.

      Bullshit. Soon as he crosses the border, he's breathing my air, drinking water, eating food, driving on roads, etc. He IS taking up resources simply by being there. A small amount, sure, but put him and his 20 million buddies in the U.S. side by side and suddenly the amount is not quite so small is it? When 20 million people drive over our roads, how much more quickly do they wear out, and who's paying to fix them? And when a van full of Mexicans driving at twice the speed limit (not a single valid drivers' license to be found amongst them) crashes and seriously injures all 23 inside, who gets to pay their $800k worth of surgery and medical charges? You and me of course, because the illegals damn sure aint paying for it.

      There are definitely immigrants who steal and/or defraud the government, but those are crimes the justice system can handle. For another, concept of a domicile doesn't scale up to a state level because it's rooted in private ownership. Places accessible to the public are public and in a free country, that means anyone can travel there.

      No, it doesn't mean "anyone can travel there." It means that property is owned by the public, i.e. the citizens. The people of the U.S. own this land, and we can come and go as we please. We reserve the right to allow others to visit our land as well provided certain conditions have met. Illegal immigrants are those who did not meet our requirements for immigration yet who snuck in anyway, or overstayed their welcome. I know times are tough in Mexico, but this is OUR fucking land, so go your ass home and make something happen there instead of running away from your problems like a coward.

      Governments are neither private individuals, with living rooms to protect, nor corporations. They don't have owners or stockholders to whom they have an obligation to provide profit or gain to. Governments, specifically the US Government, are put in place to ensure the liberty and welfare of all they have jurisdiction over to the best of their ability.

      One of the U.S. government's biggest and most important obligations is to PROTECT AND DEFEND this nation's property. Allowing anyone to come and go as they please, using up our nation's resources freely and limitlessly, living outside the law, is NOT acceptable to me or to the vast majority of American citizens who have any common sense.

      You know what the difference between Americans back in Revolution days vs now is? It's like the difference between a 16 year old who, after saving up money from summer jobs for years, buys an old project car and fixes it up, vs the 16 year whose millionaire daddy buys him a Ferrari for his birthday. Which one do you think better appreciates what he's got? There are people in other countries who would give anything, risk it all to have what we have here in America. Despite what other governments may think, I can tell you there are a LOT of peoples in the world that look up to us and who want to follow our example.

      What do you think they dream about when they imagine America? They think of beautiful homes and people, clean, sparkling cities, fabulous wealth. They don't dream about an L.A. ridden by gang problems (many of them immigrants, legally or not), outrageous health care costs (due in part to illegals), outrageous car insurance costs (due in part to illegals), higher taxes (needed to improve roads and other infrastructure worn by the extra use), etc, I'd imagine.

      This nation has a lot of problems. Instead of lamely sitting by while they continue to pile up, it's time for our government to take action to solve some of them. Illegal immigration is a big problem, one that most Americans would be happy to see solved. This new legislation doesn't stand a chance, though, I can guarantee that. It will FAIL, or pass only against stiff opposition. Remember the big stink against the Real ID Act a few years ba

    164. Re:Papers Please! by blackraven14250 · · Score: 1

      This rings the same tone as an anti-DRM argument, for some reason...

    165. Re:Papers Please! by RocketRabbit · · Score: 1

      Me and Blank Reg are going to be sitting a the van, down by the river.

    166. Re:Papers Please! by rollingcalf · · Score: 1

      "Currently, legal immigrant or legal non-immigrant temporary workers who do not have a green card already must have an "employment authorization document", which is a similar card to the proposed--it contains a fingerprint and bar code, and you have to present it to an employer before you can be hired. Just like this current system does not deter employers from hiring illegal immigrants and illegal immigrants from obtaining jobs, the proposed new card won't stop them either. I don't see the point."

      The reason why those high-tech green cards and employment authorization cards are ineffective is that citizens don't have to use them. So instead of using a fake green card or employment card, illegal immigrants pretend to be citizens by using something else that is relatively easy to forge, like a fake birth certificate.

      If everybody including citizens had to use some form of sophisticated, hard to forge document, that would stop 95% of the illegal workers who are pretending to be legal. But the American people apparently are not willing to pay that price in order to enforce the immigration laws. And while such documents if mandatory for everybody would stop 95% of the pretenders, it still wouldn't stop the employers who knowingly hire illegal workers under the table.

      --
      ---------
      There is inferior bacteria on the interior of your posterior.
    167. Re:Papers Please! by OrwellianLurker · · Score: 1

      "I can't legally own a hand-gun in Chicago, yet 400 people a year get murdered with one."

      Really? Why not? I thought the recent SCOTUS ruling against hand gun ban laws in D.C. would pretty much have cleared the way for handgun ownership in all 50 states by now...?

      SCOTUS will be ruling on how the 2nd amendment applies to state and local governments in June.

      --
      'Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.' - Mao Tse-tung
    168. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I live in California. You have to have ID when a cop asks.

    169. Re:Papers Please! by Omestes · · Score: 1

      You do realize that the voters will has already been subverted in the United States, right? Our elected officials choose their voters, not the other way around. There are also times when the will of the voters DESERVES to be overturned. Or do you think that Jim Crow was justifiable because it happened to command popular support?

      This is a complicated one. Jim Crow deserved to die, undoubtedly, regardless of the will of the people. But some people have the same feeling about less obvious things. This is sticky ground, and needs some SERIOUS thought before people go and shoot elected officials. Where is the line?

      Jim Crow was repealed without a revolution. Jim Crow died the way it was supposed to. See also the Suffragette movement, see also most of the social libertarian progress we have made in the last 100 or so years.

      Some people would feel that violence would be called for if the government legalized gay marriage, or abortion, or instituted public health care (the real stuff, not the Obama stuff). Where is this line?

      I hope you appreciate the irony of choosing that as your signature line while condemning the notion of revolution against an oppressive government.

      Defense is the least amount of force needed to protect yourself. Most of the time it is a couple words and a smile. Sometimes its pissing off those in power, and spending the night in jail. And only when everything else fails, and you are left with no other options do you go and start shooting people.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    170. Re:Papers Please! by adolf · · Score: 1

      Nice rant. I even read about the first half of it before I got bored.

      So hey, listen: It's my country, too. And I'd welcome another 20 million heads, if they're immigrated properly. Then, they can enjoy all of the prosperity of the US, and pay taxes just like the rest of us.

      Of course, current immigration laws can make this hard for an individual to accomplish. So I'd much rather see a greater focus on making legal immigration easier, than on making illegal immigration harder, especially since efforts toward the latter tend to make my country seem less free for me. But if immigrating were easy enough, it won't be worth the trouble and the risk to come over here illegally.

      (And if you're thinking "Preposterous! You'd be opening the flood gates!", and preparing a lengthy rant about that: I know. I'm OK with that. The US was founded as a diverse nation of immigrants, and I remember where we came from.)

    171. Re:Papers Please! by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      Jim Crow was repealed without a revolution.

      Jim Crow came about because slavery was abolished. It took a civil war to make that happen.

      Some people would feel that violence would be called for if the government legalized gay marriage, or abortion, or instituted public health care (the real stuff, not the Obama stuff). Where is this line?

      The New Hampshire constitution is as good of a guide as any as to where the line should be drawn:

      Whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.

      I bolded the part that suggests where the line should be drawn, to me anyway. The ammo box is the LAST box that people should reach for. But if the other boxes (soap box, ballot box, jury box) fail, what choice is there?

      And only when everything else fails, and you are left with no other options do you go and start shooting people.

      Few people have suggested that shooting people is the starting point to righting the wrongs in our society.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    172. Re:Papers Please! by dwiget001 · · Score: 1

      That's all bullshit.

      Legitimate contractors do the work necessary to get the *cough* blessing *cough* of the state, county or whatever political entity is running things where they are.

      And, on top of the time and expense of doing "the above", there are payroll and other taxes and other overhead necessary to just employ people *as well as* keep the business going, pay the people that run things *and* hopefully have some left over for expanding and improving their business.

      Part of the problem is the ungawdly amount of regulation (tax laws, local [county, state and federal requirements]) and other things that cost a company money above and beyond getting work done and paying employees.

      From the local, state or federal government(s) point of view, using "illegal labor" is depriving the citizenry (really, just "the government[s]) of what they consider their pound(s) of flesh.

      What is needed is a complete re-vamping of our tax laws (income tax, payroll, etc.) as a start. Stop keeping the long finger of the tax law (men/women) on the individual tax payer. National sales tax (*not* the horrid VAT) or flat income tax where everyone pays something, no matter what deductions, etc., would be ideal. Then, with that mess out of the way, work more locally (state, county, city, etc.) to get regulations either done away with or stream-lined so they do not hinder employment, getting and providing services/work, etc.

      Hiring and using illegal labor just perpetuates the problem of not fixing the issues that make illegal labor "look" attractive. And, the "state" is pretty unfeeling, you break their rules (laws) and get caught, you are going to pay. So it always pays, in the long run, to follow the law, no matter what, but work to change laws/regulations that are just kill or greatly impede getting the job done, people hired and gainfully employed, etc.

    173. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, people don't realize that a huge portion of the legal mexican citizens in the US are the result of illegals coming over here and having kids on our soil. It's too bad a bill couldn't be passed to deport all illegals AND the offspring of (up to three or four generations back) back to mexico. It would sure help us all out. IT would free up billions and billions of dollars in tax payer dollars and open up hundreds of thousands of jobs that should be held by real US citizens. Even if those jobs are min wage jobs, that's still a job that a US citizen could have for which they can't get a job at all right now. And why is it that when a real citizen is down on their luck and out of work that it is very difficult to get social services yet an illegal can come in with no ID or anything else and get more aid than a deserving, hard working US citizen can get with all the necessary paperwork that is required? I just don't get it but I do know one thing, I'm fucking tired of it.

    174. Re:Papers Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Someone is going to mention "restoring the Constitution" or some such empty phrase, which leads to the question "whose interpretation of it?". No interpretation is an objective truth, all are equal, no matter how much you disagree with them.

      The quoted statement is at best, an opinion. More likely it's simply wrong, because there are certain positions advocated by the Constitution as written (and amended) that disagree with certain 'interpretations'. What you said is sort of like saying that interpreting the color purple as 'red' is as correct as interpreting it as 'yellow'. While purple is not red, it's still a hell of a lot closer than yellow, and pretending that all opinions are equal is the typical intellectually lazy argument that gets us into the kind of problem presented by the situation with the false dichotomy between "all illegal immigration is bad" and "immigration is always good".

    175. Re:Papers Please! by seekertom · · Score: 1

      whenever i read a post, i get a sense of whether a person is in favor of the 'subject' or not, and in your case, you don't seem to be sufficiently irate about the id cards to be against them. do you work for the govt? look beyond the stated, the obvious, please. these cards are just another 'create a problem, then pretend to correct the problem', ie, business as usual for the govt! they want to CONTROL us, and will try anything to accomplish it. their efforts are unceasing, always working towards our demise. i sincerely hope you don't believe your own assessment of 'the ultimate goal'. thanks fer lis'nin' seekertom

    176. Re:Papers Please! by seekertom · · Score: 1

      so, my fellow American, exactly WHEN do YOU intend to phone, fax and mail letters to YOUR congressman, DEMANDING that this idea be trashed? btw, the crapola mediscam coming out of dc, do you care for what you hear about it? have you done anything about it (yet)? and if you do something, and a zillion others of us also do something, do you believe for an instant that dc will give two shites about what we think? i do agree with your rants. i have said the same things, over and over again, but i have YET to hear of any plan to fix things. the 28th amendment would be a great start... think it has a shites-chance of ever happening? thanks fer lis'nin' seekertom

    177. Re:Papers Please! by seekertom · · Score: 1

      i must have missed seeing what post you were replying to, concerning overthrowing the govt. i agree with your reasons why that would be not the best course of action for anyone to take in America. let me say this.... if we really believe in our American way of life, then we need to fix our problems from within, using the law and the power of the popular vote. but i really believe any American might voice their opinion about 'overthrow' simply out of frustration in feeling their voice is ignored by their govt. now, here is the real reason for my reply to YOU.... it's this statement you made..."...The Government is only a problem on the surface, but the real problem runs much deeper. The American people are the "problem", how do you fix that?... " first, the govt IS the problem, and not just on the surface, as you say. take the bailout money that the GOVT handed out without control/oversight!!!!! that wasn't a 'surface' failure. the list of such DEEP failures on the part of our govt goes on and on. 2ndly, WE are not a problem. we are people, we are human beings. we are Americans. sure, we got bamboozled into what we have right now, but it's not because we are a 'problem', it's just that the guys against us have played a better hand than we have. (that is about to change.) and it's easy to understand our failings.... we are many, they are the few. in any situation, the 'few' have consensus, the 'many' do not. the best example is to recognize that one shepherd and his dog can control hundreds of sheep. we might not know who the shepherds(s) is(are), but the dogs are the current govts of the world. they do the 'dirty work' for the ones really in control. they are the ones with the obvious 'bite'. how to fix us? give us the 28th amendment, as a start. thanks fer lis'nin' seekertom

    178. Re:Papers Please! by benjamindees · · Score: 1

      It's my country, too. And I'd welcome another 20 million heads,

      Pay attention, kids. This is called the "tragedy of the commons". This guy profits from poor people, so he's happy to support a bunch of them on public resources so that he can personally profit by it.

      I remember where we came from.

      Do you remember the sparsely-populated, resource-rich country that was America, or the overpopulated tyrannical hellhole that was Europe? Which one were you hoping to return to?

      --
      "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
    179. Re:Papers Please! by Omestes · · Score: 1

      Not to sound snarky, but please use paragraph breaks. Getting through your reply severely taxed the limited amount of coffee I got this morning.

      WE are not a problem. we are people, we are human beings. we are Americans.

      In regards to the bailout, I agree, the government did that behind our back, and mostly against our collective wishes. But we still are the problem, as we will vote these people into office next time. We voted all the clowns back in after the PATRIOT ACT debacle as well.

      We get the government we deserve.

      As I stated before, if the American people overthrew their government, the same government would be voted in immediately after the revolution.

      I don't mean to shuffle all of our problems to the people, there is a lot of reform that our current government could bear.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    180. Re:Papers Please! by Omestes · · Score: 1

      Yes, there are some unambiguous parts that we seem to ignore now. But there are some ambiguous ones as well, these ambiguous ones are bigger points of contention, and thus people get more worked up over them. I'm looking directly at the Second Amendment here.

      I didn't mean to say all points of view are valid. Obviously if you think the first Amendment means that you have the right to run around peeing on walls, or punching people in the face, you are obviously completely wrong. But if you claim that libel and slander covered by the first Amendment, and I claim otherwise, then we have a valid debate, and neither of our views have much a chance of being proven objectively valid.

      Sorry for the ambiguity.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    181. Re:Papers Please! by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      > In regards to the bailout, I agree, the government did that behind our back, and mostly against our
      > collective wishes. But we still are the problem, as we will vote these people into office next time.
      > We voted all the clowns back in after the PATRIOT ACT debacle as well.

      True but... what was the choice?

      Don't like Rep X who voted for the PATRIOT ACT? Well... then your choice is to vote for Candidate Y.

      Of course the problem is that Candidate Y is the only serious contender, and isn't really running on a platform of opposition to PATRIOT. In fact, he would have voted for it if he had the chance too.

      In addition to that, putting him in means the seat flip flopping on abortion rights, just to name one key issue... in reality its on a whole host of different issues. In fact, you voted for Rep X last time because of a number of those issues.

      So whats your option? Shoot for the symbolic victory on one issue, thats really an even bigger loss for you? Stick with X because of the few important issues that you prefered him for?

      Or maybe go for the third option... pick a minor candidate who supports your views. Of course, if he does, then he is mostly going to be taking votes of other former Rep X votes, splitting the votes of people who support those issues, and helping to hand a win to Candidate Y.... bringing you back to the same real loss.

      Clearly the rational choice is to stay home, roll a joint, and watch American Gladiators.

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    182. Re:Papers Please! by Omestes · · Score: 1

      Don't like Rep X who voted for the PATRIOT ACT? Well... then your choice is to vote for Candidate Y.

      There would be more alternative candidates if there were more people who would vote for them. I suppose it is a somewhat a "chicken and egg" type scenario.

      In the last election we had Ron Paul, who was almost a serious contender, albeit running as a Republican. On the left there was Dennis Kuchinich, who the media treated as an absolute clown, more so than they treated Paul. Neither of these men would have voted for bailouts, or the PATRIOT act. Both of them were extremely hostile to the status quo (oddly, for their extreme ideological differences, they supported much the same agenda).

      In the left there are several "alternative" canidates out there, such as Feingold, Sanders, and Kuchinich, the right seems much more unified, and somewhat more hostile to difference at the moment though (Paul is the only example I can think off).

      It is your responsibility as a citizen to change other citizens mind, and thus create a demand for alternatives, and to participate in rallies and educational exercises to endorse your views. The Tea Party movement was a good example of this, though now (like most popular rebellions) has been completely taken over by the Republican establishment and status-quo.

      Yes, at first any alternative will cut votes. Though I don't see this is a very meaningful thing, since there are no "sides" per se anymore. Oh no, the "pro-corporate, anti-freedom, the-rich-comes-first right won against my "pro-corporate, anti-freedom, the-rich-comes-fist left favorite!". More likely, though, would be a more coalitional government, like in much of Europe. Major parties don't have enough votes to pass their agendas, so they have to deal with the little guys.

      We can see this right now, the Democrats can't pass a damn thing without having to make deals and compromise. Now imagine if they had to compromise with smaller independents rather than the Republicans.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
  2. Another card? by snspdaarf · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why do we need another card? Seems to me that identity thieves have enough things to use already.

    --
    Why, without your clothes, you're naked, Miss Dudley!
    1. Re:Another card? by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 2, Informative

      Don't worry, the UK government has been pushing for this for years. Technically it already exists, and about 5 volunteers have signed up for it. On the other hand, while certain groups have IIRC already been forced to have one, other test groups have outright rejected it.

      With an election coming up, I haven't seen a single reference in favour of ID cards from the Labour lot who are in power at the moment, and both the other big parties have said they will scrap the scheme. It's become a political nightmare for the government.

      FWIW, the really insidious thing here in the UK isn't actually the cards, it's the all-in-one database that is behind them. Curiously, the Conservatives (who are likely to win power later this year) seem to have been a bit quiet about that.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    2. Re:Another card? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. Implement socialism
      2. Immigration subsequently becomes a problem
      3. Implement national biometric identification card
      4. Slide into a police state.
      5. ?
      6. Profit for the inner party.

    3. Re:Another card? by Jurily · · Score: 1

      Perhaps because the existing cards don't cover and weren't designed for this particular application, and using the driver's licence would be stupid?

    4. Re:Another card? by maxume · · Score: 1

      If the cards have decent security features, there is at least a chance that they would make it a lot easier to blame the financial institution when they opened an account for someone using a fake card.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    5. Re:Another card? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry, the UK government has been pushing for this for years

      So what? In Germany we'll get digital IDs by the end of the year. These things are very real and many countries already have them or will get them in the near future.

      Biometrics will include a standardised photo and fingerprints. The latter being voluntary ... for now.

      Planned usage scenarios are online shopping and identification towards commercial entities and government offices/agencies, etc..

    6. Re:Another card? by deniable · · Score: 1

      using the driver's licence would be stupid?

      Especially for people who can't drive for whatever reason.

    7. Re:Another card? by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Fortunately, I somehow doubt that the rest of the world is going to start adopting universal ID because one or two governments think it's a good idea. At the risk of triggering Godwin's Law, Germany doesn't exactly have a great record in this area. And lately, the US probably has the most abusive anti-privacy/state intrusion laws in the western world, and I think many other places are getting a bit sick of the US throwing its weight around.

      Meanwhile, privacy and the database state are becoming a significant electoral issue here in the UK, where we've had more than our fair share of state intrusion under the Blair/Brown administrations. Far more politicians are making an active campaign issue out of promoting privacy issues than "war on terror" and similar rhetoric. And I get the feeling many of our neighbours have always felt more strongly about this than we collectively have until recently.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    8. Re:Another card? by vxice · · Score: 1

      Biometrics are much more secure than your average card. Really what do you need to get a drivers license? A birth certificate and proof of residency, magazine subscription and cable bill, which are all easily forged especially given any more time than a week. Now with biometrics there is a lot of research into aliveness detection, you can't simply put a disconnected finger onto the scanner but who would want to since your future employer will hopefully be watching over the process similar affect for most other spoofs. However this will not come cheap "Mr. Schumer said employers would be able to buy a scanner to check the IDs for as much as $800." Now that seems a bit light for anything with the amount of security you will want for this project. You would have to have plenty of new hires to make this worth your while especially since it will be reducing your access to cheap labor in an artificially inflated labor market, what else do you think minimum wages are and who the hell tries to raise a family on one? Combine with that the fact that instead of being in many different databases this will all be in one which will be hard to crack but the more valuable information you have the more worthwhile it will be to someone. Now I do like the idea of biometrics and am studying the field for my major and it is not the systems that are the problem but the people running them that cause the real threat. So do this, stop screwing over the rest of the world and demand fair trade policies, require that if you want to import you have to observe U.S. labor standards, hold minimum wage at present levels until it means absolutely nothing allowing people to work cheap jobs if they really need the money so lower unemployment and more output since jobs that weren't worth hiring for at inflated labor prices now become economical and suddenly there is less reason to import except where there is real competitive advantage and wages will go up relatively world wide along with productivity.

      --
      every anarchist is a baffled dictator. Benito_Mussolini
    9. Re:Another card? by rfrenzob · · Score: 1

      And what are the issuance requirements here? Drivers license? Social security card? Passport?

      The last time I renewed my license, the DMV would not accept the passport as proof of citizenship. Birth certificate paired with social security card only, thank you very much.

    10. Re:Another card? by Mantis8 · · Score: 1

      Once this is in place nationwide for a while, then how long before we're all required to *upgrade* to those injectable capsules the size of a grain of rice??? Then the government can track us all like cattle...

    11. Re:Another card? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You don't seem to understand - It's more a case of extreme capitalism than socialism in this case. People have been bitching for years about how illegal immigrants were "stealing" their jobs because they're willing to work for way below minimum wage and the corporations that hire them are more than willing to let it fly under the radar for the lower cost of employment. This isn't the way to stop it, but it's just one of many signs that show that the Western World is headed for a much more totalitarian method of governing.

      I mean, for that matter, a two-party system like that in the United States isn't really a whole lot better than a one-party system - Hell, most of them have the same corporate agendas anyway. There's this strange gap between Americans when it comes to the Republicans/Democrats, but in the end, they both do pretty much exactly the same things, the status quo is pretty much always maintained, and it's more a matter of dick-waving than anything else to claim one party is inferior/socialist/evil compared to the other. Hell, you might as well say you only have one party to begin with.

    12. Re:Another card? by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      Well, they try to support this successful traditional American industry. ;)

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    13. Re:Another card? by Gilmoure · · Score: 1
      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
  3. I like this idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't see a problem with this. It doesn't infringe upon our rights at all.

    1. Re:I like this idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Mr. Cheney, we've advised you in the past to stop trolling internet forums!

  4. Ornlu by Ornlu · · Score: 1

    Over my cold dead body.

    1. Re:Ornlu by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Funny

      Ok, it's not like you have to work...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:Ornlu by nine-times · · Score: 1

      ... especially not if you're planning to have a "cold dead body".

    3. Re:Ornlu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod parent informative!

      The goal needs to be to become either independently wealthy or a way to make judicious investments of a temporary character each day so you are freed from the obligation to be an employee.

      Sadly, not everyone can or will do what is required to achieve this.

      If you are tired of your country, come to Switzerland

  5. Bullshit by Cornwallis · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ain't gonna happen.

    1. Re:Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Every time something like this comes up the 'Mark of the Beast' meme reasserts itself.

      There would need to be a sea change in the US for such a card to get traction.

    2. Re:Bullshit by Natales · · Score: 1

      Denial is the most predictable of human responses. But rest assured: this is the sixth time we've done it. And we are getting exceedingly efficient at it.

  6. Papers please! by Pojut · · Score: 3, Informative

    Seriously though...this idea would likely work just as it is being advertised, but the privacy implications of this are astounding. Then again, we only have the illusion of privacy at this point here in the US, so we may as well stop fooling ourselves....

    Remember kids, privacy != freedom

  7. Not with Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I find this hard to believe. Obama already gets enough grief about not being right wing enough even though he's as right wing as Bush 2. Patriot Act, torturing people to death, and all that. The NRA went nuts since he's a socialist and guns and ammo started selling before his nonexistant gun ban. If Obama tried this, the right wing would just completely shut down. Look at how much they shut down the government already. Doing this is pretty dangerous for any president even with the terrorist as a ready made excuse.

    1. Re:Not with Obama by furby076 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I find this hard to believe. Obama already gets enough grief about

      Obama's not in the senate. He hasn't been in the senate since he became president. This proposal is in the senate. Stop obama bashing.

      Just because Schumer is meeting with Obama does not mean Obama is responsible for this idea. According ot the article, a source in the white house said they have no official stance.

      Personally, this is the first time I have seen the democrats sell something properly. They are targetting this towards everyone, but their language is focusing on immigrants. Republicans are against national IDs, but they are more likely to be for it when we start throwing out the words "immigrants"

      --

      I do not support "The Man". I also do not support your irrational stupidity
    2. Re:Not with Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty danged left wing myself, but Obama isn't much different than the last. It's like Batman, same character, different actor.

    3. Re:Not with Obama by characterZer0 · · Score: 1

      This is Schumer, not Obama. Schumer is going after the votes of the lazy unemployed* people in upstate NY who see illegal immigrants doing jobs that they refuse to do and complain that the immigrants are taking their jobs.

      * There are lazy employed people. There are non-lazy unemployed people. I am talking about the lazy unemployed people only. I am not trying to associate the two adjectives.

      --
      Go green: turn off your refrigerator.
    4. Re:Not with Obama by AthleteMusicianNerd · · Score: 1

      Just because Schumer is meeting with Obama does not mean Obama is responsible for this idea. According ot the article, a source in the white house said they have no official stance.

      You're clearly not familiar with the "Opposite Theorem". This means that the White House does have an official stance, and they're in favor of it.

    5. Re:Not with Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you could also say the same thing about health care. obama is blurring the lines between legislative and the executive branch even more these days.

    6. Re:Not with Obama by cthulu_mt · · Score: 1

      You must not be from New York. Chuck Schumer doesn't give a shit about anyone north of Westchester county. If you asked him to find his home state on a map he'd point to Manhattan island.

      --
      Virginia is for lovers. EVE is for griefers.
  8. national ID by confused+one · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is a National ID card. Call it what it is and be done with it, don't try to hide it as part of an immigration bill.

    1. Re:national ID by timlyg · · Score: 0

      which one? the first one or the second one? I'm getting a little confused now...

    2. Re:national ID by Cigarra · · Score: 1

      It seems so.

      Then again, I fail to see the problem with it. Most countries have a national id card... what's so terrible about it?

      --
      I don't have a sig.
    3. Re:national ID by TheLink · · Score: 1

      But it is an immigration bill.

      Your new country is just coming to you, instead of you going to it.

      The Land of the Free and Home of the Brave left you long ago..

      Been a long journey but you're almost completely in the new country already. :)

      --
    4. Re:national ID by kramerd · · Score: 1

      We already have national ID cards, but currently they are optional. Go to your local DMV and ask for a personal identification card (useful if you don't drive but still wish to purchase age restricted items or sometimes to use a credit card). On a more obvious example, passports.

    5. Re:national ID by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 2, Informative

      This is a National ID card. Call it what it is and be done with it, don't try to hide it as part of an immigration bill.

      Several states already have laws on their books preventing their executive branches from servicing a National ID card. A few years ago they called it "REAL ID".

      e.g. New Hampshire. Folks interested in these issues ought to come out and lend a hand.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    6. Re:national ID by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most countries have a national id card... what's so terrible about it?

      There is a long and strong current of dislike and distrust of required Government issued ID in the USA.

      Personally I would love a single ID that could replace my drivers license, passport, fingerprint card, EMT card and all my other state/federal issued cards that I own.

      ID cards are just tools. They can be used for good or evil. We just need to make sure that if mandatory national ID does come into existence, that it is used correctly and for good.

    7. Re:national ID by chimpo13 · · Score: 1

      If you try to use a national ID at a bar in California, many will tell you to fuck off. I didn't know we had an option for a national ID card, but with passports many bars/stores won't serve/sell. I don' t know if it's legal, but that's Sacramento.

    8. Re:national ID by kramerd · · Score: 1

      Thats odd. When I visited California a couple (few) years ago (when I was in college), I was never once asked for ID at bars and such. I know its illegal for a alcohol vendor to not check identification to determine age (the penalty starting with massive fines and accelerating to loss of liquor license or business license, depending on severity of infractions). On the other hand, a business has the right to refuse service to anyone at anytime for any reason. It is perfectly legal for a bar to refuse to accept passports as proof of age.

    9. Re:national ID by chimpo13 · · Score: 1

      Once they started fining the employee, as well as the business, is when they lost it. I guess you were in a town without much ABC presence. It's pretty bad in Sacramento.

      I remember visiting Illinois and the bar wouldn't sell me drinks with my California drivers license.

      I think bars should 18 and there shouldn't be a time limit on selling booze. Just to go even more off topic.

    10. Re:national ID by kramerd · · Score: 1

      I would imagine that San Francisco is not going to be more lax than Sacramento. On the other hand, fining the employee and the business seems like a useful deterrent. That way, when a 22 year old looks the other way when selling to his faternity, the store doesn't look the other way to make a large sale. Meanwhile, the 22 year old is less likely to take on personal risk.

      Unfortunately, it seems from your experience that restrictive measures to prevent underage drinking are unintentionally preventing legal age drinking. Again, this has not been my experience.

      Let's not forget that 18 year olds don't have that difficult of a time obtaining alcohol in the first place. Its a great reason to keep em out of bars until they are 21. 3-4 years of practicing drinking in mom and dad's basement or the dorm room means they show up to the bar on their 21st birthday and don't drink 30 shots sending them to the hospital (as much).

      When it comes to time limits for purchasing alcohol I agree with local ordinances regarding bar closing times. I know I don't want to drive to work in heavy traffic at 7 AM along with barflies who are just leaving to also go to work (or my co-workers stopping in for a quick one before coming in to work). On the other hand, if you are a grocery store, and you are open on Sunday, you should sell beer on Sunday. If I don't have to work on Monday, and my retarded state has blue laws, I should be able to buy at 1201 on Monday, not 9 AM.

  9. Block the foreign programmers. by Singularity42 · · Score: 0

    They are taking our jobs!

    1. Re:Block the foreign programmers. by gtarget · · Score: 1

      They are taking our jobs!

      Dey took hiz job!

  10. Meh by Alarindris · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Who wants to bet that employers will just have a paper form to check off that they looked at your card rendering all the bio stuff useless?

    The only reason I mention that is because a social security card is also 'required' for employment, although I lost mine when I was a kid and have never shown it to any of my employers.

    I tell them I forgot it and they never ask again.

    1. Re:Meh by jav27 · · Score: 1

      no, that will not happen. The requirement is not just to show the card. the requirement is to SCAN the card in the reader. Every employer will have to submit electronically the results of the scan to DHS as proof that the employees are authorized to work.

    2. Re:Meh by BrianRoach · · Score: 3, Informative

      A social security card is not required. It can be used as a "List C" document for the I9 form.

      http://jobsearch.about.com/cs/backgroundcheck/a/background_2.htm

      I simply use my passport since it's a "List A" document. Which begs the question ... why is it that we need something more than that? Like this new thing is going to be "unforgeable" ?

    3. Re:Meh by ebuck · · Score: 1

      Sorry Sir, you passport isn't sufficient proof you can work in your country, you need a worker id card! Bwahahaha!!! Something tells me that soon afterward we'll need biometric implants to authorize us to use the toilet.

      Look, as a tax payer, I am appalled that we even consider pouring more money into yet another ID card. Odds are this is just a special interest group trying to ride the wave of foreigner xenophobia and fear of unemployment into getting panic prone Americans to vote away their dollars because the sales pitch promises to calm their fears. If you're prone to such a tactic, I have some Armageddon insurance to sell you.

    4. Re:Meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, that will not happen. The requirement is not just to show the card. the requirement is to SCAN the card in the reader. Every employer will have to submit electronically the results of the scan to DHS as proof that the employees are authorized to work.

      And at $800 each, one scanner required for every business in America...

      1) What companies donate to Schumer's campaign?
      2) Of those companies, which ones are in the biometrics business?
      3) PROFIT!

      ...I think we finally found step 2, and if that company is publicly traded, we can all trade on it.

    5. Re:Meh by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1

      The only reason I mention that is because a social security card is also 'required' for employment

      No, it's not. A Social Security card is one of several documents that can be presented to prove work eligibility. A passport, a birth certificate, or several other documents can used with the I-9 form.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
  11. To you hackers out there.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If this comes to pass, please hack it fast and make a big splash with it, like have a petite white chick go around as President Obama.

  12. This ended so well in the UK... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They tried this in the UK, long story short, it costs millions and nobody has an ID card. It was also found to be completely impractical. I wish the US the best of luck with their scheme.

    PS - What happens if you literally have no hands? Can you not work?

    1. Re:This ended so well in the UK... by Kymermosst · · Score: 1

      The difference is it will cost us billions instead of millions.

      --
      "Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives" should be a convenience store, not a government agency.
    2. Re:This ended so well in the UK... by DataBroker · · Score: 1

      The difference is it will cost us billions instead of millions.

      So what you're saying is that this is a "high-tech jobs bill"?

  13. Tie this in to drivers license, and passport by furby076 · · Score: 1

    Make it so this card also has my drivers license, and passport (I assume it already has my social security since it's for work) and I am all for it. I am tired of having to to worry which ID i need to have on me. Drivers license (all the time), then passport when I fly (god help me if I forget this one), and now this?

    Gov't - stop making life cumbersome. With technology we can get everything we want, on a drivers license sized ID card. It shouldn't be that hard.

    Oh - and don't forget the most important thing...the persons picture.

    --

    I do not support "The Man". I also do not support your irrational stupidity
    1. Re:Tie this in to drivers license, and passport by Lawrence_Bird · · Score: 1, Insightful

      hey why not add thier bank account data, IRS payment status, medical history, criminal record, fbi and other three letter agency file indices... I'm sure you could think of even more things that would make your life and the governements easier. Don't worry, next week the Senate takes up the 'lets wipe everyone's ass for them' bill.

    2. Re:Tie this in to drivers license, and passport by furby076 · · Score: 1

      hey why not add thier bank account data, IRS payment status, medical history, criminal record, fbi and other three letter agency file indices... I'm sure you could think of even more things that would make your life and the governements easier. Don't worry, next week the Senate takes up the 'lets wipe everyone's ass for them' bill.

      The gov't tracks you prett well actually. You think the gov't doesn't know your employment status, criminal record, fbi record, IRS payment status, bank account data, credit card bill, mortgage bill, car payment, phone bill, electricity usage, etc? You really honestly believe they don't already have this information on you tracking down to when you got your last parking ticket, or used EZ-pass the last time or went to an ATM machine in 2001? If you really think that then you are 110% naive.

      All this bill is saying 1) Put some kind of biometric (whichi includes a picture) on your social security ID, 2) require employers to check this. Good, I have always wanted a picture on my social...that way I can worry less about it getting stolen. If they happen to put my drivers license information (probably a checkbox saying "he can drive a car"), put my passport information (probably a checkbox saying "he can leave the country") then I am all for it.

      The information itself is not stored on the card (maybe my name/birthday), but an ID number on the card is linked to a database which *ALREADY* has the information.

      So Lawrence, please stop with the scare tactics. The gov't knows this information about us...and as far as where you are concerned...don't worry as long as you pay your taxes the gov't couldn't care less about you.

      --

      I do not support "The Man". I also do not support your irrational stupidity
    3. Re:Tie this in to drivers license, and passport by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      Agreed. Throw in a smart card chip, too. let me use it for banking transactions.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    4. Re:Tie this in to drivers license, and passport by vlm · · Score: 1

      Make it so this card also has my ... passport

      Not going to work. International treaties specify how passports work. Some customs inspector in Zimbabwe can read and stamp your passport, but would have no idea what to do with a plastic card.

      Also, if its electronic, you can erase stuff, and historically there is nothing arab nations customs inspectors like better than to harass people with Israeli stamps in their passports (and probably vice versa). They will not be amused with the idea of erasable entries. And of course, if you can intentionally erase entries, you can accidentally erase entries. And if you can accidentally erase entries, it'll be mighty hard to prove anything was intentionally erased. So whats the point of stamping an electronic passport anyway, since only non-crooks will bother?

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    5. Re:Tie this in to drivers license, and passport by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      If it is encrypted with a pin that I have to enter, I am fine with that idea. As I said elsewhere, this should be encrypted on the card, but with 2 pins to get to it; Mine or the feds.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    6. Re:Tie this in to drivers license, and passport by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am with you. Make sure to show full face and hair. I do not care what your God thinks, I need to see your face otherwise, how do I know it is you.

    7. Re:Tie this in to drivers license, and passport by Lawrence_Bird · · Score: 1

      The government may know some of the items you mentioned and some of those items may only be known by one or two agencies making it at least a hurdle of some sorts for someone to compile a complete run down on you.

      Further - why are you conceeding this to the government? Do you think they should have access to credit card purchase records? EasyPass data? (Both supposedly private info but already abused).

      This is not scare tactics. It is about fighting against further encroachment by a governement that HAS NO NEED TO KNOW.

  14. So... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    I guess this is where we learn whether Americans hate "big gummint" or mexicans more. Based on our performances during the wars on terror, drugs, crime, pedophiles, etc. I'm guessing that the answer will be "mexicans" hands down.

    Sure, there'll be some libertarians and civil libertarians who actually do prefer freedom, and some liberals(and, of course, hispanics) who don't actually hate mexicans; but the "God bless Joe Arpaio" crowd would submit to checkpoints and cavity searches in their own homes if they thought it would bring back "purity" and "real america"(how ironic...).

    1. Re:So... by Pojut · · Score: 1, Insightful

      That's the way it goes, and part of the reason why I turned my back on what the Republican party has become.

      "Government, stay outta my life! Unless it's gay marriage, prayer in schools, pot, or mexicans. Then you need to regulate the fuck out of it!"

      And they wonder why people look down on them...

      To be fair, the Democrats are just as bad...the difference being that Democrats like to pretend they aren't lying to you, while Republicans lie right to your face. Either way, still lying.

    2. Re:So... by benjamindees · · Score: 1

      As a libertarian, it's:

      "Government, stay outta my life! Unless it's to regulate behavior that violates my rights."

      And that's all it ever needs to be.

      Someone smoking pot doesn't violate my rights unless they blow it in my face. Prayer in schools doesn't violate my rights if those schools are private and voluntary and supported by vouchers. Gay marriage doesn't violate my rights because the state has no business licensing marriage in the first place.

      Mexicans don't violate my rights until they breed themselves into poverty and destroy their own country and flee into mine in order to commit crimes and vote in our comically fraudulent elections and sign up for welfare and subsidized construction jobs* and free education and pop out a bunch of birth-right citizen anchor-baby future welfare cases.

      *thanks Alan Greenspan, you dipshit

      --
      "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
    3. Re:So... by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      "Unless its gay marriage, prayer in schools ..... mexicans..."

      Except each one of those IS a government issue-- gay marriage is about whether the state (ie the GOVERNMENT) recognizes such unions, prayer in schools is more properly labeled "prayer in PUBLIC schools", and immigration... well, if you cant see why THATS a government issue I cant help you. Whatever you think the policy should be on each of those, the government cannot stay neutral on any of them-- It has to make a decision one way or the other.

  15. hate to point this out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Meet the new boss (administration), same as the old boss

    1. Re:hate to point this out by Em+Emalb · · Score: 1

      People were expecting different? If so...sorry that your optimism was (once again) crushed like the dreams of a small child. Don't worry though, your salty little tears feed the vampiric politicians. So please...continue weeping.

      --
      Sent from your iPad.
  16. ID Card by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because that's exactly what we need, is to make employees at small businesses (remember, small businesses are important! Every politician says so!) go to the DMV to get scanned. You know, because the DMV moves people through so quickly...

  17. Start with lawmakers by Josh+Coalson · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Fine, congressmen should get the cards first. If they still like the idea after 6 years, let them try and foist it on the rest of us.

    1. Re:Start with lawmakers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The federal government already issues IDs to its employees, and has done so for far more than 6 years.

    2. Re:Start with lawmakers by SecurityGuy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Federal employees are already being issued biometric ID cards.

    3. Re:Start with lawmakers by Josh+Coalson · · Score: 1

      The problem is not the card, it's the data and what's done with it. Somehow I doubt Congressmen have their personal and biometric data in some crappy insecure system, easily accessed, shared with any agency or corporation willy-nilly, sold to marketers, etc. like what is going to happen if this proposal goes through.

  18. Illegal work. by Ostracus · · Score: 1

    "A person familiar with the legislative planning said the biometric data would likely be either fingerprints or a scan of the veins in the top of the hand. It would be required of all workers, including teenagers, but would be phased in, with current workers needing to obtain the card only when they next changed jobs, the person said. The card requirement also would be phased in among employers, beginning with industries that typically rely on illegal-immigrant labor.""

    What about virtual companies and telecommuters were the notion of "illegal worker" doesn't really exist.

    --
    Shai Schticks:"You don't make peace with friends, you make peace with enemies"
    1. Re:Illegal work. by NiteShaed · · Score: 1

      What about virtual companies and telecommuters were the notion of "illegal worker" doesn't really exist.

      How do you figure that? Your "virtual company", which I take to mean a company running out of your basement, is subject to the same labor laws as any other company in your area. The fact you slapped the word "virtual" in front of something doesn't mean you are therefore completely unregulated and free to make up/ignore any rules you want......
      A telecommuter may not actually travel to the office, but they're still required to pay taxes and you're still required to follow employment related laws when hiring/employing them.

      --
      Some bring out the best in others, some the worst. Some bring out far more.
    2. Re:Illegal work. by bkr1_2k · · Score: 1

      If you're getting paid for your "virtual work", whatever that means, then you have supplied employment information required by the feds, or you are being paid as an "independent contractor" and are expected to provide income information on your taxes in April.

      The problem is this won't make any damn difference in the status quo. People will fake or steal these the same way the fake or steal SS cards and the other documents are very easy to get legally. Hell, up until the mid 90s (I'm not sure exactly when this changed) you could get a social security number legally as a tourist for purposes of opening a bank account. Tourist visas last for months so it's an easy justification to say it's unsafe to carry lots of cash while you're a tourist so you want to have it in a bank.

      --
      "Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
    3. Re:Illegal work. by Reziac · · Score: 1

      This becomes an excuse to require biometric logins for any computer capable of remote access.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  19. For those who are going to complain by elrous0 · · Score: 1

    For those of you who are going to draw analogies to Soviet Russia, etc. and complain that this somehow violates our rights and so on: just think of all the "papers" we ALREADY have to carry in this country. A lot of fuss was made in anti-Soviet propoganda about the papers the Russians had to carry around, but try leaving your house some time in the U.S. without your driver's license, car registration, proof of insurance, etc. I'm pretty sure the cops aren't going to accept "But this is a free country!" in lieu of these if you get stopped at a roadblock.

    There are privacy concerns here, but not civil liberties ones (well, no more than are raised by all the other "papers").

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:For those who are going to complain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We are required to carry a driver's license and the rest to allow us to use public roads. If you want to drive without a license nobody can stop you, just stay of public roads - drive around your private property all you want. If you want to walk or take the train, no need for a license.

      This is different, you can get by without a license (it might be difficult, but it IS possible) - how are you going to survive without a job?

    2. Re:For those who are going to complain by langelgjm · · Score: 1

      The difference is that requiring you to have a driver's license, registration, and proof of insurance helps ME if you hit me with your car. And you're entirely free to walk around or take public transportation without any kind of identification whatsoever. That's not the case in many other countries. In the US, you are only required to have (and carry) a driver's license if you want to drive. Unless there's some law I'm unaware of that requires everyone to learn how to drive, which there isn't.

      --
      "Anyone who [rips a CD] is probably engaging in copyright infringement." - David O. Carson
    3. Re:For those who are going to complain by Zumbs · · Score: 1

      A drivers licence is a permit to drive a car. So, if you want to drive a car, you should be able to produce your permit when asked. If you walk out the door, and go on a stroll, there should be no reason to be able to produce a drivers licence. The issue here is that you need a card holding a large quantity of very private information on you, just to take a job. Furthermore, this information will have to be gathered into a big database, which suggests that it could be misused by whatever authorities can gain access to it. And once the database is there, the authorities will try to get access to it, with or without a warrent. Not to mention future employers.

      --
      The truth may be out there, but lies are inside your head
    4. Re:For those who are going to complain by xaxa · · Score: 1

      try leaving your house some time in the U.S. without your driver's license, car registration, proof of insurance, etc. I'm pretty sure the cops aren't going to accept "But this is a free country!" in lieu of these if you get stopped at a roadblock.

      I know it's a strange concept in some bits of the USA, but you can leave your house without immediately getting into a car. ;-)

      You don't need to carry anything when walking down the street, do you?

      (Incidentally, an alternative to carrying those papers in the car is for the police to have access to the data on a database, like they do in the UK. Some police cars have forward-facing cameras with automatic number-plate recognition systems, which will do OCR on the plate, then check in a database for valid insurance and whether there are any outstanding reports on the car (e.g. that the car is stolen, or was used in a crime). If there are, the screen in the car alerts the driver.)

    5. Re:For those who are going to complain by ElSupreme · · Score: 1

      No I would regularly ride my bike on public roads with only my health insurance information (because those 'licensed' to drive suck at it) stuffed into various parts of my bike and clothing. You only need a drivers license to operate a MOTOR vehicle (typically above 49cc) on public roads.

      You would be supprised how much ground you can cover with a bicycle when it is your only mode of transportation. Even in a HOT, HILLY, and CONGESTED metro area like Atlanta.

      --
      My addiction: Arguing with idiots. AKA Slashdot!
    6. Re:For those who are going to complain by Jimmy+King · · Score: 1

      Just because something is already bad, we shouldn't try to keep it from getting worse?

      As pointed out by others who have already replied to you, there are also some significant differences between your examples and this new id.

    7. Re:For those who are going to complain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what the fuck is a roadblock and why would I stop for it? you don't need to carry any of those things if you leave your house and take public transit or walk.

    8. Re:For those who are going to complain by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      And you're entirely free to walk around or take public transportation without any kind of identification whatsoever.

      Actually, no you can't. The Supreme Court established in 2004 that U.S. citizens must, in fact, always carry identification. Failure to do so can land you in jail.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    9. Re:For those who are going to complain by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      You don't need to carry anything when walking down the street, do you?

      Only if you don't mind going to jail in the many states that require you to carry ID.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    10. Re:For those who are going to complain by elrous0 · · Score: 2, Informative

      For the third time in this thread I would point out that many states do, in fact, require you to carry ID's at all time, and the Supreme Court has upheld that. So just try to tell a cop that you don't need to show him your papers sometime. And enjoy your night in jail.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    11. Re:For those who are going to complain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If an officer of the law requires you to show ID and you don't have any, you go to jail.

      It is the law.

    12. Re:For those who are going to complain by langelgjm · · Score: 1

      That assertion is not supported by the case you link to, at least not as summarized in the WP article. What I see is that if you have ID, you may be required to show it. But if you don't have ID, how can they require you to show what you don't have? It is not illegal to leave your wallet at home.

      Furthermore, as I pointed out, not everyone has driver's licenses. Social Security Card clearly says "not for purposes of identification" printed on it. People don't carry around their birth certificates. How can you be required to show something that you are not required to even have?

      --
      "Anyone who [rips a CD] is probably engaging in copyright infringement." - David O. Carson
    13. Re:For those who are going to complain by radish · · Score: 1

      No states require you to carry ID (wiki). Some do have laws which require you to identify yourself when a police officer asks you to, but that doesn't mean you have to present any specific document or card.

      --

      ---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"

    14. Re:For those who are going to complain by elrous0 · · Score: 2, Informative

      As Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada made clear, simply telling the officer your name is not sufficient. No photo id? Do not pass Go, go directly to jail.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    15. Re:For those who are going to complain by codegen · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually most id laws only require you to identify yourself verbally, and only your name. They do not require you to present physical ID. This has been upheld by the Supreme Court (Hibel v Nevada). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_and_Identify_statutes

      --
      Atlas stands on the earth and carries the celestial sphere on his shoulders.
    16. Re:For those who are going to complain by dcollins · · Score: 1

      "...try leaving your house some time in the U.S. without your driver's license, car registration, proof of insurance, etc. I'm pretty sure the cops aren't going to accept 'But this is a free country!' in lieu of these if you get stopped at a roadblock."

      Car Analogy: Null. I live in New York.

      --
      We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
    17. Re:For those who are going to complain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, you probably need to keep repeating yourself because you are just wrong. The Supreme Court upheld that you need to IDENTIFY yourself to a police officer on request, and that the only information you are required to surrender as part of the ID is your NAME. Nowhere in the USA are you required to carry actual ID documents.

    18. Re:For those who are going to complain by bkr1_2k · · Score: 1

      That's not what that link says. You may be required to provide identification if you've been issued one, but there is no requirement, presently, that you ever make the effort of getting issued identification.

      --
      "Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
    19. Re:For those who are going to complain by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      There are privacy concerns here, but not civil liberties ones (well, no more than are raised by all the other "papers").

      Congrats, you win the Appeal to Common Practice logical fallacy award!

      Any government action that impedes an individual's natural rights without preventing harm to others is immoral.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    20. Re:For those who are going to complain by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Note that it also only applies when the police officer has reason to believe you are involved in a crime (or are 'about to commit a crime' but that skates dangerously close to thoughtcrime -- if I peer through a window, am I about to burglarize the place??)

      It does NOT give them the right to demand identification from average citizens under random or ordinary circumstances.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    21. Re:For those who are going to complain by snowgirl · · Score: 1

      ...try leaving your house some time in the U.S. without your driver's license, car registration, proof of insurance...

      You only need all of that if you're operating a vehicle, because operating a vehicle is a privilege.

      I can walk out my house right now without any of that, and if a cop stops me while walking around or taking a bus, he cannot legitimately haul me into jail for failing to have any of it.

      Oddly enough, in Washington state, with a motorcycle, you do not have to have proof of insurance, or even insurance at all. You also do not have to have your vehicle registration on you, as your bike's license plate is sufficient for them to look up the information, and validate it. And usually, they don't even care about your driver's license, as long as you can remember your DL number.

      Literally, I could be going 80mph down a 60mph zone on my motorcycle, be stopped by a cop, and receive a ticket without showing one single piece of paper to him.

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
    22. Re:For those who are going to complain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada made clear, simply telling the officer your name is not sufficient. No photo id? Do not pass Go, go directly to jail.

      That's not what happened in the the case at all... Hiibel did have ID, the reason he was arrested is that he belligerently and repeatedly refused to show the officer his ID. The officer in this case had explained why he was there (investigating a report of a domestic disturbance between a man and a young woman) before asking for their names and ID. By being argumentative and evasive, Hiibel was acting like someone who could have been the source of the complaint being investigated (which seemed to be further collaborated by facts like his daughter, a young woman, was with him). It isn't that unusual for suspects to get jailed for domestic disturbances. If he had just politely shown his ID (or turned his pockets inside if he didn't have any on him at all, which wasn't the case) that would have been the end of it!

      Yeah I know most Slashdotters feel that they are entitled to tell the cops go to piss-off at any time, but in this specific case it not only irritated the cop it also made the guy look like a potential suspect of what the cop was actually investigating.

    23. Re:For those who are going to complain by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Generally when that happens, you give them your SSN, they tell you to wait on the side of the road, they go and pull up your info, and then you both get on with life. If the cop's being a stickler, he MAY give you a ticket for not having your license-- which is required to drive your car anyways.

    24. Re:For those who are going to complain by codegen · · Score: 1

      You misunderstand Hibel. In Hibel the defendant refused to identify himself at all. The SC ruled that he had to identify himself once the officer had reasonable suspicion. All analysis of the Hibel decision that I have seen say that a verbal identification is sufficient for the law.

      --
      Atlas stands on the earth and carries the celestial sphere on his shoulders.
  20. Rather open the borders by Lawrence_Bird · · Score: 3, Interesting

    and let in all the illegals than give those fucks in washington not only a national id card but one with biometric data. Worse than the Nazis and Soviets.

    1. Re:Rather open the borders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... but the US have forced the European countries to have Passports with biometric features a couple of years ago if they want to travel to the US. So I think it would be just fair to force the US citizens to use the same - although a passport is not quite the same as a national ID card, I think.

    2. Re:Rather open the borders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      man cool out with the Fox News bullshit....Bush was the biggest asshole when it comes to taking away your privacy...you should dig quite a bit on that and you'd be sicked by what you find. Where do people like you come off and say shit like Nazis and Soviets for a damn national id card...you already have one (SSNO) We have birth certificates, SSNO, Drivers licenses, credit cards, facebook accounts, twitter accounts, blogs, slashdot accounts, passports...and your worried that 1 more is going to make us Nazis. You should read more than just what you hear on Fox...Nazis weren't about national id cards...I think it had something more to do with Superior race, or hating the jews....I could be wrong...maybe WWII started from a national id card.

    3. Re:Rather open the borders by rcamans · · Score: 1

      I don't usually say this, but I think you are correct on this one.

      --
      wake up and hold your nose
    4. Re:Rather open the borders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If this kinda stuff is worse than the Nazis or the Soviets, why hasn't armed revolution taken place?

    5. Re:Rather open the borders by bkr1_2k · · Score: 1

      All new US passports do have fingerprints in them, as I understand it. At least those issued starting this year, I believe. As you said, though, that's not the same as a national ID.

      --
      "Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
    6. Re:Rather open the borders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your analogy is seriously lacking, how is it worse than the Nazis and the Soviets? You can make quite an argument that this move is bad, but lets not Godwin the argument. Your government doesn't appear to be attempting to commit genocide just yet!

    7. Re:Rather open the borders by Lawrence_Bird · · Score: 1

      fyi - i only have OTA TV so no Faux News here. What makes you think I *want* let alone condone what SS cards are used for? Was that its original intent? to become a number to identify me in every database? And all the other things you list are at MY CHOICE.

      As far as Jr. goes, this began under Clintholio and continue under Bush and is *just as bad* under commrade Obama - who if I recall promised an end to this crap.

    8. Re:Rather open the borders by kimb · · Score: 1

      ... but the US have forced the European countries to have Passports with biometric features a couple of years ago if they want to travel to the US.

      Not quite. EU passports are required to have machine readable data (I'm not sure how it's called, it's that three lines of characters at the bottom of the first page) to be able to enter US without a visa. The old ones without that (I'm not sure if anyone even has them anymore) are fine too, you just need to be issued a visa at a US embassy or consulate.

      That said, EU is phasing in newer, shiny biometric passports (photo, fingerprint... varies from country to country) with RFID. *makes a tinfoil passport wrapper*

    9. Re:Rather open the borders by Lawrence_Bird · · Score: 1

      Was genocide the only downfall of the Nazis in your view? What of the Soviets?

      And these proposals are far more intrusive than simply "hand me your papers" and come from what is claimed to be a "free" society.

  21. Guilty until proven innocent. by pavon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is something that we need to harp on everytime the subject comes up. You cannot pass laws against illegal aliens to prevent them from working or participating in social programs, because we don't know who they are. You can only pass laws against everyone requiring them to prove they are a citizen. To require us to beg government approval before we can work or attend school, and hope there isn't a clerical error, or we never lose our papers at a bad time, or that the government won't someday extend this program to a larger scope.

    There are no laws against illegal aliens, there are only laws stating that we are all assumed guilty of being illegal aliens until we prove ourselves innocent.

    1. Re:Guilty until proven innocent. by zzsmirkzz · · Score: 1

      Mod parent up. Guilty until proven innocent goes against the very notion our justice system is based on. It is also the sole reason why I'm against Breathalyzer integration in ignition systems, DUI checkpoints, intrusive scanning/searching of person and affects at airlines, etc. They all mean the same thing, that you must prove your innocence. That it is okay to assume everyone is guilty.

    2. Re:Guilty until proven innocent. by khallow · · Score: 0, Troll

      You can only pass laws against everyone requiring them to prove they are a citizen.

      It's a consequence of the entitlement society we currently have. If you're going to make public resources available for consumption, then you need some sort of "laws against everyone" in order to keep a zillion non-citizen moochers from consuming the resources. In the past, when the US didn't have such a society, there were no illegal immigrants. I think it's no coincidence that the US transitioned from an open immigration society to a closed society in the 20s and 30s, when entitlements were first doled out.

    3. Re:Guilty until proven innocent. by BZ · · Score: 2, Interesting

      > no coincidence that the US transitioned from an open immigration society to a closed
      > society in the 20s and 30s

      Uh.... The Emergency Quota Act was passed in 1921. What entitlements were being doled out in 1921? Note that the act didn't place any limits on immigration from Latin America and placed the limit on Northern/Western Europe higher than actual immigration levels; it was basically targeted at limiting immigration from Eastern/Southern Europe. And that had more to do with "those people aren't like us" than with entitlements. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Immigration_to_the_United_States#New_Immigration has a good summary.

      Of course the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 can hardly be explained by entitlements as well.

      The truth is that immigration restrictions in the US have always had more to do with the existing population feeling that the ethnic balance is threatened than with anything else. That's exactly what's going on now too.

      Now I agree that entitlements make it more appealing for people to immigrate to the US. But the country was pretty appealing in the early 20th century too.

    4. Re:Guilty until proven innocent. by Nyrath+the+nearly+wi · · Score: 1

      from The Notebooks of Lazarus Long by Robert Heinlein

      When a place gets crowded enough to require ID’s, social collapse is not far away. It is time to go elsewhere. The best thing about space travel is that it made it possible to go elsewhere.

    5. Re:Guilty until proven innocent. by khallow · · Score: 1

      My view is that the restriction on immigration enabled the implementation of entitlements in the 30s. Would FDR have created all those generous entitlements (public employment projects, Social Security, unemployment benefits, etc), if everyone had to worry about a few million people moving over each year to the US to take advantage of them?

    6. Re:Guilty until proven innocent. by BZ · · Score: 1

      At the time when FDR was creating the entitlements, immigration to the US was at historic lows because there were no jobs to be had (so not much reason to immigrate). If you look at you will see that in the 1920s (which saw immigration restrictions passed in 1921 and 1924) immigration averaged 400k a year (as compared to 900k a year in the 1900-1914 timeframe; 1915-1919 is partially showing the effects of WWI). In 1931-1946, immigration averaged 50k a year. If you assume that none of this happened during WWII, then we're talking 75k a year averages for the 1930s. Immigration quotas as set in 1924 were about 150k from Europe, nothing from Asia, no limits on Latin America.

      I doubt those immigration numbers would have looked much different without the quotas in the 30s.... again, no point immigrating to a country where you then won't be able to find a job.

      Note that the entitlements put in place at the time were not nearly as generous as what we have now. For example Social Security didn't cover jobs in agriculture, domestic service, government, teaching, nurses, hospitals, anyone who worked intermittently. The upshot was that about half the workers in the US were not covered by it; I would expect that fraction to have been even higher amongst recent immigrants. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_(United_States)#Controversy for some details and links to references.

      I don't have data offhand on the public employment projects and unemployment benefits, but the WPA jobs were restricted to "Any American citizen, or other person owing allegiance to the United States" (see http://www.gjenvick.com/WPA/1939-04-17-Questions-Answers-WPA-Employment-WagesAndHours.html ). It's not clear to me whether that latter part covers immigrants prior to naturalization or only residents of US territories....

    7. Re:Guilty until proven innocent. by Reziac · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That's the best argument I've seen. And as I recall, there is some SCOTUS decision that basically says you aren't required to prove or even admit who you are, unless you're a principle in a crime.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  22. Branded like cattle... by stakovahflow · · Score: 1

    I have always wanted to be branded like cattle. Thankfully, our government wants this to be the case, as well. And they make it sound like a good thing? I think not...

    Good luck with the revolution!

    --
    Holy happy hippy crap!
    1. Re:Branded like cattle... by tibit · · Score: 1

      You already are 'branded'. If you don't wish to be 'branded', you have to keep cloning yourself. Other than that, we're all different and unique. How the heck is that supposed to be 'branding' -- I just don't know.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
  23. Tracking of work? Nothing new by furby076 · · Score: 0, Troll

    The biggest objections to the biometric cards may come from privacy advocates, who fear they would become de facto national ID cards that enable the government to track citizens.

    Tracking citizens of what, their work? We already do that. Before you can get a job (legally anyhow) you need to provide your social security number. The problem with this - your card has no biometrics (pictures, fingerprints, etc) - so you can steal someones social security card and then use that to gain work...which is not what we want. It's actually a huge issue and there have been many cases where illegal immigrants use stolen social security numbers from dead people (or living people who had their id's compromised). This will help curtail that identity theft.

    This is nothing more then putting a "picture" on your social security card.

    --

    I do not support "The Man". I also do not support your irrational stupidity
    1. Re:Tracking of work? Nothing new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course it's more than that. When you get a job you're already required to provide identification both of your eligibility to work and your identity (A photo ID in combination with SSN/birth certificate or a passport).

      This is more by definition. If it is the same or less, it wouldn't be done.

    2. Re:Tracking of work? Nothing new by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      The problem with this - your card has no biometrics (pictures, fingerprints, etc) - so you can steal someones social security card and then use that to gain work...which is not what we want.

      Uhmm... Using a stolen SSN to get a job... Wouldn't that mean the social security benefits aquired over the years in that job would be credited to the original owner of that number?

      --
      bickerdyke
    3. Re:Tracking of work? Nothing new by furby076 · · Score: 1

      Of course it's more than that. When you get a job you're already required to provide identification both of your eligibility to work and your identity (A photo ID in combination with SSN/birth certificate or a passport).

      This may have some kind of verification to make sure the ID was properly checked. Many places only check your social security card...that has no form of actual identification. Are you sure it's the law you have to show a photo id currently? Birth certificate is absolutely not required. Each city, & state and employer is different. Two jobs ago I had to provide a photo copy of my naturalization certificate (though the second HR person said I had to bring it in to show it to her, because a photo copy from her predecessor wasn't proof enough...which shows inconsistencies). This was in addition to my license and social security card. My last job? Social security card and license. I am pretty sure the license was more for the employer then for the gov't (i would have to do some driving so needed a license). My current job - they just needed to check to see who i am and run a background check (not gov't required, just a company process).

      THe point is - there are tons of inconsistencies, and through all of my employers (large and small, in NJ, PA, DE, and various cities/counties in those areas) they have all been different. I used to work in retail banking while in college and they had to get me bonded (all bank employees must do this)....i only had to provide social and drivers license.

      Why they don't require some kind of photo on a soc card is beyond me...it would help reduce ID theft...and your social card is one of the most difficult ID types for you to get changed, and it is so integral in your life (credit, social security benefits, and more)

      --

      I do not support "The Man". I also do not support your irrational stupidity
    4. Re:Tracking of work? Nothing new by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Uhmm... Using a stolen SSN to get a job... Wouldn't that mean the social security benefits aquired over the years in that job would be credited to the original owner of that number?

      And the income taxes that would be owed for said income....

      This whole thing is pointless anyway. Does Congress really live in a fantasy land where illegal immigrants are hired to positions where they supply SSNs, drivers licenses, etc? In my experience the vast majority of businesses employing illegal labor do so by paying them in cash. "Come work with us for a day putting up drywall, there's a few sawbucks in it for you." No amount of biometrics will stop this.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    5. Re:Tracking of work? Nothing new by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      ah ok. weh have tax-numbers for that...

      --
      bickerdyke
    6. Re:Tracking of work? Nothing new by rhsanborn · · Score: 1

      Tracking citizens of what, their work? We already do that. ... This is nothing more then putting a "picture" on your social security card.

      Which is exactly the problem. Read to one of the other posters on the same level as you. He describes "other" uses for this card, like stores and other government agencies tracking non-work related things. It's not entirely crazy that a national ID card will be used for far more than simply track work. Look at the social security card that you cite. It was never intended to be a national ID number, but it's become one, not just for the government, but for most businesses as well.

    7. Re:Tracking of work? Nothing new by furby076 · · Score: 1

      Uhmm... Using a stolen SSN to get a job... Wouldn't that mean the social security benefits aquired over the years in that job would be credited to the original owner of that number?

      The problem is that illegal immigrants are using this - and they are not supposed to be here. Criminals use this to avoid being tracked...I am sure we would like to continue to track pedo's...or escaped criminals. What if the person who is using this for work decides to then take grandma's SS benefits? Or take a loan out on her name and default on the loan now ruining grandmas credit? What if you are working, and someone else is working on your social....now your income tax bracket went up. If the person didn't pay any taxes on the money they made...guess who has to pay it...yup you do.

      I'll prefer to keep my social private and I'll earn my own retirement benefits.

      --

      I do not support "The Man". I also do not support your irrational stupidity
    8. Re:Tracking of work? Nothing new by furby076 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Does Congress really live in a fantasy land where illegal immigrants are hired to positions where they supply SSNs, drivers licenses, etc? In my experience the vast majority of businesses employing illegal labor do so by paying them in cash. "Come work with us for a day putting up drywall, there's a few sawbucks in it for you." No amount of biometrics will stop this.

      Illegal immigrants use stolen socials to get said jobs...yes it happens, and yes it is significant. Those socials are also used by criminals who are trying to avoid detection, used by people trying to steal benefits, used by people trying to get loans and defaulting on them, etc. It's a huge issue. SS theft is extremely bad - it hurts the person who had their information stolen (getting your SS changed is next to impossible). It hurts the businesses who got screwed out of loan money (which in turn raises the prices for the general public).

      --

      I do not support "The Man". I also do not support your irrational stupidity
    9. Re:Tracking of work? Nothing new by furby076 · · Score: 0, Troll

      How the hell does my post get modded -1 troll? I mean really? Is anything I stated incorrect? Even if it may be incorrect how is it considered trollish?

      Fucking stupid ass mods. Troll this!

      --

      I do not support "The Man". I also do not support your irrational stupidity
    10. Re:Tracking of work? Nothing new by fulldecent · · Score: 1, Informative

      >> Does Congress really live in a fantasy land where illegal immigrants are hired to positions where they supply SSNs, drivers licenses, etc?

      No. The public lives in a fantasy land. They also believe that the only thing between them and immortality (guaranteed healthcare for the rest of their natural and unnatural lives) is passage of a bill in congress.

      --

      -- I was raised on the command line, bitch

    11. Re:Tracking of work? Nothing new by timeOday · · Score: 1

      The public lives in a fantasy land. They also believe that the only thing between them and immortality (guaranteed healthcare for the rest of their natural and unnatural lives) is passage of a bill in congress.

      Do you really not know that almost every other country in the world from Cuba on up already has guaranteed health care?

    12. Re:Tracking of work? Nothing new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe it's your sig that's troll-ish.

    13. Re:Tracking of work? Nothing new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Counter-economics in practice.

    14. Re:Tracking of work? Nothing new by thomasw_lrd · · Score: 0

      You've never lived in Chicago. They hire illegals with fake credentials all day long and pay them every two weeks with a check. That's why you can't find a job that pays more than minimum wage, and 1 bedroom shit hole apartments cost almost $1,000 a month.

    15. Re:Tracking of work? Nothing new by polishengineering · · Score: 0

      I agree. The infrastructure, laws, and documents are already in place to control the hiring of illegal workers. The problem is that employers currently feel that that benefits outweigh the risks. They can get incredibly cheap labor for which they are not responsible from a tax or benefit perspective at a low likelihood of being caught or penalized.

      Increasing the penalties or stepping up enforcement of current laws seems like a much more simple and less controversial way of addressing the problem.

    16. Re:Tracking of work? Nothing new by chudnall · · Score: 1

      Why they don't require some kind of photo on a soc card is beyond me

      Since we now get our social security cards when we're still infants, that would look a little funny.

      --
      Disclaimer: Evolution comes with NO WARRANTY, except for the IMPLIED WARRANTY of FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
    17. Re:Tracking of work? Nothing new by Knitebane · · Score: 1, Informative

      Of course he does. And he also knows (as should you) that the users of that "guaranteed" health care regularly come to the US to get quality work done rather than wait in line for the rationed health care in "almost every other country."

      --
      "...history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest." --Ghandi
    18. Re:Tracking of work? Nothing new by dcollins · · Score: 1

      "Of course he does. And he also knows (as should you) that the users of that 'guaranteed' health care regularly come to the US to get quality work done rather than wait in line for the rationed health care in 'almost every other country.'"

      In other news today, Sarah Palin admits that she used to have sneak over the border into Canada to use their health care system: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/03/sarah-palin-canadian-health-care.html

      Here's a bet: The proportion of U.S. residents crossing the border into guaranteed-health-care-countries exceeds the proportion of guaranteed-health-care-country citizens crossing into the U.S.

      --
      We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
    19. Re:Tracking of work? Nothing new by socz · · Score: 1

      So when I got some people at the local home depot to help me move at $160 for the day (6 hours) then they used ssn, dl and tax forms? The reality is that there is no one way to stop anything.

      SS theft is just that, theft. For the most part, just so you KNOW, most if not all people who "steal" SSN always contribute to the SSN owners contributions, but they can never claim it. It also amazes me that a lot of people even pay taxes on their fake SSN's.

      And you know what? To be honest, I prefer to have a person using a "stolen" SSN to actually do some work than have legal's mooching at home because they don't want to work. Lets compare some things:


      Undocumented resident: steals ssn to get a 'legal paying job'
      documented resident: stays at home because ssn gets welfare or other social source of income

      UR:faces getting caught by police check points or immigration sweeps at their low paying jobs
      DR: faces long lines at social offices

      UR:Will establish a family or take care of family back home and encourage to get ahead in life due to opportunities.
      DR: Will kick kids out at 18, may or may not encourage kids to get higher education, kids take for granted what they have.


      Eventually as the years pass by and "undocumented" persons are given the chance to become "documented" they'll get their own SSN and be able to base their life around that. And having worked in several banks, sometimes as an employee and others as a contractor, believe me that a SSN alone is not going to get someone a loan for a $200,000 house that they couldn't repay.

      --
      My abilities are only limited by my imagination
    20. Re:Tracking of work? Nothing new by OldeTimeGeek · · Score: 1

      Ever hear of Medical tourism? Americans are leaving the country to get surgery and other treatments done because they can't afford to get it done here due to lack of coverage or gaps in coverage with their insurance.

    21. Re:Tracking of work? Nothing new by ShakaUVM · · Score: 1

      >>In other news today, Sarah Palin admits that she used to have sneak over the border into Canada to use their health care system

      Lots of Americans do this. When you offer free health care, usage goes up.

    22. Re:Tracking of work? Nothing new by billybacs · · Score: 0

      Most of the places I've applied to had 3 lists, and you either needed one item from A & B, or one of C. From what I've seen, passports have always been the best form of ID and are (supposed to be) the most secure.

      But then, when I first turned 21 and didn't have the "adult" license, I actually got turned away from a bar for having a passport and not an over-21 license. Go figure.

    23. Re:Tracking of work? Nothing new by operagost · · Score: 1

      And in 1776, almost every other nation was ruled by a hereditary monarch or dictator. We bucked that trend too, for much the same reason.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    24. Re:Tracking of work? Nothing new by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Does Congress really live in a fantasy land where illegal immigrants are hired to positions where they supply SSNs, drivers licenses, etc? In my experience the vast majority of businesses employing illegal labor do so by paying them in cash

      There are a good number of employers who actually check for documentation. A fake social security card can be bought for $50, and you don't have to be a citizen to get a drivers license. So it's not too hard to provide documents, as long as the employers don't verify the SSN, which they aren't required to do.

      --
      Qxe4
    25. Re:Tracking of work? Nothing new by conspirator57 · · Score: 1

      trollish, possibly, but funny, definitely.

      --
      "If still these truths be held to be
      Self evident."
      -Edna St. Vincent Millay
    26. Re:Tracking of work? Nothing new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No -

      When you get your annual SS staement of earnings, they are based off your income reported to the IRS - not what was paid in. Last year someone other than myself had both ss and Fed income tax witheld under my SSN - I get no credit, but I clean up the mess.....

      XXX

    27. Re:Tracking of work? Nothing new by Calithulu · · Score: 1

      While I'm not a fan of Mrs. Palin, you appreciate that she did this when she was six years old (i.e. her legal guardians decided to do so for her), right? In addition to that, it was the closest hospital. The real story here is how cooperative the US and Canada were, even accepting each others' citizens for medical care with minimal paperwork. Of course, these days that spirit of brotherhood is missing.

    28. Re:Tracking of work? Nothing new by Obyron · · Score: 1

      Speaking as an American who moved to Canada, most Americans are so deluded that they think if it were such a good idea they'd already have it. You can tell them that Cuba, Scandinavian countries, the UK, Canada, etc., all have it, and they'll point at that and say, "Well, there you go." They think it is a mark of how elite and amazing they are as a country that they get to pay for healthcare or something. It's ridiculous.

      This is the product of spending 60 years terrifying people that the Communists are coming to kill them any minute, and that the Soyuz missiles have probably already been launched. I'll be so glad when the last of the Cold Warriors die out, because they've done harm to the psyche of the States that may be irreparable. Maybe, just maybe, we can get some real change when they're gone, but I doubt it. In the mean time we're going to have to deal with people who think that because it has the word "socialized" in it, that means Joseph Stalin is going to be in charge of it, and Felix Dzerzhinsky gets to decide what's covered.

      --
      --Obyron
    29. Re:Tracking of work? Nothing new by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      They think it is a mark of how elite and amazing they are as a country that they get to pay for healthcare or something.

      You think you don't pay for health care just because it's provided by the state? Can I have some of what you are smoking?

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    30. Re:Tracking of work? Nothing new by shermo · · Score: 1

      Wow modded informative.

      I don't think anyone involved in the American healthcare debate disputes that America has great care if you can pay for it.

      Why one side keeps on bringing this up confuses me, as it's irrelevant to the discussion.

      --
      Insanity: voting in the same two parties over and over again and expecting different results
  24. 666 by Ixtol · · Score: 3, Funny

    How long before people claim this as the mark of the Beast?

    1. Re:666 by stakovahflow · · Score: 1

      I live in the Bible Belt of the US... It's already being proclaimed as such...

      LOL!

      --
      Holy happy hippy crap!
    2. Re:666 by sjames · · Score: 1

      It's not a bad idea actually. I hereby officially point out that this is just the next step in the beast's plan to place a mark upon each person according to the prophesy. We must drive Satan and his minions from our government right now! We can start with Sens. Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) and Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.).

      Cast the devil out! Do not listen to them for they are the minions of the prince of lies!

    3. Re:666 by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

      Well, it is intended to serve the same purpose, namely as a requirement to engage in any sort of commerce.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    4. Re:666 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is this funny? This is a BRILLIANT idea to get the legislation stomped on - so many USAsians seem to believe in the 2nd coming, and they're all supposed to be against such "branding" by the beast - you've got a guaranteed rabid campaign force against this thing - USE IT !

  25. Guess where this card goes? by lordmetroid · · Score: 1

    If I get a card like this, they will simply have to look for it in the local dump. I am not going to cooperate with this program.

    1. Re:Guess where this card goes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Have fun not having a job then I guess.

      If only more people were like you and just said "no" to mandatory government programs...

  26. Well... by MikeRT · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    This at least makes sense considering how much harm illegal immigration does to American blue collar workers. As long as I can go out in public without it and buy goods without it, I'm not going to lose much sleep over it.

    I have to wonder, though, how many people who are going "oh noes... mah freedum iz under attack" would get upset if a state government suddenly abolished its concealed carry license laws and declared that any adult who can legally carry a weapon is entitled to concealed carry.

    I bet it's A LOT more than most slashdotters would guess.

    1. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If citizens were willing to work on the same conditions that illegal immigrants do, they could have the same jobs.

      As far as the concealed weapon thing, weapons *kill* people, directly. I don't see the analogy at all.

    2. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This at least makes sense considering how much harm illegal immigration does to American blue collar workers. As long as I can go out in public without it and buy goods without it, I'm not going to lose much sleep over it.

      I have to wonder, though, how many people who are going "oh noes... mah freedum iz under attack" would get upset if a state government suddenly abolished its concealed carry license laws and declared that any adult who can legally carry a weapon is entitled to concealed carry.

      I bet it's A LOT more than most slashdotters would guess.

      BZZZT! Wrong, thanks for playing!

      Um, which part of the 2nd Amendment authorizes ANY government to pass ANY law restricting ANY citizen from "carrying" (bearing) arms, concealed or not?

      You've been brainwashed so badly, that you actually think that GOVERNMENT "allows" us to "legally" carry a weapon. Instead, the 2nd Amendment RESTRICTS Government from PREVENTING us from carrying a weapon ("concealed" or not).

    3. Re:Well... by icebrain · · Score: 1

      I have to wonder, though, how many people who are going "oh noes... mah freedum iz under attack" would get upset if a state government suddenly abolished its concealed carry license laws and declared that any adult who can legally carry a weapon is entitled to concealed carry.

      Go ask residents of Alaska or Vermont. Anyone legal to purchase and own a firearm can carry it, open or concealed, without any kind of license. I'd hardly say there's outrage about it in those states.

      And really, it's open carry that tends to freak people out. It's legal in 47 of 50 states to carry concealed (the process varies by state), but only around half of them allow open carry (of which some allow open carry unlicensed, others require the license for open or concealed). There's only one state that allows open carry only. There was strong implication in Heller that carrying arms was covered under the 2nd, and mention was made that concealed carry could be prohibited because it was thought repugnant in the past and often prohibited. But, given that the recent trend is overwhemlingly towards concealed carry, both legally and in practice, I expect that a future ruling would say states must allow some form of carry, it must be shall-issue (ie, not at the arbitrary whim of an official), and can't prohibit concealed carry if they do not allow open.

      --
      The meek may inherit the earth, but the strong shall take the stars.
  27. why are people so emotional about this? by circletimessquare · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    why do they talk about fascism, "papers please" and destruction of privacy and freedom?

    it's just a damn national id card. do you drive? do you have a driver's license? same fucking thing. is the existence of your driver's license some sort of matrix-like conspiracy to utterly destro your individuality? no? then calm the fuck down

    it's just a bizarre sort of rigid fear of the unknown, when if you have an actual functioning brain, there's no threat this card poses to anyone, anyhow

    what a bunch of spastic hysterical idiots

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:why are people so emotional about this? by Ogive17 · · Score: 1

      I think it's because this is perceived as the "next step" in data mining about the nation's citizens. Sure they know your name, SSN, age and address now. Soon they'll have all fingerprints on file and possibly other biometric data. Why do they need it?

      --
      "Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
    2. Re:why are people so emotional about this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, you're an irrational idiot that needs to brush up on their recent world history. There is a certain poem about "when they came for ....... " that personified an attitude a certain nation claimed was hysterical and emotional because they thought the person leading the charge was 'their deliverer'.

      I find it very strange when people choose to ignore potential dangers of things like this. While they deserve what they get, I will continue to speak my mind.

    3. Re:why are people so emotional about this? by Malc · · Score: 1

      I don't have a car. I don't carry ID. I'm not doing anything wrong, so why should I have to prove who I am? Why should it be easier for the police to exercise power and control over people?

    4. Re:why are people so emotional about this? by ElSupreme · · Score: 1

      But a drivers license is an OPTION. You don't need to drive. I went a good 4 years on my own without a car. Sure I lied to my employer (worked shitty hourly retail job while in college)about my ability to drive in when it was raining. But I lived for 1 year very close to school, and abotu 8 miles from work. Then I lived for 2 years about 2 miles from work and 12 miles from school, and finally I lived a year 9 miles from work and 10 miles from school. And sure I bummed some rides with friends every now and then but I also biked (or walked) 12 months doing all of this.

      Social Security they give me (hopefully) money when I retire. Sounds fair.

      This is just supposed to stop mexicans from working in the US. And well they will continue to work here despite the ID card because they alread do it illegially. It isn't like the employers are getting duped, they just want plausible deniability by having a fake SSN, they know they are hireing illegials. They will do the same with the id card. Just a different number.

      --
      My addiction: Arguing with idiots. AKA Slashdot!
    5. Re:why are people so emotional about this? by macs4all · · Score: 1

      why do they talk about fascism, "papers please" and destruction of privacy and freedom?

      Because "they", unlike you, have actually READ the history of other nations.

      First they came for the Communists... [isurvived.org]

    6. Re:why are people so emotional about this? by macaddict · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A driver's license is proof you had training in operating a potentially dangerous piece of machinery around others. Which is why they have ticky boxes for things like "chauffeur" and "commercial" on it. You know, because it's about driving. I agree, it shouldn't be used for anything other than employment as a driver, traffic violations, and insurance purposes! In fact, it's a perfect example of how the "oh, this card will only be used for X" is so easily corrupted!

      Want to know what hysteria is? It's the "OMG TEH MEXICANS ARE STEALIN' MAH JOB!". Nevermind that these 'patriot' xenophobes tend to be the same group that practically worship symbols like the Statue of Liberty, but don't even bother to learn the inscription she carries (I'll give you a hint: "Give me your tired, your poor...") Instead of radio-collaring everyone, why don't we concentrate on fixing the broken immigration system that keeps legal applicants in limbo for years, pushing some to come here illegally instead. Oh wait, that's going to take a lot of effort and won't appease the xenophobes, so let's just put a shiny band-aid on it to get re-elected. (And with all the immigration hysteria, the fools won't even notice that we've chipped away a little more of their freedom!)

    7. Re:why are people so emotional about this? by tibit · · Score: 1

      LOL. You'll only need this card when you apply for the job. You already need an ID for that, so what would be so different this time, besides the ID being trickier to forge?! You're just irrational, that's what it is.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    8. Re:why are people so emotional about this? by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      No, you're the irrational one. Why should I have to ask the government for approval to make a living? I want to work for a company, it should be between me and the company. The government should not be able to step in and tell the company they cannot hire me. Just because we have a status quo does not mean it is right and that we should be tolerating what we have today.

    9. Re:why are people so emotional about this? by snowgirl · · Score: 1

      A driver's license is proof you had training in operating a potentially dangerous piece of machinery around others. Which is why they have ticky boxes for things like "chauffeur" and "commercial" on it. You know, because it's about driving. I agree, it shouldn't be used for anything other than employment as a driver, traffic violations, and insurance purposes! In fact, it's a perfect example of how the "oh, this card will only be used for X" is so easily corrupted!

      A driver's license is also issued as a government-issued ID card. If you don't want a driver's license (or can't get one) then you can actually get an ID card, that looks quite similar to a driver's license.

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
  28. For the union makes us strong... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Save me IWW! *runs off crying*

  29. Not a fix by Datamonstar · · Score: 1

    If the immigration system wasn't so fucked up to begin with we wouldn't be seeing this. Corruption in Mexico and on this side of the border is largely what causes the problems that this stupid card is supposed to fix. It will not fix them. Illegal aliens are nothing if not highly intelligent and resourceful. The U.S. government is nothing if not blundering and ill-managed. This will not fix the problem, but instead introduce new problems for those who didn't have them before. The cards will solve nothing. I have illegal immigrants in my family who work here and I would love to see an opportunity for them to be able to be able to stay and make a living, but not at this cost. I refuse to trade freedom for a slightly and increasingly lesser form of freedom. I will be putting the word out that the US has its balls trapped on the immigration issue and that people should not be quick to support something just to get what they think they want only later to discover that it's actually a pair of shackles. Technology is not magic.

    --
    The eternal struggle of good vs. evil begins within one's self.
  30. Working for money or having money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So the people who have money can keep their privacy and freedom whereas the people who do the actual work must get an ID card? When will average Americans realize that they're not in the same boat as rich Americans but in the same boat as other working people, including foreign workers?

  31. Wow! by schon · · Score: 2, Insightful

    flight access [...] cashing checks or even credit cards [...]to track purchases [...] replacement for courtesy cards [...] health care, I mean we can now see that you buy WAY too much alcohol and cigarettes [...]the govt types will be able to come up with new, nifty ways to use a national id

    Wow - just WOW. You are aware that with the exception of "national health care", EVERYTHING you mentioned would be done by private businesses, right? And if idiots like you get their way and there is no "national health care", private insurance companies could use it the same way, right?

    Don't get me wrong - such an ID is a horrible idea - but it's a horrible idea because it will be abused by corporations.

    (Yes, I know - all the libertardians will now proceed to mod me down and talk about how the invisible market fairy will make it all better.)

    1. Re:Wow! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Re-read and decided that it wasn't worth the mod up (posting to correct), due to the trolling comment at the end, and the apparent lack of understanding that corporations aren't the only abusers of civil liberties - governments (including ours) have been known to abuse them as well.

    2. Re:Wow! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (Yes, I know - all the libertardians will now proceed to mod me down and talk about how the invisible market fairy will make it all better.)

      Is this the same Invisible market fairy that gave the financial industries a not-so-invisible hand job because "self regulation" doesn't work for greedy heartless bastards?

    3. Re:Wow! by aliddell · · Score: 1

      Arguing over whether abusive governments or abusive corporations are better is kind of missing the point. I'm sure either would be more than pleased to trample over your liberties if you gave them half a chance - but you go right ahead waving that flag. ...fuckin' Judaean People's Front.

      --
      What do you think, sirs?
    4. Re:Wow! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. It's called BitTorrent.

    5. Re:Wow! by operagost · · Score: 1

      False dilemma. Governments are corrupt, independent of whether corporations are also corrupt. Your argument assumes that if we place power in the hands of the government, they'll use it properly. By the way, the government took over airport security back in 2001, so the government would be abusing that.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    6. Re:Wow! by conspirator57 · · Score: 1

      but if we admit that the government does wrong then how can we justify using it to extort for our progressive programs we want? we might actually have to face the idea that someone in government might actually do wrong to people using our programs. and that goes against the talking points saying how evil business always is and how the government is your savior.

      --
      "If still these truths be held to be
      Self evident."
      -Edna St. Vincent Millay
    7. Re:Wow! by clarkkent09 · · Score: 1

      (Yes, I know - all the libertardians will now proceed to mod me down and talk about how the invisible market fairy will make it all better.)

      I don't mod down posts merely because I disagree with them, and I won't try to explain things to you either, because idiots like you who still don't understand how free market and liberty (yes, you can't have one without the other) are beneficial to them will probably never understand it and are not worth wasting time on. So, I won't reply at all.

      --
      Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
    8. Re:Wow! by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      If you get modded down, I imagine it may have something to do with your inflamatory remark on national health care. Calling your opposition "idiots" sure is a good way to prove your position....

  32. The Plans... by bsDaemon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ok, so worker will be required to get it when they next change jobs, and the industries that will be forced to require this first are the ones which typically hire the most illegals. The industries that hire the most illegals are construction, food service, etc. Those are also the industries where people are going to need to "change jobs" pretty soon, especially construction, due that sector having been hit the hardest by the economic issues. Yet again, this is just another way to control the poorer workers, all the while making them feel like having to register body scans to get a job building houses is for their own good 'cause it'll keep "illegals" from getting the jobs or "terrorists" from blowing them up.

    How come its OK for capital to transfer across borders but labor can't move freely? How come I have to go through more trouble to get legal working status in another country than I do to invest in a foreign stock market? Is it because the nation state is the new lord's estate and they want to keep me on the manor? And to make sure we don't get any funny ideas, the Daddy Party tries to tell us we should hate our neighbors and do anything necessary to keep them out, fomenting racism and causing all sorts of animosity on both sides of the border, and the water, making sure that we're just as unwelcome abroad as they are here... screw this shit.

    1. Re:The Plans... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      How come its OK for capital to transfer across borders but labor can't move freely?

      Because capital doesn't carry culture with it, and labor does.

      Capital is pretty much interchangeable; convert dollars to euros to yen to gold ounces -- it's still roughly the same amount of wealth. Do you care if your neighbor is saving wealth in dollars at the bank, or gold buried in his backyard? Most people won't care.

      Do you care if your neighbor is from your own culture and thus understands, for example, that it's not acceptable to make loud noises at night because most folks work during the day? And thus someone from a culture where partying outside well into the morning hours is going to be bothering the hell out of you? Yeah, you'll care about that. And in that type of situation, a lot of people are going to start hating each other.

      That's the kind of thing that happens when labor crosses borders. But that's exactly the kind of thing that libertarian analysis completely ignores, since it doesn't have a dollar sign attached to it.

    2. Re:The Plans... by tibit · · Score: 1

      Umm, if you want to change immigration laws to allow aliens to work in the U.S.A. without restrictions, talk to your rep/senator about. It's an issue that's wholly separate from the biometric ID. You can be for alien/immigrant workers and for biometric ID. Those are not mutually exclusive. Right now such ID would be used to enforce immigration/employment laws. Change the latter, and the ID still can stay. BTW, see how far you'll go in chatting with your rep/senator about allowing unrestricted alien labor. LOL.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    3. Re:The Plans... by bsDaemon · · Score: 1

      I think foreigners should be able to come work in the US and that Americans should be able to to travel abroad to work as well and that fewer restrictions should be placed in both directions. It would definitely take the edge off of the sending jobs overseas crap anyway.

    4. Re:The Plans... by TheSync · · Score: 1

      How come its OK for capital to transfer across borders but labor can't move freely?

      Indeed, arguments by economists show that the potential benefits to the economy as a whole from labor migration is far higher than potential benefits due to reduction of trade barriers. Just as capital should be free to move where it is most productive, so should labor.

      The greatest enemy of immigration is socialism. Redistributionist policies make native populations wary of immigrants "who come just for the benefits", or at least it provides a logical support to latent racism.

      If we reduce socialism at home, we remove this barrier to immigration.

      Conversely, the greatest cause of unskilled migration is lack of economic freedom in the home country. If developing countries adopted policies of higher levels of economic freedom, their economies would develop faster, and there would be less need for their workers to migrate.

    5. Re:The Plans... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I see, so the government is protecting us from ourselves by deporting said neighbor?
      Thank you Lord Obama, I don't know how would I sleep at night without you.

    6. Re:The Plans... by snowgirl · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Do you care if your neighbor is from your own culture and thus understands, for example, that it's not acceptable to make loud noises at night because most folks work during the day? And thus someone from a culture where partying outside well into the morning hours is going to be bothering the hell out of you?

      Wait... so them teenagers are all dirty foreigners? I KNEW IT!!!

      The same argument was made with the Irish, and the Italians, and what do we think now? Is there anything more American than going out to a bar on St. Patty's day and drinking yourself drunk. And more so, is there anything more American than our pizza, spaghetti, etc?

      This "culture" argument is stupid, and has been blown off hojillions of times before in our culture.

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
  33. OT: invisible man by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1

    The invisible man is blind. If light passes through a body without being affected, then it cannot be properly refracted

    Wells was too smart for you: "I went and stared at nothing in my shaving-glass, at nothing save where an attenuated pigment still remained behind the retina of my eyes, fainter than mist."

    --
    Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
    You cannot wash away blood with blood
    1. Re:OT: invisible man by Nesman64 · · Score: 1

      Wow. I've never read the original. Thanks for linking me. Although I'm excited that Wells thought of this, I think I was happier thinking it was handwaved. Being invisible except for the lens looks like a cop out. I guess it's better to handwave and remain accurate than handwave and break physics more than necessary. :)

      As long as we're OT, I recently read Omnilingual on Project Gutenberg and I recommend it as a nice sci-fi short about learning the language of ancient Martians without any common translation to start from.
      http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/19445

      --
      coffee | nose > keyboard
    2. Re:OT: invisible man by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      Sweet! Another Piper fan.

      Beam ROCKS!

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    3. Re:OT: invisible man by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1

      As long as we're OT, I recently read Omnilingual on Project Gutenberg and I recommend it as a nice sci-fi short about learning the language of ancient Martians without any common translation to start from. http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/19445

      I'll certain check it out -- H. Beam Piper hasn't disappointed me yet. Thanks for the link.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
  34. Great idea! by Jason+Levine · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, this completely solves the illegal immigration problem! I mean, it's not like people will give illegal immigrants jobs if they don't have valid "job cards." After all, then they would need to pay the immigrants cash under the table or something. And, of course, these cards will be 100% forgery proof so immigrants won't be able to just get a fake ID.

    Plus, there are no privacy concerns at all. I mean a card with your fingerprint and other personal information sitting right in your wallet? That's the most secure place I can think of. Nobody would ever lose their wallet or have it stolen. The card could never, ever go missing leading to identity theft. Nope. Simply impossible.

    Oh and did I mention the "E-Verify" online system to check the ID card's validity. A stroke of genius! It's sure to be 100% hack-proof like all good government sites are.

    Finally, there's no way this would ever be used for anything other than jobs. There will be no temptation for our completely honest politicians to extend this to travel, voting or any other use.

    Now if you'll excuse me, I need to clean my glasses. I think there's a smudge on the rose-colored lens.

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    1. Re:Great idea! by jjo · · Score: 1

      Why wouldn't you put a one-way hash of the biometrics on the card, so that the actual data would not be vulnerable to theft of the card? Why wouldn't you digitally sign it to make forgery more difficult?

      Is this a perfect solution? No, there are no perfect solutions. Privacy is the biggest problem, but it's unavoidable once you decide that some people are allowed to work and others (indistinguishable from the legal workers) are not. Take your choice: restrict both employment and privacy, or restrict neither one. The slippery-slope argument is valid too, but since the public wants to restrict employment, we must start down that slope.

    2. Re:Great idea! by nine-times · · Score: 1

      Well, this completely solves the illegal immigration problem! I mean, it's not like people will give illegal immigrants jobs if they don't have valid "job cards." After all, then they would need to pay the immigrants cash under the table or something. And, of course, these cards will be 100% forgery proof so immigrants won't be able to just get a fake ID.

      Well part of the problem is that you can't currently prosecute people for hiring illegal immigrants, at least not very easily, because it's easy enough to claim, "I didn't know." Employers can't even seek to verify whether they're legal very easily, since they could run afoul of discrimination laws.

      So if you want to be able to crack down on businesses that employ illegal immigrants, then you need to provide them with a framework where they can verify that someone is legally allowed to work. There aren't many ways to do that.

  35. The powers that be... by BlueBoxSW.com · · Score: 1

    ... don't want a fix to the problem.

    It's not good for business, and so MANY people don't want to fix the problem, it's never going to be solved in any real way.

    You know the I-9 form? You know how annoying it is? You know how many people have been prosecuted for falsifying information on the form?

    Two. That's it. Two cases.

    Either people here in the US are really, really honest, or there's no one out there investigating theses things.

    New technology won't change old behavior.

    1. Re:The powers that be... by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

      Some of the real ways to deal with illegal immigration from Latin America to the United States:
      - Prosecute employers who knowingly employ illegal immigrants. For example, the INS will sometimes raid a factory and round up a few hundred illegal immigrants. But the factory owner or manager, who either is a complete moron or knows what's going on, won't even get a slap on the wrist.
      - Enforce minimum wage laws. This would probably include a program that makes it so that illegal immigrants can turn in their employers who are paying less than minimum wage without risking deportation. In fact, you might even go so far as to create a reward for doing so. This would reduce the incentive to hire illegal immigrants rather than US citizens.
      - Work with Mexico to improve wages, economy, and working conditions there, to reduce the incentive to emigrate.
      - Make it easier to enter the country legally to work. Think an Ellis Island or two along the border.
      - Do what George W Bush suggested (and this was one of the few issues I agreed with him on) and create a way for illegal immigrants already here to obtain legal status. Otherwise, even if new immigration was completely stopped, we'd still have millions of folks already in the US to concern ourselves with.

      But those all would be ways of actually solving the problem, which nobody really wants to do. Business interests want to look the other way to ensure access to cheap largely captive immigrant labor. Unions definitely want to look the other way, because they see immigrants as a potential part of their base. Democrats don't want to solve this, because the children of Mexican immigrants tend to be Democrats. Republicans don't want to solve this because it helps them stoke racist fears about Hispanic folks as well as helps their business buddies. The police and INS definitely don't want to solve the problem, because having lots of illegal immigration gives them an excuse to harass just about anyone who looks Hispanic. Instead, what we actually do is a system of more-or-less looking the other way, but occasionally sending in the INS to deport a few hundred people to placate the "They took our jobs!" crowd.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  36. implant by TheMonkeyhouse · · Score: 2, Insightful

    awesome - this is the first step towards automatic identification - soon we will have the RFID chip implanted under your skin so with one wave of your hand anyone can know everything about you!

    i knew something like this would happen when immigration moved under the auspices of the Department of Fatherland Security.

    and RFID is so much nicer than barcodes or numbers just written straight on the skin...

  37. Instead of using crap like this... by jonwil · · Score: 1

    Instead of using crap like this to stop illegals, do this instead:
    1.Do whatever is necessary to ensure legal American workers can get (and will try to get) the jobs that illegals are currently taking. Tie this work to unemployment benefits (i.e. if you are currently out of work and receiving any kind of government unemployment benefits you have to take these jobs. Possibly the government over there could do what the government here in Australia did and introduce "work for the dole" (which is where you work at the jobs like fruit picking that would otherwise be taken by illegals in the American system but instead of being paid by the employer out of their pockets, the government pays what they would have paid you in unemployment/dole payments)

    2.Encourage American companies to build factories and other things in Central America where the illegals come from (if a Mexican has a good job in Mexico, they have a lot less reason to try to come to America and work for almost no pay because any job that pays anything decent wont take the risk of hiring people without proper paperwork)

    1. Re:Instead of using crap like this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great idea, so then I can use my masters to work beside someone who dropped out in the 7th grade because mother government has chosen my profession for me

      why not, we already have a bunch of "in soviet union" jokes just replace with USA

    2. Re:Instead of using crap like this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      my masters

      I see you proposed no alternative.

      If you want high living standards (and the high educational attainment that goes with them), you have to regulate reproduction. If you're too stupid to understand this, then you probably should have dropped out before wasting money on a worthless degree.

    3. Re:Instead of using crap like this... by tibit · · Score: 1

      American companies should be building factories and 'other things' here in the U.S. There's more than enough residents to fill those jobs. It's only due to the corporate nutjobs that we've lost national manufacturing. Those people firmly believe in manna from heaven -- namely, that if you somehow make things cheaper abroad, that you'll still have now-jobless customers with money to pay for those cheaper things. This fantasy can only work for so long. While it works, it of course generates nice 'returns' for the shareholders. But the economic buffer has been spent now. The real reason for our economical crisis is our humongous international trade deficit. That's what made banks lend to non creditworthy customers. A mere 30-40 years ago, people had jobs and could save money and afford sane mortgages. As less and less people had any real economic stability to speak of, due to loss of manufacturing jobs, they banks were losing them as creditworthy customers. But banks live on lending profits! As it is, shareholders demand churn and profits, thus banks resorted to fantasy-backed loans -- otherwise their loan portfolios would shrink alarmingly. And here we are. And banks are still with heads in the sand, nothing has changed here. Just dig a bit and see how many foreclosed/bank owned real estate there is. Banks keep it for months or years, largely under wraps. The banks are now actually taking the free market elements out of the real estate market -- the properties are still over-valued, because the supply is somewhat constrained by the banks. If all REO properties suddenly appeared on the market, there would be a further 50% drop in house prices. Of course it would make the housing affordable to many, but those with existing mortgages would be left upside down. Being "upside down" by itself is not a problem as long as you can stay in the same place. The workforce in the U.S. is too mobile to stay in a house for long, so they'd end up screwed even further.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    4. Re:Instead of using crap like this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One of the main reasons why there are illegal immigrants in this country is because of the American factories in Central and South America.

      Our companies go down there, turn their country into a worse shit-hole than it was previously, and the residents have no choice but to seek life elsewhere.

      You have a very narrow view of global economics.

    5. Re:Instead of using crap like this... by Sloppy · · Score: 1

      3. Lower/remove barriers to legal immigration. If doing it legally were as easy/cheap/reliable as doing it illegally, then what's the incentive to do it illegally? (The ability to not pay taxes or have big brother watching your life in the databases? Sheesh, anyone can go underground, become a hobo, and take fruit-picking jobs for off-the-books cash. You don't have to be an illegal immigrant to do that, but hardly anyone wants to.)

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    6. Re:Instead of using crap like this... by sjames · · Score: 1

      Before item 2 can work, you'll have to force all U.S. outsourcing to apply U.S. standards for labor practices and pay rates to foreign factories. Otherwise, potential illegals still get 10 times more pay and better working conditions by crossing the border.

  38. Write your Congressman and Senator by davidwr · · Score: 1

    Well, don't just stand there, do it.

    http://www.house.gov/
    http://www.senate.gov/

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  39. No it's NOT the same fucking thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Driver's Licenses were, when initially set up, just that... a LICENSE. A piece of paper with a government seal saying you were approved to drive, just like a hunting license. No ID, no address and issued by the STATE.

    A national ID, weakens the powers of the states and gives the federal government more control over your daily life... IE as in now you need papers just to seek employment and eventually to get healthcare that the government approves you to have.

    As the saying goes, you can't throw a frog into a boiling cooking pot but you can sure turn up the heat over time and they won't know the difference...

    But hey... chocolate rations are up.

    1. Re:No it's NOT the same fucking thing by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      But hey... chocolate rations are up.

      Not obvious enough. Do you really think the members of this forum read the books that they claim analogies to?

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    2. Re:No it's NOT the same fucking thing by sjames · · Score: 1

      It's interesting about the driver's license. We just take it as a given now, but it was not without vocal opponents when it was first implemented. Many of those opponents objected that it would come to be used as an ID card. Others complained that it would be a bureaucratic mess. Still others were concerned that it was an entirely unnecessary limitation of our natural freedom.

      About the only sign of that left in common view is a cartoon featuring Daffy Duck and Porky Pig where we hear the question "Do you have a license to sell hair tonic to bald eagles in Omaha Nebraska?".

      The frog boiling is proceeding nicely and has been going on for about a century.

  40. What's the point? by macemoneta · · Score: 1

    Do they really think this card can't be duplicated / created illegally? If it's actually too hard to make one, people will just steal the materials or bribe someone. As is done today. The only ones that will be impacted, as usual, are those attempting to follow the law, who get eaten alive by the bureaucracy.

    --

    Can You Say Linux? I Knew That You Could.

  41. Because Privacy is the New Green by RobotRunAmok · · Score: 1

    Because kids need a cause. They don't need to UNDERSTAND a cause, or to grasp implications and both sides of the issue, they just need something to wear on their sleeves, next to the patch promoting that super-cool underground indie band only they have ever heard of.

    1. Re:Because Privacy is the New Green by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The USA are built on a rebellion against governmental control. The limitation of control over the people is a fundamental principle, not a fad. Opposition to an ID card is the conservative point of view.

  42. Just need to have serious fines for employers by originalhack · · Score: 4, Informative

    The ID cards are not the problem. The problem is consequences.

    Today, it is cheaper to staff with undocumented workers and hope they don't get caught. If ALL employers had to verify the ID of all of their employees and contractors or face serious fines and all contractors (including household help) were required to show a verifiable ID and anyone who fails to check or falsifies faced serious penalties, this problem would be hugely reduced overnight.

    The real problem is that the big businesses (agriculture, meat packing, hospitality, commercial real-estate, etc..) want the cheap labor and won't let the problem be solved.

    1. Re:Just need to have serious fines for employers by digitig · · Score: 1

      The real problem is that the big businesses (agriculture, meat packing, hospitality, commercial real-estate, etc..) want the cheap labor and won't let the problem be solved.

      Or is it that Joe Public wants the cheap products and services that only cheap labor can provide, and won't let the problem be solved? It's just the free market in action.

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
    2. Re:Just need to have serious fines for employers by jwhitener · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I googled, and found the fine to be up to 10,000 and 5 years in prison for employing, knowingly, illegal workers. 5 years in prison isn't insignificant. The problem is more likely that the employer didn't know (or claim to not know), and/or the illegal employee gave him counterfeit papers.

      As an employer, how can you be certain? If the person hands you a W2 from an old job, a valid looking ssn, what more should you do? And if the employer can't be certain without going to extreme lengths and background checks, should they really be thrown in jail for 5 years?

      I can understand the intent behind wanting a form of 100% accurate identification, so that employers can be sure their employees are legal... but I think that it is missing the point entirely. I would assume that a very large percent of the migrant work force is payed under the table, without any paper work at all. Where there is demand, supply will come.

      I'd much rather see some sort of temporary worker visa made available. Having grown up around agriculture for the first half of my life, I can tell you that there are very few US citizens that would want to work in the fields. I've done it (college summer job), and it is very hard minimum wage work.

      But the hard work isn't even the primary issue. The single biggest thing that people miss in this discussion is that agricultural work is entirely temporary. When the harvest is ready, thousands upon thousands of migratory workers flood into central Washington State. When the harvest is done, most of them move to another State with a different growing season, or head back home with their earnings.

      How could you run a business if you needed 500 workers for 3 months each year without migratory labor? The only temporary work that pays off if you want to be stationary, with a home, as a US citizen is something like Crab fishing in Alaska. Big money, short time. Minimum wage short time jobs do not pay off, and no US citizen with better options is going to travel around to get those temp harvest jobs.

      If we successfully removed all illegal labor tomorrow, where would the workers come from? Well I suppose you could point out that places like Detroit have 40% unemployment among inner city males, mostly black males (I think thats the right figure, might be lower, but you get the point). Why aren't all those unemployed people traveling across the country each growing season and taking the harvest jobs? Because when they return home to Detroit with their summer earnings, that money doesn't buy much in America. A Mexican worker returning home on the other hand...

      It boils down to 2 choices:
      1. Temporary worker visas, and being able to tax those workers to pay for the social services they might use during their temporary stay, or
      2. Build a big wall, aggressively enforce laws, greatly increase business inspection, attempt to remove all illegal workers in other words. The result would be that farmers would need to pay more to entice people to take the job, and our food costs would go up.

      Either plan is basically sound in terms of the cause/effect. Except that like the war on drugs shows, where there is demand, supply finds a way of creeping in. Number 2 would be a losing battle imo.

  43. Only One Problem... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The potential for good like scanning my card at any doctor's office or hospital and thus being done with my check in, or scanning my card at the DMV and thus being done with my check in or... will never happen.

  44. It's official by benjamindees · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Federalism is officially a complete failure.

    The day I am forced to get an unconstitutional "biometric ID card" in order not to have my job opportunities, directly subsidized by taxes, government-sponsored monopolies and other expropriated wealth, stolen by an illegal immigrant is the day that it's time to dissolve the federal government and revert it's duties back to states that have some semblance of fiscal responsibility and individual rights.

    And I say this of course under the near-universal assumption (by now) that this, along with everything else the US government does, will do absolutely nothing to curb illegal immigration or salvage jobs or benefit Americans and instead will be used simply as another tool of inept government to punish the compliant and reward criminals and cheaters and traitor banks and businesses.

    The US is no longer a functional government. It can't regulate borders. It dissolves them and signs them away in supranational treaties. It can't regulate trade or abusive businesses. It supports them and bails them out when they fail. It can't win wars. It can't even define "winning" in terms of the bullshit wars it now engages in. It can't regulate reproduction or resource consumption or immigration or anything that actually affects the long term well-being of it's citizens. All it can do at this point is make token bullshit infringements on the rights of anyone unlucky or stupid enough to get in it's way, accomplishing absolutely nothing save crippling debt increases in the process.

    --
    "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
    1. Re:It's official by MarcQuadra · · Score: 1

      "...states that have some semblance of fiscal responsibility and individual rights."

      Thanks, now I have to clean soda off my monitor.

      Really though, I appreciate the sentiment, and I actually agree with you, but I'm also from Rhode Island, which I'm starting to think is on-par with Nigeria in terms of 'fiscal responsibility' and 'individual rights'.

      --
      "Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
  45. How do you authenticate? by Churla · · Score: 1

    First, if employees would have to get them when they got new jobs would this be something done in the field or something someone would have to go to an office to pick up? If the latter than exactly how much do you think immigrant workers who cross the border to work in the fields will stop by a government office to register?

    If it's the former what stops anybody from creating a second indentity for themselves by simply getting a job, saying they have no ID, and getting a card? Or stops someone who is here from mexico (many of whom don't have birth certificates they could find or any documentation) from simply creating identities ad hoc?

    Also, for the sake of comic relief, can we call it a Multipass?

    --
    I'm a fiscal conservative, it's a pity we don't have a political party anymore
  46. F'em by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fuck the State!

  47. wouldn't work at all by rubycodez · · Score: 1

    already we have millions of illegals with IDs because so many areas purposely are safe harbors for them, this is just one more thing on the list they will get

  48. Permanent underclass? by vlm · · Score: 3, Interesting

    but would be phased in, with current workers needing to obtain the card only when they next changed jobs

    Well, that's scary. You could easily form a permanent underclass of never-employable again people with that plan.

    There's no point to getting a card unless its more effective than a passport or drivers license or military ID, or my freaking passport would be good enough so we wouldn't need this new thing. It took months to get my passport, including all kinds of hoops to jump thru for notarization and some special kind of birth certificate and other foolishness involving the local postmaster. I assume this new thing will be worse, otherwise we wouldn't need it. Its a safe assumption that in general, any time the govt does anything, its to make it worse for the middle class, and this specific situation seems to fit the mold.

    For a upper middle class employed dude like myself, a couple months time and a couple thousand bucks is annoying but no big deal, similar to replacing a leaking roof and fixing the damage. For dirt poor, unemployed, barely HS educated, how-mucha-month, joe six pack, he's screwed. What if J6P needs to hire a lawyer to fix some paperwork, or needs to pay up front to get docs from various agencies to prove his existence?

    --
    "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    1. Re:Permanent underclass? by tibit · · Score: 1

      Special kind of birth certificate?! What drugs are you on? There's only one kind of birth certificate in the U.S. It's handled by the county or state vital statistics departments, usually in the health department. We got the birth certificate for my daughter, and her U.S. passport -- it took about 1.5 months total, nothing special about it, and I just can't see how is the middle class being punished here? What's the big deal?

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    2. Re:Permanent underclass? by vlm · · Score: 1

      Special kind of birth certificate?! What drugs are you on? There's only one kind of birth certificate in the U.S

      Apparently not the good drugs, or at least my birth cert wasn't acid blotter.

      My passport expires in a year, its been 9 years. But, as I recall, it was a month or so to get rejected and find out the cert that I used for decades wasn't "good enough", I needed to send away for one with some special sticker/seal or embossment or watermark or special parchment copy or some such BS. It was about a month or so to get a new BC and a month or so to get the passport on the second try. It took "about one season" from thinking about getting it, to actually holding my passport in my sweaty little hands. I was previously informed the hardest part of visiting Ireland would be getting my passport, so I did nothing else until I was physically holding my new passport, so it didn't mess up my travel schedule very much.

      We got the birth certificate for my daughter, and her U.S. passport -- it took about 1.5 months total, nothing special about it, and I just can't see how is the middle class being punished here?

      If passport level security was good enough, we would be calling this new ID card a "passport card" which you get as per above, except almost a decade ago it took about three or four months. This is either going to be tougher, in which case good luck, or its going to be more expensive, so as to funnel money to haliburton or some other corrupt contractor.

      How long did it take to get my T/S clearance when I was in the military in the early 90s? Something like a year? I was in the reserves so I didn't care I was on undeployable status. That's what I'm talking about.

      If a minor little hiccup means four extra months of unemployment, I'm scared about what a major malfunction could cause.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
  49. Greasing the wheels by RenHoek · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's funny how a lot of Americans are shouting "Dey took our jerbs!", but when you actually offer them the jobs that illegal immigrants are doing, i.e. scrubbing toilets for low wages, then suddenly they are too good for that kind of work.

    Illegal immigrants do not take away high-pay jobs, and those actual high pay jobs are routinely shipped off to India and alike anyway. Those immigrants are greasing the wheels of the economy, doing jobs that nobody else wants to do.

    I see it in my own country (Netherlands) where we have to ship in seasonal workers to harvest asparagus crops because they just can't get the local people to do the hard work.

    It'll be interesting to see the effects of this plan.

    1. Re:Greasing the wheels by macs4all · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Illegal immigrants do not take away high-pay jobs, and those actual high pay jobs are routinely shipped off to India and alike anyway. Those immigrants are greasing the wheels of the economy, doing jobs that nobody else wants to do.

      Right.

      Because, until the massive influx of ILLEGAL immigrants in the U.S., toilets everywhere went unscrubbed, burgers went unflipped, no construction happened, lawns went unmowed, assembly-lines were silent...

      Keep on keepin' on regurgitating the "They only take the jobs nobody else wants" line.

      I have a good friend that is a ceramic-tile-setter. That is NOT a "Job nobody else wants." At 48 years old, his career (making about $20-30 an hour) is OVER; simply because he simply cannot support his family on the wages that an entire crew of ILLEGAL immigrants (who sleep THREE FAMILIES to a house) can be hired for.

      Sorry, the onslaught of ILLEGAL immigrants (in the U.S., mostly Mexicans) has ruined the U.S. economy. You see, it's a "trickle-UP" effect.

    2. Re:Greasing the wheels by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      The Day the Immigrants Left

      An asparagus farm was featured on this program. I can't say I'm surprised at your comment; It looked like back-breaking work. I couldn't believe that the group who worked in a restaurant gave up, though; Two didn't even turn up for work on the last day, and the third worked the morning until the busiest time for the restaurant and then walked out. He was the only guy front-of-house because the rest of the English people who were going the job for the show feigned illness.

      I'm fairly sure that the folks who whinged like pansies are roughly as infamous over here as this guy is in the US.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    3. Re:Greasing the wheels by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      Sorry, wrong video. I'm not searching for "guy punches girl in face" though. I'm certain you know which one I mean.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    4. Re:Greasing the wheels by zzsmirkzz · · Score: 1

      scrubbing toilets for low wages

      Nice argument you got there, got any data to back it up? How about separating ideas for a starter. The problem with your argument is that they are not just offering jobs that illegal immigrants are doing, they are offering them jobs that illegal immigrants are doing for the same pay the illegal immigrants are willing to work for. This typically is at or below minimum wage (with a trade-off of 0 taxes). The problem with this is that illegal immigrants don't have bargaining power to negotiate better wages (because they are illegal), so they race each other to the bottom. This artificially reduces the value of these positions to the point where no legal worker would feel that the pay is fair for the work and they refuse the job. Not because they don't want to do the work but because the pay is too low. It's like asking a Sr Level Programmer to work for $8/hr and arguing that Americans don't want the job when they say no.

    5. Re:Greasing the wheels by khallow · · Score: 1

      i.e. scrubbing toilets for low wages

      I outlined in bold what's wrong with this example. The job you mention is not competitive. Why would someone work that hard for so little when there's easier work for more money? Offer a higher salary. The "too good for that kind of work" excuse only matters, if the job is competitive with other US jobs. People may be stupid economically, but they're not that stupid.

    6. Re:Greasing the wheels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The unemployment for poor Americans over 30%. If they where offered these jobs they would take it. The problem is that American citizens are and legal immigrants get legal protection and enforcement of worker rights so the employees can't get away with treating them like animals and paying them under the minimum wage without paying taxes. So they hire illegals instead.
      This isn't about people not willing to do hard work. This is about employers not willing to follow the law.

      Of course fixing the problem is easy, go after employers of illegals not the employees and the problem would be over fast. Especially if you aim high in the chain of command.

    7. Re:Greasing the wheels by radish · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You know what? When some people find that their job doesn't pay enough for their lifestyle they look for a new, better paid job. Sometimes they go back to school to learn new skills, sometimes other people in the household start working so that they whole family isn't supported by one person (which is increasingly impossible).

      Of course some people just sit back on their asses and complain that it's the mexicans' fault for taking all the work. But that doesn't make sense - why is this guy entitled to more money just because of where he was born? Why should I (as the customer wanting my bathroom tiled) pay more just because he wants me to? And why should the government penalise people willing to work for less? Do we complain when Newegg sells us memory cheaper than elsewhere?

      It's really simple - if you're selling something in a market, be it a product or a service, no one owes you customers. No one owes you a business model (see copyright & RIAA, it's a popular topic around here). If you're charging too much, lower your prices. If you can't make enough profit at those prices, offer something else to distinguish yourself (maybe he does better quality work? maybe he could partner with a designer?). If that still doesn't work - figure out a different way to make money.

      --

      ---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"

    8. Re:Greasing the wheels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's funny how a lot of Americans are shouting "Dey took our jerbs!",

      Yes, *all* Americans say that. It is completely rational to use South Park episodes as a microscope into the psyche of the American citizen, which is absolutely identical for all of us, and forget the fact we're one of the most diverse populations in history.

      but when you actually offer them the jobs that illegal immigrants are doing, i.e. scrubbing toilets for low wages, then suddenly they are too good for that kind of work.

      [citation needed]

      Seriously- show me an actual instance where this was studied. Or is it just another meme peoplem trot out as an alternative to actual thought?

      Illegal immigrants do not take away high-pay jobs, and those actual high pay jobs are routinely shipped off to India and alike anyway.

      A lot of high paying construction jobs have fallen to the illegals here amongst other things. It isn't just picking strawberries. You have no effing clue what you are talking about.

      India? You mean computer jobs? Who even confuses that issue with illegal immigration? The border problem here in nearly unique in the world in terms of magnitude and the bullcrap politics. No other country in the *world* is ever attacked for *not* wanting a wide open border. The double standard is ludicrous.

      I see it in my own country (Netherlands)

      Netherlands?!?! Gee, have you guys prosecuted anyone for daring to criticize Islam this week? Oh, am I stereotyping? Sucks, doesn't it?

      You guys have the Freedom Party, which is riding the back of anti-immigrant feelings, and you're going to take potshots at us? Are you frakking me?! Is the sound of your glass house shattering making your ears ring?

      Geez, even the USA doesn't have a major Party devoted to the immigration issues. In fact, both the Dems and Reps have a basic pro-amnesty stance, although for very different reasons. It hardly ever comes up in elections, even here in Southern California. The economy has led to a lot of the illegals self-deporting (autodeporting?), so it's not even a big deal right now.

    9. Re:Greasing the wheels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Welcome to the real world, where people is paid real salaries. Thought you would be protected from competition forever?

    10. Re:Greasing the wheels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't you guys have the Freedom Party winning seats? You really wanna wade swinging away the anti-immigrant sentiment fray, Dutch-boy?

      Explain to me exactly why US citizens are the only ones in the world who have to sit back and take the consequences of *illegal* immigration? Why are we required to have an open border, especially by commenters from the EU who live in places with their own immigration furors? It's actually a *bigger* issue in Holland.

      Look at the post a bit below this that basically says "Illegal immigrants took over your industry? Go back to college, loser!" How about the companies that exploit the illegal immigrants so they can pay sub-minimum wages and not worry about all the overhead that a legal citizen requires? Why no hate for them?

      It's a great thing to have a permanent underclass that can't even call the cops if someone commits a crime against them? Are are you YET ANOTHER MORON who thinks being against illegal immigration is the exact same thing as being against *ALL* immigration because you have to real arguemnts?

    11. Re:Greasing the wheels by alan_dershowitz · · Score: 1

      why is this guy entitled to more money just because of where he was born?

      Do you hear yourself? He's entitled to representation of his interests because he is a CITIZEN OF THIS COUNTRY. The other guy isn't.

    12. Re:Greasing the wheels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because, until the massive influx of ILLEGAL immigrants in the U.S., toilets everywhere went unscrubbed, burgers went unflipped, no construction happened, lawns went unmowed, assembly-lines were silent...

      No, the jobs were done by a workforce with ever-increasing demands for money.

      At 48 years old, his career (making about $20-30 an hour) is OVER; simply because he simply cannot support his family on the wages that an entire crew of ILLEGAL immigrants (who sleep THREE FAMILIES to a house) can be hired for.

      Ahhh...NOW we're getting to the root of the problem. the cost of living has increased to the point that people cannot subsist on minimum-wage jobs (or jobs somewhat higher pay). Or is it that people want so much crap that they need more and more money?
      How is it that an entire crew of illegal immigrants can support their families on what ONE person CLAIMS cannot support theirs?

      Sorry, the onslaught of ILLEGAL immigrants (in the U.S., mostly Mexicans) has ruined the U.S. economy. You see, it's a "trickle-UP" effect.

      There you go constantly regurgitating that "trickle-up poverty" line. Maybe if you weren't such a greedy bastid you wouldn't have these problems?

    13. Re:Greasing the wheels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Illegal immigrants do not take away high-pay jobs, and those actual high pay jobs are routinely shipped off to India and alike anyway. Those immigrants are greasing the wheels of the economy, doing jobs that nobody else wants to do.

      Right.

      Because, until the massive influx of ILLEGAL immigrants in the U.S., toilets everywhere went unscrubbed, burgers went unflipped, no construction happened, lawns went unmowed, assembly-lines were silent...

      Keep on keepin' on regurgitating the "They only take the jobs nobody else wants" line.

      I have a good friend that is a ceramic-tile-setter. That is NOT a "Job nobody else wants." At 48 years old, his career (making about $20-30 an hour) is OVER; simply because he simply cannot support his family on the wages that an entire crew of ILLEGAL immigrants (who sleep THREE FAMILIES to a house) can be hired for.

      Sorry, the onslaught of ILLEGAL immigrants (in the U.S., mostly Mexicans) has ruined the U.S. economy. You see, it's a "trickle-UP" effect.

      Unfortunately the problem is not the ILLEGAL immigrants the problem is capitalism. Not only do I feel sorry for your friend but also for the millions who have lost there income due to the LEGAL imports of cheap labor and No pollution norms. We impose restrictions on local business that the importers need not deal with.

      I wish people would stop trying to blame others for the problems we have created. The only reason that "MEXICANS" exist is because we created an artificial border which allows us to import the cheap product and not the cheap labor. Unfortunately most people can no longer afford the cheap product that was produced by cheap labor because WE are unemployed. Lets stop the import of the cheap product and the cheap labor. Lets not pretend that China is this global polluter when the fact is that they produce OUR cheap product, we are the polluter because we are the consumer. If we believe in labor standards and minimum wage why do we import from countries who don't?

      But then again it's a lot easier to blame those MEXICANS, right?

    14. Re:Greasing the wheels by Sloppy · · Score: 1

      Boo hoo, he got underbid. Do you really think that if those people were not illegal immigrants, they wouldn't still underbid him? Anyone (illegal immigrant, legal immigrant, or natural-born citizen) who is willing to share a house with two other families, is going to kick everyone else's ass from an efficiency standpoint. Your friend is essentially going up against the labor equivalent of Wal-Mart. What does that have to do with illegal immigration?

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    15. Re:Greasing the wheels by Sloppy · · Score: 1

      BTW, "boo hoo" was an asinine thing to say, I'll admit. But even technology itself will tend to bring prices down, if people do things right. It doesn't matter whether your job is underbid by Apu or Bender. You have to either get a different job, or figure out how to be more competitive in your existing one. A changing market is just the price of progress.

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    16. Re:Greasing the wheels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're wrong. I saw this in France in the 90s, jobs dried up and the French suddenly wanted the low paying jobs that the folks from Northern Africa had immigrated for and had been working. People won't stay in those jobs if something better comes along, that's true for nearly anyone, but the mythic refusal of Americans to do certain jobs is BS. They might demand actual minimum wage to do them, or even a buck more if the job really sucks (and berry picking does suck), but they will do them.

      If you maintain Americans refuse those jobs, then show some data, as far as I know, no credible data has ever existed.

      Also, in the Pacific North West illegals do often take high paying construction jobs, the ones that pay 15-22 bucks an hour plus overtime, so it's not all about toilette scrubbing.

    17. Re:Greasing the wheels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Who gives a flying fuck about his interests? My interests tell me I'd like to save money on having my bathroom tiles set, therefore I go for the Mexicans. If he wasn't so damn lazy, he'd be out learning additional skills to supplement his skill set to stay competitive. But nah, it's easier to complain about those mean ol' Beaners.

    18. Re:Greasing the wheels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who made those Immigrants illegal? Oh yes, the (great grand whatever) kids of the wave of illegal immigrants that came before.
      Now shut up, put up and get your nose to the grindstone like a good drone, and quit your whining. It's the magic invisible hand of the free market, you nincompoop. It's what made the US the US.

    19. Re:Greasing the wheels by misexistentialist · · Score: 1

      It's impossible to compete on quality and price when your competition is converting their dollars into pesos. Your argument works better in reverse anyway, since companies' "right" to have high profits built on low wages even if it means breaking the law and hiring illegals or cooperating with foreign governments is obviously suspect.

    20. Re:Greasing the wheels by zzsmirkzz · · Score: 1

      You know what? It's easier to charge less when you don't have to pay taxes. It's easier to charge less when you don't have to pay Social Security & Medicare. It's easier for an employer to charge less when they don't have to pay Social Security match, unemployment insurance and other payroll expenses. The reason the work is cheaper isn't because illegals are willing to work for a lesser fair wage, they are willing to work for a lesser unfair wage that a legal, upstanding citizen can't afford because he has to play by the rules. It's easy to win when you cheat.

    21. Re:Greasing the wheels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shit, wait, are you trying to tell me these ILLEGAL immigrants are ILLEGAL? This changes everything! Somebody call the police!

    22. Re:Greasing the wheels by Rudeboy777 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't know why you picked on this poor fellow, but he's not railing against the free market. He's railing against the unfair price pressures of competing against criminals who don't have the same obligations (tax, insurance, supporting a family in the USA with a higher cost-of-living than Mexico) that those who play by the rules do.

      --

      From hell's heart I fstab at /dev/hdc

    23. Re:Greasing the wheels by tguyton · · Score: 1

      Because, until the massive influx of ILLEGAL immigrants in the U.S., toilets everywhere went unscrubbed, burgers went unflipped, no construction happened, lawns went unmowed, assembly-lines were silent...

      I don't believe the GP was stating that these jobs didn't exist before illegal immigration became so prevalent. Even though many people like to whine about jobs getting stolen, they would pass over these sorts of jobs now simply because we've grown used to not having to do them ourselves. I'm not saying it's right, and I'm not trying to make apologies for anyone, but illegal immigration has changed the societal norm. It's irrelevant who did the jobs twenty years ago, things have changed and most middle class white Americans would indeed consider those sorts of jobs beneath them now.

    24. Re:Greasing the wheels by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Hear fucking hear!! WE have to look out for our own country and our own people -- BECAUSE NO ONE ELSE WILL.

      Or did these "no borders" types really expect Mexico et al. to extend welfare benefits to Americans who are put out of work by illegal immigrants??

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    25. Re:Greasing the wheels by bjk002 · · Score: 1

      I passed by this at first, not wanting to involve myself in the stupidity debate...

      but my GAWD man... let us all completely de-humanize everything why don't we? How about child labor? How about unfair labor practices? People like you, let's call you unapologetic capitalists, have an uncanny ability to completely remove the human equation from the argument.

      Hell... I can round up a bunch of 10 year old kids, chain them to a factory floor, and churn out product cheaper than anyone. Do you recognize the logical flaw?

      Now, I do agree that current immigration law is absurd. But the problem is really not here, but there. Why are people coming here from these places? Because their governments have failed to protect them from people.. just.. like... you!

      --
      Opinion:=TMyOpinion.Create(Me);
    26. Re:Greasing the wheels by sjames · · Score: 1

      That just means they would have to start paying what the work is worth to an American. It's not that Americans won't scrub toilets, it's just that they won't scrub toilets on the second shift for minimum wage and zero benefits. It's not that Americans won't pick fruit, they just won't do it for 10 hours a day while living in a shanty for minimum wage.

    27. Re:Greasing the wheels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      there are places in the usa where you can not pay rent or health care alone for what they pay undocumeneted workers.

      they do not want cheap labor, they want slaves.

      it should be ileagal because it is like prostitution

    28. Re:Greasing the wheels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the other hand, illegal immigrants aren't really fair competition. They aren't allowed to be here, so they are willing to work for less than they would otherwise. If you made them legal, they would want more money. Then you could have fair competition between them and citizens. Free markets always require a legal structure to define what is and isn't allowed. The labor market is no different.

    29. Re:Greasing the wheels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In California many of these immigrants violate fire safety regulations on number of residents in order to live more cheaply. Why should somebody be penalized for living fewer in a dwelling to comply with safety regulations?

      Also much of the money the illegals make here goes straight back to Mexico. No taxes or revenue for the government. So again, why should a worker here be penalized for living in the USA? If he wants to make more money he could just relocate to Mexico and live in the USA to work (further depriving the US economy of taxes).

    30. Re:Greasing the wheels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're charging too much, lower your prices.

      maybe some of these people could charge similar rates to the illegal immigrants if they didnt have to pay taxes/deal with the government.

    31. Re:Greasing the wheels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This post is a grand example of why unregulated capitalism sucks. It's based on greed.

    32. Re:Greasing the wheels by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      Do you really think immigrants want to live like that and feel OK with it?

    33. Re:Greasing the wheels by nine-times · · Score: 1

      Well it's not exactly that illegal immigrants ruined the economy. There were multiple factors, including manipulation in the housing and finance sectors. We've also refused to invest in public infrastructure, which isn't doing us any favors.

      However, even the specific problem you're talking about isn't just an issue of illegal immigration, but an erosion of the value of blue collar work. We outsource things overseas, and for the things we can't outsource, we bring in illegal immigrants. People have the problem a bit backwards and they blame the immigrants themselves, but really we're enticing them to come. We're offering them jobs which, by their standards might be high-paying, but by our standards are inhumane.

      We also teach our children that they shouldn't be interested in any kind of blue collar work, since manual labor is for the lazy and the stupid. We don't teach our kids that there's any honor in a hard day's work. Meanwhile, we don't provide good public education because we think it would be "communist".

      It's almost as if we're trying to create a perfect storm of economic collapse.

    34. Re:Greasing the wheels by winwar · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "But that doesn't make sense - why is this guy entitled to more money just because of where he was born?"

      Perhaps you missed the part about ILLEGAL immigrants? His job is being threatened by people breaking the law. The citizens of a country are entitled to set the laws that run a country within reason.

      I'm sorry but it's not reasonable to disrupt society and good well paying stable jobs to cater to illegal immigrants and cheap consumers and employers (both of which are breaking the law by hiring illegals). The race to the bottom does not help a country dependent on the middle class. Because everyone can be replaced by someone willing to take less, even you.

      Of course, in my experience, people who share your attitude often have jobs with artificial barriers preventing their loss to low paid workers....

    35. Re:Greasing the wheels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If someone can and is willing to do the same work your friend is doing for $10 an hour instead of $20-$30 then your friend should either work for $10 an hour or learn something else.

      "You see, it's a "trickle-UP" effect."
      Many people would argue trickle down economics creates a larger wealth gap. So "trickle-up" economics would help close the wealth gap in this view, helping the middle class and creating a stronger economy.

      Perhaps our current economics woes aren't the result of those dirty foreigners and is more a result of ridiculous government overspending and the blind leading the blind around how much fiat money should exist at whatever rates they think will let us keep our stranglehold on the world's economy.

    36. Re:Greasing the wheels by nine-times · · Score: 1

      But that doesn't make sense - why is this guy entitled to more money just because of where he was born? Why should I (as the customer wanting my bathroom tiled) pay more just because he wants me to?

      You're missing the point: people who hire illegal immigrants are often doing so because they're also violating other labor laws. Not only do they pay below what we would consider a "working wage", but they often enough pay below minimum wage.

      In essence, you're selling a product on the market, but you're being undercut by the black market. No one owes me customers, but people are supposed to follow the law.

      But no, it's not really the fault of "the mexicans". It's the fault of businesses who seek out and use illegal workers, and who lobby against immigration reform. They don't want the illegal immigrants out of the country, and they don't want them to become legal either. They want a large army of illegal immigrants who will be too afraid of being deported to report labor law violations and unsafe working conditions.

    37. Re:Greasing the wheels by Grizzled+Old+Scout · · Score: 1

      Don't forget the flip side to your good friend's career woes: Now the people who used to have to fork over $30 an hour for his labor can get the same work (or near it) for less money. That enhances their lives. "ILLEGAL" immigration enhances competition and is opposed mostly by people who are either xenophobic or are looking to limit economic competition, harming their neighbors in the process.

    38. Re:Greasing the wheels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah that transcontinental railroad we got was built by all us white guys. You sure are right when you think immigrants have never been the backbone of construction in this country.

    39. Re:Greasing the wheels by alan_dershowitz · · Score: 1

      Who gives a flying fuck about his interests?

      His government? Hopefully? More than a foreign national?

    40. Re:Greasing the wheels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      His government? Hopefully? More than a foreign national?

      Therefore, should I be in need of whatever services he provides, he's automatically entitled to my money? Nope, don't think so. If %MEGACORP% is allowed to outsource then so am I. All the money I've saved with cheaper labor will ultimately find its way to naturalized citizens who've managed to stay relevant, and the world will continue to turn as normal.

    41. Re:Greasing the wheels by jwhitener · · Score: 1

      Compared with agricultural work, I'm assuming that construction is a pretty small slice of the illegal population. Agricultural jobs are temporary, seasonal, and low paying. No person living in the US legally, paying US prices on goods and services, paying US prices on homes, etc.. is going to want 3 months of harvest work.

      And I agree with the person who replied to you:

      "You know what? When some people find that their job doesn't pay enough for their lifestyle they look for a new, better paid job. Sometimes they go back to school to learn new skills, sometimes other people in the household start working so that they whole family isn't supported by one person (which is increasingly impossible)."

      And I'd also like to add one thing. If your friend the tile setter doesn't want to go back to school or learn a different trade, why isn't he by now the one hiring teams of tile setters? Form his own business and just manage a bunch of low payed workers....I'd assume by age 48 his back would start complaining a bit, and in a career of tile setting he'd have gained enough contacts and knowledge to manage 5-6 minimum wage folks....

    42. Re:Greasing the wheels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The point is, is that if the ILLEGAL immigrants were legal, they would be charging much closer to the amount that the guy's buddy is charging/the job would cost the same because the company hiring the illegals would need to charge more due to the costs that are being skated around by the workers being illegal

    43. Re:Greasing the wheels by benjamindees · · Score: 1

      What a profoundly ignorant comment.

      When some people find that their job doesn't pay enough for their lifestyle they look for a new, better paid job.

      And when there are no "new, better paid jobs", what then?

      I'll tell you what happens then. Then, the act of poor Mexicans producing more poor Mexicans to send into my country in search of resources to support them becomes an act of war. Because, then, either the resources of my country support me and my lifestyle or they support a dozen illegal immigrants.

      Do we complain when Newegg sells us memory cheaper than elsewhere?

      Do you complain when slave-traders sell you illegal workers cheaper than local laborers?

      Computer hardware doesn't have rights. It doesn't consume resources. It's not entitled to welfare or benefits. It can be destroyed when it is in oversupply and re-purposed. Humans can't be.

      And why should the government penalise people willing to work for less?

      Government should encourage improvement in living standards rather than a race to the bottom.

      --
      "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
  50. No you don't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "there is no way for you to access government services without filling out forms every time"

    Yeah yeah... that's what they said about the SSN never being a "national ID number".

    It's not just using "government services"

    It will be required to get a job. Without the right papers I will be denied the ability to seek work in a country founded on the very principles of liberty and freedom without government involvement.

    Tell me again that this is no big deal.

  51. DaveGillam by DaveGillam · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Bypassing all the arguments for and against this plan, I notice an interesting detail in the article. It applies to employers and employees (form W2) only. It apparently does not apply to business owners or freelancers (form 1099). So all the independent people (lawnkeepers, housekeepers, pool cleaners, handymen, freelancing programmers, etc) won't be affected by this either way, at least at first. They'd have to expand it to apply to everyone asking for any kind of service (hospitals, unemployment, banks, groceries) to have it affect 100% of the population. So if you want to avoid this card as long as possible, just start your own service business, or convince your employer to convert you to a form 1099 contractor, instead of a form W2 employee. You'll have to work out the pay scale to afford your vacations, insurance, and other perks, but that's workable. Also, if a lot of people become their own bosses, they technically always will have a job (their own business), so the unemployment lines would diminish. Theoretically. ;-)

  52. yay, i love beind IDed by german govt agencies by decora · · Score: 0

    the scheiserheitsdienst, the schutzstaffel, the ordnungspolizei, the sturmabteilung, the gehlen organization, the geheime staatspolizei, the scheiserheitspolizei, the reichssicherheitshauptamt, the kriminalpolizei, oh, and my favorite, the Wirtschafts-Verwaltungshauptamt that last one is just the cutest!

    1. Re:yay, i love beind IDed by german govt agencies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And we've already got the HeimatSicherheitsDienst watching over us, so we're tripping merrily down the garden path toward having to provide our papers to any 'official' who wants to put up some barrier to our right to move around the country.

  53. Re:i value my privacy and my freedom by tibit · · Score: 1

    I agree. I liked it very much back in the 80s when I was visiting Switzerland -- they had "combo" smart cards that were used as ATM and rail discount cards. I would, in fact, like it very much if there was a smart card that could be used for everything -- for proving that I'm licensed to drive, for getting money out of the ATM, for identification, ... What's the difference between having it on multiple pieces of plastic vs. having it on one? How does it erode my privacy/freedom in any way? All it does is decrease profits for wallet makers. I smell a wallet maker conspiracy here.

    --
    A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
  54. Bingo. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Too bad that will never happen.

  55. Re:i value my privacy and my freedom by trurl7 · · Score: 1

    So - at least one of your contentions is that this will provide less bureaucracy? You've obviously never worked for any form of civil service. There will be more bureaucracy, because you can't fire the old guys (who won't know what to do with this fancy new technology), so you'll have to hire new people. The old corps will still do what they've always done, duplicating the efforts of the electronic systems on paper.

    Your emphasis on the "use of" id is also flawed - a centralized infrastructure will inevitably be used for purposes not originally envisioned. The "big deal" is preventing that infrastructure from coming into existence. Tomorrow, the Dems get booted out, the Reps come back in and decide to datamine this toy for "terrorist trends". Next thing you know, people are getting harassed and interrogated because a computer said so (you don't need evil intent - simple bugs will work just fine). Ever hear of false positives?

    All of these measures are a threat to freedom, in the aggregate.

  56. Megadeth's Endgame by Jimmy+King · · Score: 1

    Well, Dave's lyrics to the song Endgame sound more likely and less crazy by the day (and they weren't a very hard sell in the first place) although they were technically about a different document that this plan certainly ties directly into.

    "A system of controlled movement, like a giant ant farm." is about fucking right.

  57. Yes, it's the law by way2trivial · · Score: 1

    for employment, photo ID is required by federal government

    for independent contracting- no

    passport (col a) or photo ID + something like ss card
    a social security card is not actually required- but a valid # is
    http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/i-9.pdf
    see instructions on the actual government form

    --
    every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
  58. Government Databases by ericlj · · Score: 1

    Think how many people would be unable to take jobs if just 1% of the checks returned false negatives. Who wants to wait while the INS (or other agency) decides they might have made a mistake and will update the database in the next annual batch? I like to eat and I have to pay bills; I'd prefer to take the chance that someone will hire a few illegal aliens to this.

  59. Never happen by Anonymous+Codger · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Between the libertarian right, the religious crazies who will conflate this with the "mark of the beast", and the lefties who don't trust law enforcement, this will never get through Congress. If it ever came to a vote, the uproar in the intertubes and talk radio would be deafening and the tea party loonies would all die of apoplexy.

    --
    No sig? Sigh...
  60. Re:it's. not. a. big. deal. by night_flyer · · Score: 1

    those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it

    --


    Thanks to file sharing, I purchase more CDs
    Thanks to the RIAA, I buy them used...
  61. Wake up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The unfortunate side effect is that immigration is going to be even more of a nightmare for people who are legal to work in the US

    You think that is the only unfortunate side effect, or even the most significant?

    The potential for government abuse of this system is very high. The government can use it to track its own people without warrant, to further the current problem if lifetime punishments for every crime, and to silence anyone with an unfavorable opinion. Furthermore, this increases the risk of identity theft victimization, since swiping this card, or the information on it, is all such a thief will need to do (and don't think for a second that this unique identifier won't be used for credit applications, phone service, and everything else that the SSN is used for today (and more)).

    This has "bad idea" written all over it, but is being sold as a solution to a problem that only exists because the government refuses to enforce its CURRENT POLICIES (and not due to their expense, but rather, due to the high demand for cheap foreign labor among donating businesses).

    1. Re:Wake up by niteice · · Score: 1, Interesting

      track its own people without warrant

      How?

      lifetime punishments for every crime

      Huh?

      silence anyone with an unfavorable opinion

      What?

      Please stop being so paranoid. It's not healthy.

      --
      ROMANES EUNT DOMUS
    2. Re:Wake up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Just because you're paranoid, that doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.

    3. Re:Wake up by conspirator57 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      track its own people without warrant

      How?

      through everything you buy or do that requires ID. Air travel, train travel, and i think even bus travel now. just add a spiffy new ID scanner to the TSA agent checking your ID and viola, yet another database that knows who everyone is and where they're going. no one would evar misuse that...

      lifetime punishments for every crime

      Huh?

      notice how crimes these days aren't just one charge, they're like 8 at a minimum, and if the prosecutor thinks he can get away with it he throws terrorism on top to boost his resume? yeah. that. overly broad criminal statutes with redunculous sentences. not to mention 3 strikes laws.

      silence anyone with an unfavorable opinion

      What?

      you know, like how it's not socially tolerable to question any of the measures that reduce freedom "for our own good". or suggest that some aren't effective. or suggest alternatives that don't destroy freedom. or how people who do these things are branded as kooks, kinda like when Ron Paul threw the 9/11 commission findings in Giulianni's face. which was particularly funny because Giulianni was listed as an author of the report. yeah. that.

      Please stop being so paranoid. It's not healthy.

      please wake the hell up and smell the fascism. it's not healthy.

      --
      "If still these truths be held to be
      Self evident."
      -Edna St. Vincent Millay
    4. Re:Wake up by WindBourne · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Of course, the real solution will be that the data is encrypted on the card, and you either give a pin, or the feds have a pin for it to unlock it. I am not wild about ID cards, but I am also oppose to illegals destroy our economy (and yes, they are costing America HUGE, along with the outsourcing). EU nations handle it by requiring IDs for every legal person to have a card. So do many other nations. In the end, the question is, do we continue on this mutual suicide path, or do we take risks with the feds? Up until about 2002-2003 (and ignoring such times as 1940 ), I would have said that this was ideal. In fact, when Eisenhower did his infamous operation wetback, we actually sent Americans over the border to Mexico because they could not prove who they were just due to skin color. Oddly, most of those spoke ONLY english, and little Spanish.. Something like this would prevent such actions.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    5. Re:Wake up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lifetime punishments for every crime

      Huh?

      Yes. You get busted for GTA when you are 19. You do your time and pay back your debt to society. But these cards contain your entire life's criminal record so at the age of 43 you are still getting declined jobs (and probably also denied housing, insurance, loans, etc) because anyone running your card can see that 24 years ago you were convicted of a felony.

      This is essentially lifetime punishment for a crime.

    6. Re:Wake up by GasparGMSwordsman · · Score: 1

      Your assuming this will change anything. All this will do is concentrate non-changeable identification information at a single place. That place is not secure, the data bases that store this information are not secure. Many of the personal who access that data only have to pass through minimal screenings. In some cases they don't have to pass any screenings. Go look up what it takes to get hired as a data entry person at the DMV or any other State or Federal agency, most require almost nothing.

      The outcome if this passes will be zero effect on preventing illegal immigrants from working here. It will increase the cost of hiring employees. It will increase the number and severity of ID theft. It will cause vast problems as US Citizens have to prove that they are US citizens (as has happened with every such scheme in the last 220 years). Lastly I guarantee that within one year of these cards being put into production you will be able to buy a undetectable counterfeit for a negligible amount.

    7. Re:Wake up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know, you didn't actually answer the second and third questions, and your answer to the first question doesn't make any sense. You already have to show the TSA agent a driver's license or a passport, either of which can be scanned. You haven't made any argument that the new card adds anything to the government's ability to track people.

      You might have legitimate arguments against these new ID cards, but you haven't given any. Blind paranoia isn't going to convince anyone.

    8. Re:Wake up by phantomfive · · Score: 1
      ,quote>but I am also oppose to illegals destroy our economy (and yes, they are costing America HUGE, along with the outsourcing).

      Yeah right, lets see how many white American born citizens you can find to work in the fields in agriculture, at any price. Not very many, I can tell you, and the ones who do are usually lazy and bad workers. If you got rid of all the illegals, you would see the price of agriculture sky-rocket (or be completely outsourced). Illegal immigrants really do jobs no one else will do.

      The second problem they help with is more of a planning problem on our part, but the illegals usually pay social security, which will help to pay for the baby boomers in our ponzi-scheme public retirement system. Someone has to take care of them in their old age.

      --
      Qxe4
    9. Re:Wake up by magus_melchior · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I am also oppose to illegals destroy our economy (and yes, they are costing America HUGE, along with the outsourcing).

      Just to play devil's advocate (a bit sincerely, at that), who is responsible for the growth of illegal immigration and outsourcing? The Mexicans/Central Americans, Chinese, and Indians? They just want a job that pays better than a couple of USD per day, and would be among the last people who want the US economy to collapse. Can we not level some responsibility at the US corporations who fanatically seek dirt-cheap labor costs and zero labor protections/environmental regulations? Can we not see some responsibility in American laborers who demand ever-increasing wages and benefits while turning down the plentiful manual labor that the illegal immigrants consider generous? And, if the labor is being utilized by these undocumented workers, exactly how are these taxpaying people costing America*? For that matter, where are you getting this idea that handing out more documentation will suddenly cause illegals to stop working illicitly, or that this would prevent boneheaded racist ideas from becoming policy?

      Boiling the discussion down to "illegals destroy our economy" makes for a catchy talking point (which is why GOP politicians use it liberally), but it is, in the end, a Big Lie designed to foster discrimination and create a class of scapegoats. If it worked for every immigrant struggle in the history of this fine nation, why not, right?

      An ID card is little more than security theater. You'll have the same things that happen today with SSNs and identity theft, where illegals buy paperwork from dishonest people to become (sarcasm quotes) "documented"-- the only difference will be the time it takes to crack whatever encryption is on the ID card (remember, a straight cipher like the one you suggest is very straightforward to crack with brute force), or, more likely, the time it takes to move the electronics to a fake ID.

      Let's not require such cards for citizens and permanent resident visas; don't even encourage employers to try to "document" their citizen/green-card workers this way, as the constitutional implications of this are serious. Let's not force those who seek temporary visas to get these IDs, as if we're Narita Airport's immigration gates fingerprinting every foreigner (remembering that by and large we Americans are descendants of immigrants). But if we want to somehow try to offer a way for undocumented workers to get legit documentation that's easy for employers to verify, offer this to them. Put them on "probation", if you would, and monitor their progress towards a legit visa.

      Maybe that's too progressive for some folks, so naturally Congress would probably strengthen CIS officials' power to kick undocumented workers out for any reason. There is never a straightforward answer to a problem like this, and every solution will hurt a huge number of people. Hanging onto this ID card idea as if it were a silver bullet strongly suggests that you want a quick and dirty fix without thinking about the consequences.

      * Yes, yes, you want to say "they're taking jobs away from hard-working patriotic freedom-loving Americans". I've got news for you-- those jobs were either priced out of their market by the employers, or the same hard-working Americans rejected the lower wages. You cannot pin the responsibility on the illegals alone for wage depression.

      --
      "We are Microsoft. You shall be assimilated. Competition is futile."
    10. Re:Wake up by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "Yeah right, lets see how many white American born citizens you can find to work in the fields in agriculture, at any price. Not very many, I can tell you, and the ones who do are usually lazy and bad workers. If you got rid of all the illegals, you would see the price of agriculture sky-rocket (or be completely outsourced). Illegal immigrants really do jobs no one else will do."

      Not sure why you decided to bring race or color into the argument....no one said what color or race illegal immigrants were in this argument.

      However, I'd dare say that with this economy, more people would be willing to do more labor intensive jobs. Heck, if we were more dependent on US citizens for more work we could mandate that people receiving money on the public dole, have to do some of this labor to help pay for their entitlement payments.

      If we had fully legitimate workers (US citizens and legal migrant workers), we might take some of the downward pressure off of construction and other skilled labor jobs which would certainly help the economy.

      It isn't a matter of race or color here...it is only the LEGALITY of the people working in the US, and how those here illegally are forcing down wages, and placing extra burdens on our entitlement programs, our healthcare system and educations system.

      For those last two issues...I'll defer to other citizens that currently live on the border states in the south and southwest.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    11. Re:Wake up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...but I am also oppose to illegals destroy our economy (and yes, they are costing America HUGE...

      Tell me, exactly how are they destroying our economy?

    12. Re:Wake up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The outcome if this passes will be zero effect on preventing illegal immigrants from working here"

      Actually it will just result in "tax savings" for those paying taxes by no longer subsidizing illegals.

      "NO ID CARD, NO SERVICE" signs will be seen on schools and hospitals, etc. Oh wait, America doesn't have a socialized medicine or education system, guess this will be meaningless.

    13. Re:Wake up by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      I never said that a central database stores our information. It stores a pin to access the data on our card. IOW, there are 2 different passwords to access the key to the encrypted data. And the fed's password would be generated, so nothing to enter. Using that approach, then a fed can give a yeah-nea on if somebody is elgible by using their pin to access the card, that is swept through a reader.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    14. Re:Wake up by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Here is a clue. I grew up on farms. I have worked the fields. Most of the ppl here in America are STILL AMERICANS. And yes, many of them are white. And illegals do not do the jobs that nobody else will do. They do jobs that they can get. The problem is that they are taking our nation BACKWARDS.

      You obviously do not know many illegals. I know a number including my sister-in-law (she is now legal). Many of her friends do not pay SS or ANY of the taxes, because they are paid under the table.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    15. Re:Wake up by phantomfive · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Not sure why you decided to bring race or color into the argument....no one said what color or race illegal immigrants were in this argument.

      It's pretty simple, it's because I've worked in those fields, and I can tell you: there aren't very many white Americans who A) are willing to do so and B) are any good at it. I've seen similar problems in construction, although it is not as pronounced. It makes sense though: in America, anyone with any kind of work ethic will be able to get a college degree or learn some kind of skilled trade (plumber, ag inspector). The only ones left to work in the fields are lazy people or immigrants who don't have similar opportunities in their own countries.

      --
      Qxe4
    16. Re:Wake up by thatblackguy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Your precious citizens, the corporate overlords, ship manufacturing to china and support calls to India and you blame the people who took a job for the loss of 'your jobs' ? Blame the manager who made the decision to give the job to someone else, not the person who chose to accept it. BTW. Do you believe in free trade? Do you know that it extends beyond goods and services? It applies for jobs too. Jobs subject to the free market and all that. I wonder why the usual free trade nuts simultaneously hate outsourcing. It's like they choose the part which only benefits them.

    17. Re:Wake up by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Oh, I DO blame the corporations for our current situation. The problem is that the exec looked at short term gains for their own good. However, that does not change the situation. Read this.

      We need this ID card. We also need to make changes to our corporations. BTW, I do not object to legal immigrants. They provide a life blood for America. But illegal immigrants are a whole different issue.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    18. Re:Wake up by conspirator57 · · Score: 1

      you very nearly resemble one of the "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil" monkeys. i'm not sure which one.

      and i did answer the questions. you just didn't like the answers. apparently they didn't conform with your opinion on the matter.

      --
      "If still these truths be held to be
      Self evident."
      -Edna St. Vincent Millay
    19. Re:Wake up by xeoron · · Score: 1

      Not to mention that now they will have every legally workable person's fingerprints or other biometric data

    20. Re:Wake up by GasparGMSwordsman · · Score: 1

      You still have to be able to verify the data from a source outside of the card. If you don't have a way of outside identification then you can simply produce the cards your self. I can make a card with any information I want now. I could put my face, my fingerprint, my what-ever, encrypt it and use the name of "Mark Hammel McLovin" if I wanted. Without outside verification the card is worthless.

      Your SSN is identifiable because you have the card it self (or just know your number) AND that number is stored by the government where they can cross reference it. The same is true for your drivers license, your ATM/Bank card. It is true for every European country's national ID.

      As for the fallacy that encryption makes something safe, I would look at the history of any such claims. Encryption is merely one way of making things less dangerous not safe. To make a truly secure system you need to plan for it to fail safely. It WILL fail. The security is in designing it to fail smartly.

      Obligatory XKCD difference:

      http://xkcd.com/538/

    21. Re:Wake up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, actually, you didn't answer his questions. Your "answers" were non-sequiturs that had nothing to do with the ID cards. While I personally am highly suspicious of any kind of "national ID" system, you have utterly failed to make any points against it thus far.

    22. Re:Wake up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's not force those who seek temporary visas to get these IDs, as if we're Narita Airport's immigration gates fingerprinting every foreigner (remembering that by and large we Americans are descendants of immigrants).

      lolwut

      Let's not force those who seek temporary visas to get these IDs, as if we're any American Airport's immigration gates fingerprinting every foreigner (remembering that by and large we Americans are descendants of immigrants).

      fixd

    23. Re:Wake up by jwhitener · · Score: 1

      "An ID card is little more than security theater. You'll have the same things that happen today with SSNs and identity theft, where illegals buy paperwork from dishonest people to become (sarcasm quotes) "documented""

      The article quotes the senator as saying that this ID card's main advantage is that it would not be able to be counterfeited, as it is tied to the biology of a person. Whether that is possible or not, and whether it is a good idea in terms of privacy rights, are entirely different questions.

      But the stated goal is to make it very difficult or impossible to get fake papers.

    24. Re:Wake up by robotandrew · · Score: 1

      An excellent argument for replacing our inefficient income tax with a national sales tax? Then illegals WILL contribute to the system, every time they buy food, clothing, etc.

    25. Re:Wake up by forkazoo · · Score: 1

      It's pretty simple, it's because I've worked in those fields, and I can tell you: there aren't very many white Americans who A) are willing to do so and B) are any good at it. I've seen similar problems in construction, although it is not as pronounced. It makes sense though: in America, anyone with any kind of work ethic will be able to get a college degree or learn some kind of skilled trade (plumber, ag inspector). The only ones left to work in the fields are lazy people or immigrants who don't have similar opportunities in their own countries.

      Of course there aren't many Americans who are good at it. Not many Americans do it. If Americans were doing those jobs, there would be lots of Americans who were good at it. And, it isn't that Americans aren't willing to do the work. It's that they aren't willing to do the work at the offered wage.

      We have a second class sub-society of illegals in America who are willing to work for peanuts because they can't risk getting on the grid. If immigration were more open and less paranoid in America so that all the immigrants could just pay their taxes and work openly, then there would be no desperate underclass to break any attempt at reform in those industries currently dominated by illegals. Consequently, those industries would have to pay a more normal wage, and you would see Americans working those jobs. And blueberries would cost ten percent more or whatever.

    26. Re:Wake up by phantomfive · · Score: 2, Insightful

      We have a second class sub-society of illegals in America who are willing to work for peanuts because they can't risk getting on the grid.

      You don't seem to have talked to very many illegals. That is not why they are willing to work for peanuts. They are willing to work for peanuts because it's still a lot more than they would make in their own country. Secondly there are so many illegals with fake ID working in legitimate places as regular citizens that "not risking getting on the grid" isn't really an issue.

      --
      Qxe4
    27. Re:Wake up by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      The problem is that they are taking our nation BACKWARDS.

      Heh.....taking the nation backwards for some weird definition of backwards. I see lots of illegals who are hard working. In my view people who work hard take the nation forwards. They produce things. People who take the nation backward are those stuck on welfare, or planning on retiring with nothing more than their social security. Working hard moves the nation forward, expecting others to take care of you moves the nation backwards. Otherwise we could move the nation really far forward and all quit our jobs and go on welfare.

      I'm not saying we should get rid of the welfare program, of course we should help people who need it. But let's not get under some delusion that those people are somehow 'moving the nation forward.'

      --
      Qxe4
    28. Re:Wake up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If a government (even ours, apparently) can have a way of knowing virtually everything about it's citizens, then it just seems too good to pass up anymore. Does anyone recall, from a few months ago, how someone in government was saying that because of 'Cash for Clunkers' more and more people were driving fuel-efficient cars and, because of that, gas tax revenues were falling; what to do? How to make sure that the people who drive the most pay the most in gas taxes? The answer put forth was, 'why not require all cars to have a GPS installed to monitor miles driven between fill-ups? That way it's fair: people who drive the most miles will pay the most in taxes.' Seriously, this is what I heard on the radio as I drove to work.

      Who do they think they are fooling? If you drive more, you buy more gas, thus you *already* pay more gas taxes. Very simple. Works pretty well. If nearly everyone switched to more fuel-efficient cars so that we used less gas overall, the simple solution is to raise gas taxes (gov't seems to have no trouble doing this) by the amount lost due to greater fuel efficiency. Simple. GPS mileage tracking is totally unnecessary, expensive, (but then, YOU are the who will pay for it), and this information (not just *how far* you drive, but it can--and likely will--also record *where* you drove, and when) will be chum for info sharks like salesmen and government. I don't consider myself a 'conspiracy-type' at all, but I find this Jackpot of Information just too good for Big Brother to pass up.

  62. Oh, A Bill by Greyfox · · Score: 1

    As if Congress could pass anything right now. If all that stands between us and a complete fascist state is their ineptitude, well I'm happy with that insurmountable mountain between that future and us. Not that the future their complete lack of leadership is going to bring us is any less bleak.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  63. Similar to what happens in the Netherlands by vikingpower · · Score: 2, Informative

    In the Netherlands, having your fingerprints taken when applying for a new passport became obligatory last year. The government pretended that this was necessary in order to fight terrorism, although the measure is way more severre than what the European Union requires governments to do. There were and still are some civil rights organizations protesting against this security craze.

    A very unfortunate side effect of this became visible at the latest elections. People were required to bring a passport along with their voter's registration card. 200,000 voters, a significant percentage of the country's registered voters, didnot have such an ID, for various reasons ( poverty, ignorance, laxism, protest ). Thus, they were excluded from the most fundamental mechanism underlying a democracy: voting.

    Americans, beware !

    --
    Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
  64. Re:in the history of other nations by Skreems · · Score: 1

    I think it's some form of weird cross-contamination from the red scare of the 50s, which has now been adopted by the crazy wing of the left.

    --
    Slashdot needs a "-1, Wrong" moderation option.
    The Urban Hippie
  65. Re:i value my privacy and my freedom by I'm+not+really+here · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There is one major difference between a license to drive and a license to work. If I wanted to, I can drop off the grid. I can just not renew my license, get a bicycle, stop using credit cards, do odd jobs for cash or barter, pay cash for everything, and completely disappear. There is nothing illegal about this (other than tax evasion, if you are earning more than $8000 per year, but I'm sure there are legal ways to deal with paying taxes while not having an official address), as there is nothing mandating that I have a driver's license, nor anything forcing me to use credit/debit cards.

    If, however, a license to work is created, then the step "do odd jobs for cash or barter" becomes illegal if I don't have this license to work. Now, there is no option for me to drop off the grid. I have no choice.

    I know at this point it's a small difference (almost to the point of not existing), and that 99.99% of society likely has some form of ID that allows the government to track them, but the point is that, to date, all forms of ID are effectively voluntary. Take away my ability to get paid to work, a basic requirement for survival, and we've got a serious problem. It's the principle of the thing—Right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. This inability to work stifles my ability to pursue happiness (a starving man cannot be happy - see Maslow's hierarchy of needs), and in the long run, through starvation, would remove my right to Life itself. Essentially, the government is trying to get me to give up part of my right to Life and my right to pursue happiness in exchange for eliminating the illegal immigrant problem. Screw that. I'd rather let the whole world in than give up the last vestiges of my freedom to choose whether or not I wish to have "papers" to identify myself.

    --
    Before commenting on the Bible, please read it first
  66. Divide and Conquer by brxndxn · · Score: 1

    This seems just like another 'divide and conquer' attempt in order for Washington to get nothing done and still spend taxpayer money. Getting rid of illegal immigration is a top goal of the rightwing liberty movement as well as preserving privacy through resisting a national ID.. So, if you want to divide the rightwing movement and dilute their influence, come up with solutions that require implementing problems. That way, some of the rightwing movment will support the National ID in order to prevent illegal immigration and some will resist the National ID and thus look like supporters of amnesty (since our political system tries to label everyone on every issue in either one or the other category while ignoring all other options). It falsely makes those against a National ID appear to be for amnesty.

    We don't need a National ID card to deter illegal immigration. Instead, we need enforcement of current laws. Companies that hire illegal immigrants need to be penalized. The rampant illegal immigration is a result of lack of penalties; not a result of illegal immigrants being hard to find. For example, Tyson Foods (btw, a huge political contributer) continues to operate despite repeated slap-on-the-wrist fines for employing illegal immigrants. The law needs to be enforced better from the top down. Companies should not be able to make cost-based decisions that involve breaking the law in order to save money.

    --
    --- We need more Ron Paul!
  67. Just put it in your wallet and shut up. by Nukenbar · · Score: 1

    Is this really a big deal? I just seems like an updated SSN card to me.

  68. TWIC? by geethree · · Score: 1

    Don't we already have a version of this with the "Transportation Worker Identification Credential" (TWIC)?
    http://www.tsa.gov/what_we_do/layers/twic/index.shtm

    It has everything this ID card asks for, including the fingerprints.

  69. Re:Another card? -- Yes, with biometric ID by jacksdl · · Score: 1

    Why do we need another card? Seems to me that identity thieves have enough things to use already.

    Did you miss the part about it being biometric? This would seem to be the best tool to fight identity theft.

    Now for all of those slashdotters who will start fretting over the misuse of this card -- get over it. You are not likely to find yourself in Dr. Richard Kimble's situation (unjustly convicted of murder and needing to hide from Tommy Lee Jones). And as for the government having too much power, please note that these are the people who have our guns, tanks, drones and hydrogen bombs. No, we shouldn't trust them -- we should watch them for any abuse of power and call them out when necessary. But a system that insists we should maintain personal security through making personal identification more difficult is misguided.

  70. Right to work? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A similar issue came up, in my mind anyways, a year or two ago with another bill. The bill would have required that all employers use the national Employee Eligibility Verification System (the name was something like that), and it was immediately obvious that such a requirement could result in errors or be abused to prevent American citizens from getting jobs. The EEVS already exists and is voluntarily used by employers, so there's history. There's no signs of abuse, but errors have happened.

    So the question I wondered about is, "Do we have a right to work?" It certainly seems we do, if not explicitly, then by things such as free association and the statement of all people having the right to "the pursuit of happiness", a.k.a. the pursuit of property.

    Is there a lawyer in the house? Have there been cases that inform or set precedent on the concept of a right to work?

  71. If I had mod points, I would mod that up by Presto+Vivace · · Score: 4, Informative

    anyone who has an opinion about this can contact Senator Schumer and Senator Graham

    1. Re:If I had mod points, I would mod that up by sycodon · · Score: 1

      You can contact them here:

      Asshole1
      U.S. Senate, Washington D.C.

      Asshole2
      U.S. Senate, Washington D.C.

      Be sure to include the numbers as generic reference to Asshole will end up spamming the entire Senate.

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    2. Re:If I had mod points, I would mod that up by querist · · Score: 5, Insightful
      As Senator Graham is one of my senators, I have contacted his office regarding this matter.

      For those of you who contact your senators or representatives, please try to be civil. If you have appropriate qualifications in the field (advanced degrees, etc.), please politely offer your assistance to your senator's staff to help them understand the technical complexities of the proposal. That is exactly what I have done, and I have had significant success with this approach with Senator Jim DeMint. I am on his "call list" and I occasionally receive calls from his office when proposals like this come up and I am asked for my input on the matter. (I have not received a call on this one, so I will contact Senator DeMint's office once I've had a chance to read the bill. Often they do not recognize that there is a "computer security" component to a bill such as this - they just think "ID card" and do not think of the databases behind the cards.)

      If you are polite and you have appropriate qualifications that your senator or representative will recognize, you may have an opportunity to have a positive influence in the process. Remember, though, that your senators and representatives are people who have fears, egos, and agendas just like everyone else. Show them that you want to work WITH them.

      If you honestly cannot bring yourself to assist your senator or representative for whatever reason you have, then please at least be polite in your letters. An angry letter filled with vitriol and profanity will only alienate the recipient from your viewpoint.

    3. Re:If I had mod points, I would mod that up by ahabswhale · · Score: 1

      So I shouldn't send him an email telling him that he can shove this fascist crap up his ass?

      --
      Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
    4. Re:If I had mod points, I would mod that up by blackraven14250 · · Score: 1

      No, you have to imply it instead.

    5. Re:If I had mod points, I would mod that up by seekertom · · Score: 1

      God bless ya, son for this. i have only one exception to what you have said, and it 'appears' to be a matter of your basic understanding of America... "and you have appropriate qualifications..." what more do i need than simply to be a citizen? thanks fer lis'nin' seekertom

  72. Innocent until proven guilty, I think by boyfaceddog · · Score: 1

    Correct me if I'm wrong but there is some, oh let's call them "constitutional" issues with this. First, entering the country illegally is a "crime". Second, hiring someone who has entered the country illegally is also a "crime". Third, being a citizen of the U.S.A. is not (so far) a crime and neither is looking for work. So if the Feds want me to PROVE I'M INNOCENT OF A CRIME in order to get a job, that would be a violation of my constitutional rights. Won't Be Done. Nothing to see here. Move along, citizen.

    --
    Here will be an old abusing of God's patience and the king's English.
  73. I'll bite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually it doesn't sound far off.

  74. Take it from a person who has to carry one... by dejanc · · Score: 3, Informative

    I lived in USA for 6 years and the best thing there, in terms of citizen-government interaction, was that there was no mandatory ID cards.

    Sure, an ID card is not that big of a deal at first. It's not much unlike a DL (which almost everyone carries around all the time anyway), and it's not like the police can't track you down all the time.

    But this is what will happen:

    • First they mandate you always have to carry it with you.
    • Then, the police implies you have to show it to anyone with a badge on demand.
    • Finally, they will randomly stop you and check your ID... without a right that you refuse it.

    Here in Serbia, quite literally, I can't even take a walk in the park anymore without a cop stopping me and asking for ID...

    1. Re:Take it from a person who has to carry one... by kimb · · Score: 1

      Here in Serbia, quite literally, I can't even take a walk in the park anymore without a cop stopping me and asking for ID...

      Doesn't happen to me that often, but when it does it's quite annoying -- you have to stand there wasting your time (and saying "I'm in a hurry" doesn't help) sometimes as much as five minutes while the cop is writing down your personal data checking them against the police records. I've figured out they have a daily quota of how much ID checks each patrolling cop has to make. Sometimes the cops are annoyed by this too, which leads to comical situations like asking if you have been convicted of something before, and if the answer is "yes" they won't check your ID because then the procedure takes even longer.

  75. Your Rights Online? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about "Your Rights In Real Life"? Not like they will require using one of these cards to log on to the internet.

    Oops, don't want to give them any bright ideas...

  76. What other commenters seem to be ignoring here... by jenningsthecat · · Score: 1

    ...are the primary forces at work behind such legislation

    Firstly, look past the rhetoric, posturing, and spurious justification, (the 'immigration problem'), and realize that this move simply concentrates more power in the hands of government. Governments always seek greater power, and that's just the nature of the beast. But insofar as we exercise our rights and our will, we hold the leash around this beast's neck. That leash is long overdue for a hard, sharp yanking.

    Secondly, any popular support for this move will stem primarily from fear, some of it based in reality and some of it manufactured by politicians and corporate interests. Fear is a good tactician but a lousy strategist; it can get you out of a tight spot and save your life, but it's no way to RUN your life, it's no way to let OTHERS run your life, and it's no way to run a country. We need to be planning a future where we don't require such intrusive 'protections' as a matter of course, rather than perpetuating fear-based, ad-hoc reactions to a perpetual series of crises.

    Just my two cents' worth...

    --
    'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
  77. POOR IMPULSE CONTROL by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    I mean between your wars and your economy, I think I have a solution for you...

  78. Who is Bill May? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Slashdot titles suck.

  79. What card ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All the card I know of in the US can be falsified by any 15 year old kid wanting to drink. About the only one which are a tad bit more difficult are passport.

  80. Think of the fines by iwaybandit · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Some employers may stop hiring illlegals, others will take the risk and continue hiring them. The glut of unemployed illegals will drive their wages down and increase the margins realized the employer hiring them.

    This is what the government wants. An employer caught hiring illegals will be fined and have assets confiscated. It will be a profit center for government, prosecuting and deporting illegals is not.

    1. Re:Think of the fines by Zantac69 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Some employers may stop hiring illlegals, others will take the risk and continue hiring them. The glut of unemployed illegals will drive their wages down and increase the margins realized the employer hiring them.

      This is what the government wants. An employer caught hiring illegals will be fined and have assets confiscated. It will be a profit center for government, prosecuting and deporting illegals is not.

      I am strangely confortable with this idea. The end result:
      1 - Employers are forced to use the verification system by threat of losing their buisness (the law should have teeth).
      2 - Illegals are effectively starved out of the country because Employers are following the rules as they should.

      What is the problem here?

      --
      1331461 is only semiprime *sigh* Alas - I am just short of 1337.
    2. Re:Think of the fines by Reziac · · Score: 1

      The problem is the civil asset forfeiture process, which confiscates property, or prosecutes property and then confiscates it, all without any proof of wrongdoing. It becomes YOUR job to prove that you didn't commit a crime (rather than the government's job to prove that you DID commit one), and meanwhile the storage costs on your property are mounting up, the damage to your business and propery is being done, the property is being sold to third parties (yes, this does happen, and without ANY due process).

      So.. if you're merely ACCUSED of hiring an undocumented worker, your business may be taken over by the enforcement corps until you can prove your innocence, and that means you are OUT of business (probably for good since most businesses cannot survive even a short shutdown period anymore), *whether you were guilty or not*.

      http://www.fear.org/

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  81. Doesn't solve the enforcement problem... by Urban+Garlic · · Score: 1

    The problem with illegal immigration isn't a lack of legislation -- as you might perhaps guess from the name, illegal immigration is already illegal.

    There is already a card you're supposed to have in order to be employed in the US -- it's the Social Security card, which your employer needs to see in order to do payroll deductions.

    Illegal immigration is a problem because existing laws are not enforced. I think they should start there.

    --
    2*3*3*3*3*11*251
  82. This was foretold by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    RE: person familiar with the legislative planning said the biometric data would likely be either fingerprints or a scan of the veins in the top of the hand.

    REVELATION 13:16
    "And he causeth all ... to receive a mark in their right hand or foreheads, that no man might buy or sell save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.....
    it is the number of a man and his number is 666."

  83. National ID or Bust by CopaceticOpus · · Score: 1

    The national ID card proposals have met a lot of resistance, so someone had a clever idea - let's tie it to a popular cause. It's a recession, so everyone wants their jobs protected, and they'll go for anything.

    If this doesn't work, the next attempt will be an ID card to prove that you're not a sex offender. You know, to protect the children.

    I'm curious what would happen if this program actually worked as intended. What do all the illegal immigrants who suddenly have no means of income do? Surrender to immigration or turn to crime?

  84. I can sum this up quite eloquently. by moxley · · Score: 2, Insightful

    FUCK THAT!

    (seriously...in addition to the obvious reasons why this is such an awful idea, there is going to be a very large population of people who will see this as "the mark of the beast.")

    1. Re:I can sum this up quite eloquently. by hierofalcon · · Score: 1

      Then those people would be mistaken. The mark of the beast from Revelation (see other quotes nearby) is a measure controlling buying and selling and is placed physically in the hand or forehead. An ID card as described here would not fit that bill.

      Bible prophecy has this annoying habit of coming true exactly as said rather than something close to what was said when it is specific rather than general in its nature. This particular prophecy is very specific.

      Of note, there is a company that produces RFID chips which can be injected into your hand and have the chip's ID tag tied to your credit card so you just have to wave your hand over a scanner to make a purchase. It has had a production test in a couple of resorts in Europe. This technology wasn't even dreamed of when Revelation was written, but it is now here and in use today. Nothing new has to be invented to implement the mark of the beast. It only needs to be legally required for commerce.

      The concern about things like this ID card (and even the RFID chips mentioned) isn't that they are the mark of the beast themselves as the rapture hasn't happened and the period of prophecy from Revelation hasn't begun. The actual mark may be something completely different and beyond what we can even dream of today. Yet this is the first generation in history when the technology to administer such a mark has existed.

      With identity theft, fraud, and a move away from cash and checks in the society and banking system in general all these things create a slippery slope where it will be easy to implement a new technological mark or mandate the existing technology be used in the period of widespread disorder following the aftermath of the rapture. The more common such things are made, the easier the world will accept the laws without hesitation when implemented.

      We can rail against technology all we want as Christians, but the Bible says something like it will be implemented so it is largely pointless. The point is to accept Christ as Savior and leave beforehand so we don't have to worry about it (and all the rest of the prophecy, for that matter).

  85. Illegal workers keep inflation in check by ub3r+n3u7r4l1st · · Score: 2, Interesting

    because employers do not need to comply with costly labor laws.

    1. Re:Illegal workers keep inflation in check by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      So you lot openly admit that the whole point of allowing illegal immigrants is to screw workers?

  86. Re:it's. not. a. big. deal. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
    I don't actually have a problem with ID cards. But I'll play.

    maybe its to avoid paying taxes? you SHOULD pay taxes, to support the very country that values the liberty and freedom you hold so dear

    "No taxation without representation!"
    - The paranoid ravings of some traitor to the British Crown, just before a bunch of tea got dumped into Boston Harbor.

    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it

    Interesting choice of .sig you've got there, Citizen. Your cognitive dissonance is showing.

  87. I have one of these.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have a national ID... it is called a passport and I show it to my employer when starting a new job.

  88. We need a guest worker program. by newdsfornerds · · Score: 1

    Most European countries have such programs and by most accounts they work fine. There is nothing wrong with wanting to control the flow of people (and goods) across your borders. It is necessary. We don't need and shouldn't allow an unlimited/unknown number of people to enter our country. Some will be criminals. Most will be economic refugees. Our economy needs some unskilled laborers but we ought to be able to devise a way to give our own citizens the incentive to take work they deem is beneath them while giving businesses incentives to hire citizens. The penalties for hiring illegal migrants are already in place. They need to be enforced. Personally I'd be glad to see the prices for a weekly lawn mowing go up. I see lawns in my neighborhood being mowed after weeks of drought when there has been zero growth. Cheap labor leads to waste! Yes it does!

    --
    Damping absorbs vibrations. Dampening is caused by moisture.
    1. Re:We need a guest worker program. by newdsfornerds · · Score: 1

      I neglected to say that in my "area" the landscaping crews are all short, dark-skinned people from Central America. As As far as I know, they work their asses off and stay out of trouble.

      --
      Damping absorbs vibrations. Dampening is caused by moisture.
  89. Re:i value my privacy and my freedom by plague3106 · · Score: 1

    a drivers license, or a national id, are simply a necessary component of living in ANY society

    Odd, because shortly after the revolutionary war, we had neither of those, and society seemed just fine.

  90. Catch 22 results by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Worker: I would like a job
    employer: you need an ID card
    Worker to state: I need an ID card to work
    State: ID card cost $100
    Worker: I don't have any money which is why I need to work
    State worker: sorry I'm just doing my job
    Worker: turns to illegal employer that pays cash under the table
    Worker goes to get ID, gets flagged because of his last visit.
    Worker gets investigated and sent to jail for tax evasion
    employer gets arrested for tax evasion
    one less employee, one less employer, no change in employment.
    jails fill up, taxes get higher, economy falls apart
    revolution and the a-hole that created this law gets tared and feathered by the worker and employer.. I hope...

  91. Back in the USSA! by conspirator57 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Back in the USSA!

    --
    "If still these truths be held to be
    Self evident."
    -Edna St. Vincent Millay
    1. Re:Back in the USSA! by extremescholar · · Score: 1

      It's the United States Socialist Republic, thank you.

      --
      Using the Freedom of Speech while I still have it.
  92. You are a little overly paranoid by einhverfr · · Score: 2, Insightful

    However, consider that revoking a card would be necessary but you can't necessarily revoke the information on the card, or if you do, you cause someone a great deal of grief. There are reasons why biometric data is considered to be the weakest form of strong security.

    There is a great deal of potential for abuse here, just with the no-fly lists, etc, but this is worse because I can still drive my car across the country (I might not be able to if I didn't have income though). There is no life in prison for every crime, and our courts won't let that happen as long as they are open for business. However, I am concerned that someone might pull strings to get cards revoked in order to mess with political opponents (I seriously doubt Sen. Kennedy's inclusion on the No-Fly list was entirely accidental).

    --

    LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
  93. Re:it's. not. a. big. deal. by plague3106 · · Score: 1

    You're asking the wrong question. The question is why should government be able to throw up obsticles in my way to work? As a free person, I should be able to live my life WITHOUT government interfernce, unless I infringed upon the rights of another. Government (and you) don't have any right to come inbetween with my dealings with another free person.

    What is wrong with YOU, that you can't handle being a free man and must have someone to rule you?

  94. Re:in the history of other nations by Clandestine_Blaze · · Score: 1

    there are countries in western europe that have greater protections for certain freedoms and liberties than in the united states. AND THEY HAVE A NATIONAL ID CARD

    I would personally feel much more comfortable if laws were put into place to protect our privacy first, before the Government makes a national ID card mandatory. This means no storing of personal identification in databases for indefinite periods of time unless there is a specific reason (and you are notified about it), and a system to strictly define what the Government is allowed to do and not do with these ID cards. Those of us with security clearances have already given biometrics, but those are special-needs purposes and there are already rules that govern what happens to that information. There are benefits to having a national ID card, though I would prefer that we didn't have one at all.

    I do agree with your statement though. Another poster from Norway pointed out that they have a national ID, but they are well protected. I just don't see our government giving us that much protection right away. It will take a few scandals where government employees are found tampering with data before we see any push for protection.

    where exactly does this fucking paranoid schizophrenic fantasy of national id card=gestapo raping your rights come from?

    what the HELL is wrong with you paranoid retards?

    Being anonymous in this country used to be something that you could control. If you wanted a loan, certain benefits, or to do certain things, you had to give some information up. That was fine. But making it mandatory to give biometric data is just opening pandora's box. Yes, Europe does already do this, but we're not Europe. Remember, this is the same country that said warrantless wiretapping of Americans was fine. This is the same country that freaked out after 9/11 and made flying on an airplane a security nightmare. The Patriot Act? What about the secret no-fly lists, where many innocent Americans who had similar names to suspected terrorists got stuck on the list with no clear way of getting out?

    At the face of it, it is somewhat silly to be so paranoid about something like this, but my take is, why give the Government any ability or chance to abuse a system that we really do not need? We already have existing immigration laws that are hardly enforced. We should start with those. We just don't need another ID card or layer of bureaucracy. And as other people pointed out, many illegal immigrants are getting work and paid under the table. No amount of IDs or security cards will stop that situation.

    I don't think we need to be paranoid, I just think we need to let the government know that this will make life for those of us who are law abiding citizens a little more difficult, and those that are operating under the table will see no change. It'll be business as usual for them. In the end, if we must have a national ID card, then they should put it in a separate bill, and along with it, create a framework to protect it from abuse.

  95. Privacy != Secrecy by denzacar · · Score: 0

    What you are thinking of is secrecy, not privacy.

    You want your identity to be secret - you NEVER had that.
    ID or no ID, every police officer in the world can stop you and request that you identify yourself. It is a routine and essential part of what police does.
    Having an ID just means that once he checks it he has no further reason to detain you unless you are breaking the law.

    Privacy on the other hand means that you don't have identify yourself to everyone else unless you want to.
    It also means that you can call on countries laws for anything beyond simple ID check by a police officer. Things like 4th and 5th Amendment in the USA.

    As for freedom...
    It is not a IS or IS NOT thing. It is a concept. An idea.
    You can be free while in chains and you can be a prisoner to an idea.

    A piece of plastic with your name and description on it makes you no lees free or private than before.
    And you were never secret.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  96. Revelation 13:16 by operagost · · Score: 1
    How about the forehead?

    He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or on his forehead, so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name.

    --

    Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  97. Passport? by BradMajors · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What is wrong with using a Passport? Passports will contain the same biometric information as these ID cards.

  98. This is being planned internationally by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The executive (the civil servants and police chiefs, the secret service etc.) are in discussions with the corporations all the time about new and innovative technologies to make their job easier.

    If one nation is considering this option, then you can be sure that all of them are. This sort of discussion goes on behind the scenes internationally between those who need to carry out the work. Politicians only get involved if pushed to act, and then they drag their feet. In the UK Kellogg, Brown and Root were implementing vehicle registration recognition systems for the UK motorways way, back in the late eighties and early nineties, more than a decade before any politician bothered to discuss the subject in any significant detail (I suspect that most of them weren't even aware of the system).

    In the future every move you make, every transaction you are party to, and each thought you express with be on record. You will be bland, unprovocative, accept the status quo, you will be watched, and you will obey.

    Imprisonment in the community is here. ID cards, databases, CCTV and facial recognition have replaced the need for gulags. You're already under control right where you are, going about your daily business.

  99. Welcome to Paranoiaville by Zantac69 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As someone who just finished dealing with the US govt getting a greencard for my wife (no, she was not a mail order bride, you twits - we met while I was living abroad), I am in full support of enforcing our immigration laws. Fuck illegal immigrants. My wife and I jumped through all the fucking hoops proving she was who she was...we were a legit marriage...she was not a terrorist...that I could "support her" if she could not work...all that shit. I get so frustrated when I see these illegal jackasses - and dont whine this shit about "noone is 'illegal'" - 'cause they are breaking the fucking law and need to be punished.

    I would love to see E-Verify be mandatory. $5-k fines per worker per day for NOT using it. I would like to see E-verify have a running database that flags SSN repeat hits cross-referenced against the full names and date of birth along with the geographic locations from the hit. I would also like to see a "feature" where you could lock your SSN down - i.e. you go to a federal facility and request that your SSN be locked to your current job, so some jackass jacks your SSN to clear E-Verify they say, "No - says you have your SSN on file here working at XYZ INC...not Javier's Drywall. Is this you, or do you need to get into the deportation catapult?" Would have to be easy to adjust this setting, but I think it would rock.

    While biometrics are awesome, I know some people are scared of big sister. I think the cross-reference deal would take care of it for the most part.

    --
    1331461 is only semiprime *sigh* Alas - I am just short of 1337.
    1. Re:Welcome to Paranoiaville by sycodon · · Score: 1

      the deportation catapult

      Nice. I like it.

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    2. Re:Welcome to Paranoiaville by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My wife and I jumped through all the fucking hoops proving she was who she was...we were a legit marriage...she was not a terrorist...that I could "support her" if she could not work...all that shit.

      So, because you had to go through absolutely fucking ridiculous lengths to live a normal life with your wife you think everybody should have to go through the same sort of gauntlet? Its like you are a frat boy who got hazed and as result thinks that anyone else who didn't go through the torture he did is not worthy.

      Personally, I don't give a shit if someone is a 'citizen' or not - as long they pay their taxes there shouldn't be any other requirements. It's bad enough that so many employers accuse you of being a drug abuser just because you want to work for them, having to please one more massive beauracracy just for the privilege of earning a living is beyond the pale.

      And yes, I married a girl from another country too.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    3. Re:Welcome to Paranoiaville by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck illegal immigrants.

      You mean like your ancestors?

    4. Re:Welcome to Paranoiaville by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My wife and I went through the process as well, which is why I feel quite differently than you.

      It took a ton of work figuring out everything that needed to be done. It was also quite expensive (well over $3000 just in fees for various things by the end). If I had been... less intelligent?... and needed to hire an immigration lawyer to get through it like many people have to do, it would have been much more expensive still.

      Our immigration process needs to be much easier and cheaper. We shouldn't make it virtually impossible for people who are poor, have difficulties with english, etc, to bring their loved ones here. And going further than that, why require marriage in order to immigrate? Open up a legal path (other than the visa lottery, which is honestly just a cruel racist joke) for people to come to America and try to start a better life. That's how America is and has always been, and trying to stop it now is just stupid.

    5. Re:Welcome to Paranoiaville by Zantac69 · · Score: 1

      So, because you had to go through absolutely fucking ridiculous lengths to live a normal life with your wife you think everybody should have to go through the same sort of gauntlet? Its like you are a frat boy who got hazed and as result thinks that anyone else who didn't go through the torture he did is not worthy.

      Frat and legal residence is hardly apples/apples - its more like apples/tubas. Choosing to join a frat so you know the secret handshake at the expense of hazing has little in common with immigration. The immigration system is not perfect - it is a pain in the ass and should be fixed - but until then - its the law. Its not a question of torture/inconvenience - its a question of following the rules and applying punishments when dictated by law.

      Personally, I don't give a shit if someone is a 'citizen' or not - as long they pay their taxes there shouldn't be any other requirements. It's bad enough that so many employers accuse you of being a drug abuser just because you want to work for them, having to please one more massive beauracracy just for the privilege of earning a living is beyond the pale.

      I think by 'citizen' you mean 'legal resident and legally eligible for employment' - and if so - I agree. They should pay their taxes...and I am cool with that. Now...if someone is NOT here legally and/or not legally eligible for employment...that is a different story.

      I dont see Company XYZ as being required to hire me for any reason other than they want me to work for them. If you dont like that Company XYZ requires drug screens or background checks - then take your application elsewhere. As long as they are doing so to ensure the integrity/safety of their work place, I have no problem with that.

      --
      1331461 is only semiprime *sigh* Alas - I am just short of 1337.
    6. Re:Welcome to Paranoiaville by TheSync · · Score: 1

      Fuck illegal immigrants. My wife and I jumped through all the fucking hoops proving she was who she was

      I'd be careful. The only difference between your wife and an illegal immigrant is a law. Law can change at any time. In Israel, citizens who marry Arabs from the occupied territories can't bring them into the country like you can. All it took is one change in a law. I'm sure some political group in the US feels your wife should not have come into the country.

      Personally, I think it is stupid that you and your wife had to jump through any hoops. How did that help the economy? How did that help humanity?

    7. Re:Welcome to Paranoiaville by Zantac69 · · Score: 1

      Our immigration process needs to be much easier and cheaper. We shouldn't make it virtually impossible for people who are poor, have difficulties with english, etc, to bring their loved ones here. And going further than that, why require marriage in order to immigrate? Open up a legal path for people to come to America and try to start a better life. That's how America is and has always been, and trying to stop it now is just stupid.

      I agree - it should be cheaper and easier - but I dont know if I agree with the need for people to bring all of their loved ones here. At the risk of sounding elitist, why should someone who is currently below the poverty line import 5 relatives from their home country to the US? They already cant support their own household - so they are just going to put more mouths around the same table? More to the point, why should my tax dollars be used for public assistance for these people? Why am I paying for them? I work to pay my own bills. I pay taxes to recieve goods and services from the govt. I am aware that the govt does provide some safety net for those who need it...and I am fine with that as long as it is just that - a net...and not a lounge chair. I am fine with people coming to the US to start a better life...but "starting a better life" should not be "sucking on the govt tit".

      And dont think I am xenophobic - I have the same issue with these welfare families with lots of kids and everyone is on the govt dime. I support manditory birth control for those who request to go on govt assitance. The govt should make it economically unattractive for you to be a baby factory when you cant even support yourself.

      --
      1331461 is only semiprime *sigh* Alas - I am just short of 1337.
    8. Re:Welcome to Paranoiaville by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Your response is one great big woooooosh!

      Frat and legal residence is hardly apples/apples

      Wooooosh #1: The point is not whether a frat is legal residence or not (what a totally random disassociation to pick) it is the fact that you had to suffer and now you want everyone else to suffer too - including native born citizens who have to put up with this verification system. And you seem to be the type to think that suffering is justified because "that's the law" rather than consider that the law is wrong.

      I think by 'citizen' you mean 'legal resident and legally eligible for employment'

      Wooooosh #2: Yeah, that's exactly what I meant, where "legal" is defined as paying their taxes, full stop. You clearly think that all the additional laws are undeserving of criticism.

      If you don't like that Company XYZ requires drug screens or background checks - then take your application elsewhere.

      Wooooosh #3: Again with "the rules are OK because they are the rules" and undeserving of criticism. I threw that drug-test bit out there as bait to see if you were of a fascist bent, you certainly seem to be. You might as well argue that requiring that all applicants pass an STD test. After all, its important to the safety and integrity of the workplace that no one need fear catching cooties from their fellow employees.

      Here's something you will be unable to rationally justify - companies like blockbuster requires their employees pass a drug test. In what way does smoking a joint at home on the weekends risk the integrity/safety of their workplace?

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    9. Re:Welcome to Paranoiaville by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree completely. I just went through the same for my wife and believe in if you want to work and live here then you have to do it right or go home. This country may have been founded on immigration but the times have changed and people need to grow up. You only have an illusion of privacy and this just makes it that much harder for people to take the benefits I pay into with each paycheck. I believe in a DB that has the pictures and fingerprints that must be validated. So what if it becomes a national ID. I have a drivers license, SS card, passport they have all my data already, and for that fact "yours" too, so why do I care??? I don't!!! I know the privacy that everyone is yelling about isn't really there already. Any person in the IT security field should know this already. Time to get a grip on reality people!

    10. Re:Welcome to Paranoiaville by Money+for+Nothin' · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I never in my life thought I would say anything like the following, but.... You are exactly the sort of immigrant who makes the case for never allowing immigrants to vote (immigrants who become citizens, and hence, eligible to vote in federal elections, not just qualifying local and state elections). People like you come here and destroy the native culture.

      Personally, I favor very low barriers to immigration -- verifications that the immigrant is not a violent criminal, but beyond that... Come on in. You shouldn't have to have jumped through hoops.

      You are aware that ID cards have, historically, been used to murder people, right? In Iraq, until Saddam Hussein was killed by the U.S., ID cards were used to track those who dissented with him and torture them - including at Abu Gharaib. In former East Germany, the Stasi secret police used them to do essentially the same thing.

      Conceptually, ID cards serve no purpose except to give individuals a way to lose: a way to lose their privilege to drive, or to earn a living, should they misplace the card; a way to lose their civil freedoms when they cannot prove to Officer Not-So-Friendly that they are who they say they are; a way, even, to lose their physical life when said officer decides they are not a "true American", and hence, are not privileged to the same rights as citizens.

      The U.S. was not founded by people who trusted their government, or anybody else's. People like you who come here and trust ours -- which is no more trustworthy than any other in history -- at the very least ought never to be allowed to vote in any significant election here.

      There are plenty of other nations you can live in where the level of trust in government is more to your liking; some of them are even nice places to live (arguably nicer than much of the U.S.).

    11. Re:Welcome to Paranoiaville by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now...if someone is NOT here legally and/or not legally eligible for employment...that is a different story.

      Full stop? Just as a matter of principle? Laws change. And they often change unfairly. Why is that Mexican ineligible to immigrate and that Cuban allowed? It's simple racism. The law is clearly unjust. Breaking an unjust law is morally neutral.

      I hope you realize you have probably committed about a dozen felonies and misdemeanors in the last year.

    12. Re:Welcome to Paranoiaville by seekertom · · Score: 1

      DUDE! most of your posts here are ok with me, but i can't let it go that you 'don't care' if someone's a citizen or not... America is a land of laws, maybe not all good ones, and maybe we need a few different ones, but the law is what makes us different from, even 'better' than, some. for you to say, basically, that you uphold the notion of folks coming here from another country and ignoring our laws is beneath a lot of what you have previously shown yourself to be... an American! as long as they pay their taxes? is it all about money to you? if so, then maybe you are part of the problem we see exemplified by our beloved 'corporate greed'. thanks fer lis'nin' seekertom ps i am also married to a girl from another country... guess what? she worked her arse off for a long time, taking nite courses etc, besides working a full-time job to get what??? her CITIZENSHIP!!!!

    13. Re:Welcome to Paranoiaville by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      I'm saying the law is fucked up and ought to be revoked. In the meantime, I don't have a problem with people breaking fucked up laws. That's the way laws get changed in the USA - people break them and go to court and they are overturned.

      If you have a problem with defining citizenship as paying your taxes - then what do you propose that is more honest? The only thing a citizen owes the state is to contribute his fair share to the maintenance of the state. Anything else is to presume that the state is more important than the people.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  100. ... and a database by GNUPublicLicense · · Score: 1

    If those infos are matched on the "workers" database, ok, if not... 400 millions people data is nothing for a custom made database with modern technologies (i.e. do *not* use an SQL engine).

  101. Congress First by pu'u_bear · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I would be much more, okay, slightly less paranoid about things like this with one change. Any legislation like this applies to the members of government FIRST. You want a single biometric ID for all workers, after you, Senator. Don't think we need warrants for wiretaps, fine, we will just install this nice little device on all your phones, and the transcripts can go straight to wikileaks. Have a problem with "government run health care"? Fine, we will just take away your health plan (it's government run after all). Good luck finding insurance now, Mr. Old White guy with a bad heart.

    --
    --You're BOTH right. It's a floor wax AND a desert topping!
  102. Why does the US Government's solutions by Kevin108 · · Score: 1

    for dealing with criminals always result in penalizing law-abiding people?

    --

    It's a perfect time for being wasted.
    A perfect time to watch the stars.
    - Burden Brothers, "Beautiful Night"
  103. Robotics is more of a problem than illegals... by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 2, Interesting

    See for example Marshall Brain's writings:
        http://marshallbrain.com/robotic-nation.htm
        http://www.marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm

    A list of current robotics videos I put together, with robots doing everything from milk cows, prune grape vines, throw and catch cell phones, put laundry in washing machines, invent and test new theories in yeast genetics, and do autopsies (the last one isn't a video, thankfully):
        http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/2009-November/005926.html

    So, ID cards and worries about illegal immigrants are all a distraction from rethinking the economy along the lines of having some mix of a basic income, local subsistence production from 3D printing and organic gardening, a gift economy like GNU/Linux, better resource-based planning, making work into play, a spread of local currencies and LETS systems, and lots of other possibilities I helped organize here for moving beyond a jobless recovery:
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jobless_recovery

    If you want to worry, worry about how to build an economy where we get past the irony of using abundant military robots to enforce a scarcity-based economic system designed around getting humans to work like robots. :-)

    --
    A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
    1. Re:Robotics is more of a problem than illegals... by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Far from it.

      Illegals come into America (and I assume the same is true in EU and UK), and take a job. Ok. No problem. Right?
      Wrong. For starters, the companies that hire them will normally not pay taxes. That removes revenue from the system. But that is not the issue.
      Of course, illegals flowing into the west, provides a safety valve for nations that are overpopulated, right? Nope. They simply delay the inevitable. Those nations with loads of illegals flowing to America or to EU have MAJOR issues with resources contention. And will be in civil war down the road unless they change (birth control is a great start).
      And the old argument that Illegals really do not use resources is also not true. Many more resources are used and not paid for.
      The real issue is when illegals come in, the taxes are not paid, AND the illegal will typically get less pay. That starts a false downward trend on the costs of things. The issue then, is that NORMALLY, automation will take over. In this case, it does not.
      America had two great economic times. The first was in late 1700 before slavery caught on. The second was after slavery was outlawed. We saw SO many new ideas and automation show up. Why? Because it was cheaper to come up with new ideas, then to buy slaves.

      The reason is that it is cheaper to have lower costs labor than to pay for automation. Automation requires cheaper energy to be cost effective. Had America not been using Illegal's, then we would have INSISTED on cheap energy. The problem is that Coal is NOT cheap energy. It is cheap relative to others such as Oil and Nukes, but still not cheap.

      Illegals have costs the west heavily. We need to disallow illegals, and re-focus on cheap energy and automation. There is a coming shortage of food and resources (and believe me, it is not here). China is starting to prevent exports of Rare Earth. In addition, we can see other nations loving our dollar, but hating the west and democracy or even socialism (Venezuela comes to mind).

      In the end, the other issue that bothers me a great deal, is that so many ppl treat illegals AS slaves and 2'nd class ppl. They are neither. Yet, we allow it. Disgusting.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    2. Re:Robotics is more of a problem than illegals... by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Then, if there is possible resource contention, rather than pass laws about IDs, it would seem that the most essential thing to do is to help everyone to use their imagination as "The Ultimate Resource"
      http://www.juliansimon.com/writings/Ultimate_Resource/
      to address any potential scarcity problems and create material abundance for all. People have already been doing that for hundreds of years, for example, Benjamin Franklin who made the pot bellied stove and bifocals and refused to patent any of that.

      By the way, fossil fuels are not cheap overall, they are just profitable to a few.
      http://www.energyandcapital.com/articles/oil-gas-crude/461
      "According to a 2000 study for the Department of Energy, there is a significant cost attached to the mere fact of our dependence. Supply disruptions, price hikes, and loss of wealth suffered through the oil market upheavals have cost the U.S. economy around $7 trillion (1998 dollars) over the 30 years from 1970 to 2000. ...
      Milton Copulus, the head of the National Defense Council Foundation, has a different view. And as the former principal energy analyst for the Heritage Foundation, a 12-year member of the National Petroleum Council, a Reagan White House alum, and an advisor to half a dozen U.S. Energy Secretaries, various Secretaries of Defense, and two directors of the CIA, he knows his stuff. After taking into account the direct and indirect costs of oil, the economic costs of oil supply disruption, and military expenditures, he estimates the true cost of oil at a stunning $480 a barrel."

      Coal has huge costs in environmental damage and health costs (from mercury pollution and other things). It actually takes more electricity to make gasoline from crude oil that in would take to make an electrical vehicle go the same distance a regular car goes on one gallon.
      http://www.evnut.com/gasoline_oil.htm

      It's been known since the 1980s that renewables are cheaper than fossil fuels (or nuclear) when you account for external costs and risks:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brittle_Power
      "Brittle Power: Energy Strategy for National Security is a 1982 book by Amory B. Lovins and L. Hunter Lovins, prepared originally as a Pentagon study, and re-released in 2001 following the September 11 attacks. The book argues that U.S. domestic energy infrastructure is very vulnerable to disruption, by accident or malice, often even more so than imported oil. According to the authors, a resilient energy system is feasible, costs less, works better, is favoured in the market, but is rejected by U.S. policy.[1] In the preface to the 2001 edition, Lovins explains that these themes are still very current. [2]"

      Anyway, please name ten jobs you do not think could *not* be fairly easily automated over the next twenty years as robotics and AI continue to advance (at least to the point where one human can do the work of ten now)?

      My take on that:
      "60 jobs that will rock the future... (not)"
      http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/2009-August/004216.html

      So, as I see it, the urgent need is to rethink the basis of our economy before then.

      There is room for quadrillions of people in the solar system if we build space habitats, so IMHO talk of birth control based on resource constraints is premature. :-)
      "The Millennial Project: Colonizing the Galaxy in Eight Easy Steps"
      http://www.amazon.com/Millennial-Project-Colonizi

      --
      A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
    3. Re:Robotics is more of a problem than illegals... by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      We are singing many of the same tunes, but the illegals will actually prevent the changes needed. Look, I could tell you that I have an interesting idea on how to lower the costs of doing farming. Corn; wheat, etc are all too expensive. The problem is that to automate this will cost money to put in. interestingly, it will after 10 years save enough energy that it paid for itself. It allows full automation as well as uses electricity. Yet, there is no sense bringing it out. Why? Because the idea can not compete against illegals. Instead, I have to wait for NASA to really be shooting for the moon. Then this will be of interest to them. The idea can be also be used for strip mining, which we will need for various minerals on the moon as well as mars. The amazing part is, that we still can not compete internationally, because the illegals here, are making more money then in say Brazil (which is why there are here in the first place). Of course, brazil, as well as most of Latin America, cracks down on illegals.

      That is why I say that illegals destroy our economy.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    4. Re:Robotics is more of a problem than illegals... by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 1

      I agree illegal immigration has reduced the incentives in the US to automate agriculture for decades. And I say that as someone who was long interested in agricultural robotics since the 1980s, but there was little money for such research. Ultimately, because organic agriculture has been knowledge and labor intensive, robotics will help farmers produce large quantities of cheap organic food without as much pesticides, conventional fertilizers, or widespread irrigation, by precision irrigation, robots that can pick insects of plants, and other things. (Still, many people do like to be around growing plants... So I'm not saying we have to automate all of this, or that we should, just that we could...)

      Still, the alternative to illegals is sometimes cheap imports from places with relatively cheap labor (like from China).

      We would be importing, say, cheap sugar from South America, and sugar is healthier than corn syrup (even as raw sugar can be unhealthy too) except for import duties on imported sugar, created mostly for the US farm lobbies to appease corn growers.
          http://www.fas.usda.gov/itp/imports/ussugar.asp
      So, instead the typical US consumer is paying more to have their pancreas destroyed by HFCS and become diabetic.

      We have not had much illegal immigration for factory work in the USA, but we still have lost a lot of jobs both to imports but even more to increased productivity in the USA. See the graphs here:
          http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/02/us-manufacturing-is-not-dead.html
      "US Manufacturing is alive and well. The real issue is manufacturing employment, which is dropping like a stone. And the reason for the drop is an increase in productivity."

      Ultimately, even preventing illegal immigration will not fix these overall trends and the effects on US jobs, even as above, I agree that having people around willing to do dangerous jobs for little pay distorts the labor market and affects what things we choose to automate, and it also removes the likeliehood there will be anyone around to blow the whistle on things like agricultural pollution. (So, we have polluted watertables instead...)

      Eventually though, robotics are going to be cheaper than illegal immigrants. It's only a matter of time with all the continuing advances (including ones driven by the military for various reasons). Of course, by then, most US jobs will be going the same way, as indicated by factor work. The fact is, only about 1% of US employment is in agriculture, down from 50% a century ago. Fixing the illegal problem in agriculture won't make much of a difference in that sense because we are talking such a small percent of the workforce, even as those unskilled agricultural jobs illegal immigrants take are otherwise great for people who want a job and like the outdoors (if they paid well).

      US manufacturing employment has dropped from about 30% fifty years ago to about 12% now (and continues to drop). I'm not sure how many illegal immigrants work in US manufacturing? Maybe you know? Again though, even if we tried to employ more people in US manufacturing, between automation and offshoring, the trend is towards less employment. (I predict, like agriculture, we will see 1% of the workforce still in manufacturing in a couple decades...)

      That leaves services. But many services can be offshored, and most services are optional. By the time we have 1% of people growing all our food, and 1% making all our stuff, then I think we need a different model for our economy than 98% of the population paying each other for hair cuts and investment advice you can get for free from friends or through the internet.

      --
      A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
    5. Re:Robotics is more of a problem than illegals... by conspirator57 · · Score: 1

      Terry Pratchet also covered this in "Making Money". I can't remember which. The deus ex were the ancient golems discovered in the protagonist's s.o.'s archaeological dig. The golems were able to work diligently and tirelessly 24/7, but had no needs of their own (robots, idealized). One would think that the golems could be used to make everyone's lives better. However people predicted that with so many more golems the golems would put everyone out of a job, thus impoverishing everyone. It's a counterintuitive catch-22. In the end, they buried the golems outside town and based the value of their currency (which the protagonist had destroyed a la our financial crisis earlier in the story) on the unused available productive capacity of the golems.

      --
      "If still these truths be held to be
      Self evident."
      -Edna St. Vincent Millay
    6. Re:Robotics is more of a problem than illegals... by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 1

      Yes, a fundamental issue in a high-tech world becomes not so much how to produce more, but how to distribute what is produced. Marshall Brain wrote a sci-fi story about that here, with both a dystopian and a utopian ending depending on whether things produced by robots are distributed unequally or equally (as everyone loses their "jobs").
          http://www.marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm

      Thanks for that reference to "Making Money".
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Making_Money

      --
      A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
  104. the terrist have nothing on US pols by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When a place gets crowded enough to require ID's, social collapse is not far away.

    --Robert A. Heinlein

  105. It is the efficiency which is eroding liberties by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While there are all those other bits of paper it is more difficult to keep tabs on you. Once there is a single card for all purposes, it becomes essential to have one, and simple to track you down.

    No, it is not the same as having all the other "papers".

  106. missing info by conspirator57 · · Score: 1

    the email address is asshole@uranus.com

    --
    "If still these truths be held to be
    Self evident."
    -Edna St. Vincent Millay
  107. Halt! Papers please! by kimvette · · Score: 1

    What exactly will this round of "Halt! Papers please!" solve?

    Prospective employers are already required to provide a (Social Security or TIN card) AND (birth certificate OR proof of voter registration). Illegal aliens (the correct legal term; illegal aliens are not immigrants they are criminal trespassers) already cannot provide that information and yet they are here leaching off of society. I know quite a few people who have immigrated or are immigrating legally and it's a royal pain in the butt for them, is usually a long process, prone to delays and huge legal expenses, while the people who are here illegally are living off of our backs (in many cases receiving welfare, "free"[sic] health care, etc.) and are pushing for amnesty. WTF? Our system is seriously broken and much like "pirated"[sic] Windows, entering illegally(read: invading) is often easier than immigrating (read: the legal way).

    If I had my way, all illegal aliens who have been leaching off of our system would all be plunked down in the middle of the pacific in tiny rowboats and left to fend for themselves, especially the ones who come here and fly foreign flags and insist that forms be handed to them in languages other than American English.

    --
    The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  108. Or by koan · · Score: 1

    They (being the gov) could just enforce current laws, and remove things like special order 40 in order to enforce immigration law.
    http://www.judicialwatch.org/lapd-special-order-40

    Currently the only thing any of you should be concerned about is the second amendment laws and how they are interpreted by state.

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
  109. insanity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is insane. I certainly hope this never happens.

  110. from demolition man (Snipes, Stallone) by conspirator57 · · Score: 1

    While you were sleeping
    a code was installed on everyone.

    It was a brilliant idea by Dr. Cocteau.
    An organic microchip... ...is sewn into the skin.

    Sensors all over the city
    can zero in on anyone at any time.

    I can't even conceive of what
    police officers did before it was developed.

    We worked. This fascist crap
    makes me want to puke.

    What do you think you're scratching?

    You really think we'd let you go
    without control?

    Your code was implanted
    when you were thawed.

    Why not just shove a leash up my ass?

    --
    "If still these truths be held to be
    Self evident."
    -Edna St. Vincent Millay
  111. Re:Social Security Number? by swinferno · · Score: 1

    Maybe I'm missing something as I'm from Europe, but can't you use Social Security Numbers for this purpose? Here, every employer requires a SSN to officially hire you and pay you. Why would you need a card?

    --
    "In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." - George Orwell
  112. DRM analogy by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    Illegal immigrants will have beautifully forged cardsto use just long enough to gain entry or employ, while law-abidiing US citizens asked for their cards by the autorities (read: anyone not white) will be brutalized by a half-complete system built on the cheap and populated with error-riddled data input by ambivilent and clueless mouth-breathers with a guaranteed employment gig.

  113. GATTACA on-a-card by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And don't worry about welcoming your new corporate overlords. It's already been done (free corporate electoral spending, food-libel laws, corporations as individuals... etc.)

    So, stop wasting their time - and get back to work (or back into the alley) !

    The powers-that-be wish you a sensible day.

    Thank you. :>

  114. Typical response by rickb928 · · Score: 1

    Figures. To solve the illegal immigration problem, punish/suspect/subject the LEGAL CITIZENS of the U.S.

    What a load.

    - Our Congress doesn't dare solve this problem. No special interest group will let them.
    - Business doesn't want it solved. Cheap and compliant labor is good for them.
    - Politicians don't want to offend new voters, legal or not.
    - Unions see illegals as potential new members.

    Meanwhile:

    - Citizens struggle to find even the lowest-paying jobs. It's hard to compete with less.
    - Work is going to illegals that never did before. Who cleaned toilets in Maine before illegals came?
    - Existing laws are ignored by federal authorities.
    - Some municipalities actually PROMOTE illegal immigration. A slap in the face of the citizens that pay taxes directly to these conspirators and law-breakers.
    - The southern border is as easy to walk across as Times Square. Only the terrible stupid or unlucky get caught.
    - All proposals to secure the southern border are diminished and neutered so as to become useless.
    - Employers pay minimal service to eVerify, etc, and largely are permitted to skate off of any violations.
    - We see just enough enforcement action to give ICE a plausible story that they are actually effective. Nothing could be further from the truth. They are impotent, and deliberately so.
    - We even prosecute those agents that are effective, and actively thwart local and state authorities that make an effort to deal with the problem. We put effective agents in JAIL.

    I'm not hopeful. This transcends party politics. Republicans and Democrats alike are complicit in this. No Administration since Reagan has made even a marginal effort. And Reagan failed. We cannot tolerate this in the long run, and really have only the four boxes to use.

    And you know what I'm talking about.

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    1. Re:Typical response by TheSync · · Score: 1

      Who cleaned toilets in Maine before illegals came?

      The same kind of people who now learn English as their first language, get 12 years of free education, have access to grants or loans for college, and should have gone to college to become a computer programmer or doctor or lawyer in 2010.

      If you are worried about competing with someone regarding cleaning toilets, it is you who should go to Mexico. Besides, a robot will take the job soon anyway.

    2. Re:Typical response by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      Wrong.

      Same sort of people, learning English as their first language (even in Lewiston), 12 years of public school (it's not free, BTW), had access to Pell grants and student loans, and could have gone on to establish careers as skilled individuals. But they didn't.

      So we live in a free country, where you are free to fail or succeed.

      But are we expected to tolerate the literal invasion of illegal immigrants? Is this excused because they fill a need that was already being met?

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    3. Re:Typical response by TheSync · · Score: 1

      So we live in a free country, where you are free to fail or succeed.

      Then I suppose they fail, and will be replaced by illegal immigrants. Or robots.

      But are we expected to tolerate the literal invasion of illegal immigrants?

      As illegal immigrants are not actually committing real crimes (such as: theft, murder, etc.), a lot of people don't truly care that they stepped over an imaginary line drawn by governments - governments which, in the case of the Americas, were actually invaders (as in: theft of land, murder, etc.).

    4. Re:Typical response by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      Actually, illegal immigrants are just like the rest of us.

      They commit real crimes (such as: theft, murder, etc.)

      They are just like us. Except they are in the U.S. illegally.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  115. Voting does not require an ID by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    In most states you can vote without showing a photo ID.
    In some states, you may be required to vote a provisional ballot, In other states you may have to affirm that you do not have a government Issued ID.

    For more details see:

    http://www.ncsl.org/LegislaturesElections/ElectionsCampaigns/StateRequirementsforVoterID/tabid/16602/Default.aspx

  116. Multiple application possibilities for this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes. You get busted for GTA when you are 19. You do your time and pay back your debt to society. But these cards contain your entire life's criminal record so at the age of 43 you are still getting declined jobs (and probably also denied housing, insurance, loans, etc) because anyone running your card can see that 24 years ago you were convicted of a felony.

    This is essentially lifetime punishment for a crime.

    You mean like sex offenders? Cry me an effing river.

    1. Re:Multiple application possibilities for this... by blackraven14250 · · Score: 1

      In general, if you don't give criminals an opportunity to change, they cannot and will not change. If you give them a steady job (and other stable conditions, like housing), they might grasp the concept of stability that a lot of people know and enjoy, and end up reforming.

    2. Re:Multiple application possibilities for this... by conspirator57 · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, but if you're too thick to see with the prompting that I gave that a uniformly formattted, electronic, authenticating ID trivializes the integration of transaction information from sources across the nation then I'm not inclined to take you seriously. This is /. try to have some technical reasoning skills.

      also, the derisive "questions" were one word each. i replied tersely out of reciprocated contempt. but you take it a step further by allowing one side of an argument to merely ask one word questions as proof of their position while requiring researched doctoral theses from the other side. this does not make for a level debate forum. in fact it's a common tactic to unfairly discredit one side.

      --
      "If still these truths be held to be
      Self evident."
      -Edna St. Vincent Millay
    3. Re:Multiple application possibilities for this... by conspirator57 · · Score: 1

      sorry, /. farted and put my response under your post rather than AC's

      --
      "If still these truths be held to be
      Self evident."
      -Edna St. Vincent Millay
  117. Ummmno by poptones · · Score: 1

    The ultimate goal might be that illegals aren't allowed to work here, but the ultimate RESULT of anything like this will simply be to create an even larger underground economy. Many native borns simply will refuse to get the cards and end up working at stupid shit like selling on ebay and doing local jobs for cash or barter. Illegals will still be here and working, only now they'll be truly indentured servants living in the homes of their employers (or homes paid for by them) and given a paltry stipend each week for "spending money."

    This is class warfare at its finest, and we need to vote out every knucklehead sonofabitch that would support such an elitist economy.

  118. The truth... by denzacar · · Score: 1

    You can't handle it.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  119. try waking up yourself by EdelFactor19 · · Score: 1

    how is this any different from now? you apply for a job and you give them your drivers license number and your SS#. They could go look it up through the same channels.

    I'm sick of people making the arguement that it lets them track everything in the world and that everyone would get access to everything on it.

    Think about it for more than a second. Your SS# is usually tied somewhere to your health insurance; do you think that allows anyone working at your health insurance company to check out your passport status or your SS benefits (bad example that answer is 0 always...) ?

    It's an ID that authenticates that YOU are YOU. It will do a hell of a lot of a better job than a SS# which you have no way of proving its your or not if it gets compromised stolen lost etc.

    What they choose to connect with it is a seperate issue; just be sure to raise hell if they try to connect confidential information together that they cant.

    This also doesn't mean that it would supplant your drivers license for everyday use; most likely it would start by replacing the horridly insecure usage of the Social Security number; especially since its highly likely that social security will fail any year now.

    I fail to see any point which lets you make a logical jump from merchant swiping your id to see your old enough to buy beer to the merchant also seeing that you've been arrested 6 times for disorderly conduct.

    Directly addressing your points:
    what do you buy now that requires your SS#? next to nothing? Why would that change? Seems to me this would replace your SSN not your Driver's License. You don't have to be a citizen to buy things here.
    Even if you did 'buy stuff' and have it checked; how does this information become the governments? They already check your ID when you fly anyways. You are making a huge jump that automagically a. it will always get logged to the government where and when your id is checked, and B. that without a warrant they will even be able to query such information. The only purchases you even mention are transportation based where your ID is already checked, whats the difference? make it such that all they can do is check that its valid and can't log that it was checked or where it was checked...

    Your bit on crimes makes no sense at all. What does that have to do with anything? It doesn't matter how many crimes are given to you because thats unrelated and independent from this ID. All this does is make the background checks done by your company and police officers potentially more accurate and collaborated. It doesn't change when they may occur. You take a new job, they run a background check. What's changed here?

    its rather simple, don't allow stuff to get stored that shouldn't be. don't allow people to access information they have no need for.

    What freedom is being reduced? Can you name one?

    There is nothing wrong with the card in itself, its the implementation and usage that you should be concerned and vigilante about. Until then, just keep staring at your SSN card.

    --
    "Jazz isn't dead, it just smells funny" ~Frank Zappa
    EdelFactor
    1. Re:try waking up yourself by conspirator57 · · Score: 1

      what you're describing is the "rolling downhill" thing that people who were against SSNs and federal involvement in the lives of everyone pointed out at the time and were laughed at and given various (worthless) assurances that the powers and data would never be abused. clearly this id law is just another increment in the "progress" towards federal (near) omniscience and exploitation of that knowledge in the name of political warfare (think Elliot Spitzer... sure he deserved to get caught, but we were told that the anti-terror surveillance powers that caught him would never be used except for terror cases.) I want instead to roll back and get rid of the SSN and all other repositories of federal knowledge of citizen transactions, lives, and whereabouts. the alternative is mass-scale, institutionalized McCarthyism. No thanks.

      As an aside, I don't know why you feeel it is incumbent on me to present the entire history and every detailed and nuanced argument against this crap. I kind of considered them to be old hat and manifestly self-evident. Does your demagoguery extend to people on the other side of the debate?

      --
      "If still these truths be held to be
      Self evident."
      -Edna St. Vincent Millay
  120. get ready! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just watch if this card becomes reality.... The card will be turned into the replacement for the social security card. Accepted everywhere.

  121. Re:Social Security Number? by fredjh · · Score: 1

    Maybe I'm missing something as I'm from Europe, but can't you use Social Security Numbers for this purpose? Here, every employer requires a SSN to officially hire you and pay you. Why would you need a card?

    Let the conspiracy theories begin! Oh... they already have.

    Yes, employers here are supposed to check your social security number. Unfortunately, you can randomly create a social security number in your head, and it doesn't matter whether it really exists or not (although, if it does, you've just completely screwed the person who it belongs to). Using a biometric card, you prove that the card belongs to you. Hopefully.

    Not that I agree with it... there are some problems that exist in the world (copyright infringement, for example) for which the cure is worse than the problem. This is one of those cases, IMO.

    --
    Stupid, sexy Flanders.
  122. Are fingerprints actually unique? by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

    Can anyone point to a scientific study which shows that an individuals fingerprints are unique to that individual? It is commonly accepted that each individual's fingerprints are unique to that individual. However, when I looked into it, I discovered that this was a claim made by some in the late 1800s, which gradually came to be accepted as true. As far as I can tell no one ever did any detailed research to actually determine if it was true.
    To make matters worse, when some studies have been done of how reliably experts can identify someone from fingerprints they have discovered that the vast majority of fingerprint experts (in a relatively small sample size) will fail to identify a set of fingerprint samples as belonging to the same person two times in a row.
    For that matter has anyone done a study of other proposed biometric identification to show that it is unique in ways that do not vary over an individual's lifetime?
    Understand, it is not that I believe that fingerprints are not unique (or other means of biometric identification), it is just that I think it would be wise to actually study the question rather than just assume it to be so, as all of the information I have been able to find seems to indicate is the current case.

    --
    The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
  123. We should actually.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Deport every illegal beaner, bring every one of the troops home to secure the border, and keep it secure this way. I hate congress and the president and their fucking excuses for everything.

  124. Nah, go back to sleep.... by TiggertheMad · · Score: 1

    but I am also oppose to illegals destroy our economy (and yes, they are costing America HUGE

    How is that exactly? I suppose they wear out the sidewalks by walking on them without paying taxes...

    What is the difference between an 'illegal' and a citizen? A few pieces of paper. Perhaps the problem isn't trying to enforce a quasi-racist policy (nobody complains about illegal immigrants from Canada.), perhaps you should try to make it simpler to become a citizen.

    I say take anyone who wants to be here who isn't a convicted serial killer.

    Before you get too holy about 'illegals', keep in mind that you, your parents, or your grandparents were probably immigrants at one time.

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
  125. The real solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The real solution is not to go after the workers. It's to go after those that employ illegal immigrants. Give the owner of a company a month of hard jail time for each illegal he hires, (and maybe a fine too), and you'll see this problem go away.

  126. How about Removing ridiculous laws first??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're bitching about all of the wrong things.... Educate yourself on your rights and get pissed at the proper sources.

    Do a search for "Constitution Class" on archive dot org

    Educate Yourself! Then pass it on!

  127. OK with the concept, but .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .. there should be no central biometrics database. If they can encode your bio data on the card, and then slam a PIN code over it to stop unauthorised access, or just store a serial number and a hash in a central DB (to check for forgeries) that would be far better. No risk of insider threat or "accidental" use (that's the political version of blatant abuse), no guilty before proven innocent crap - just an improvement on ID, provided the issue process is worth something.

    Oh, and where possible no RFID (or at least with shielding). I'd much rather have a 3D barcode behind IR transparent plastic - the readers are cheaper too - but I'm not sure if that can hold enough data.

    If you need an example of how NOT to do it, look at the UK..

  128. or, when you have a non-functional brain... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    when if you have an actual functioning brain, there's no threat this card poses to anyone, anyhow

    I would like to posit that when you have an actual non-functioning brain, it may appear to you that it is functioning properly and its inability to see the threats posed by a national ID system may appear to be normal. TO YOU.

  129. And When E-Verify Fails? by Stormy+Dragon · · Score: 1

    Every year, the Social Security administration accidentally declares several thousand people dead who are actually still alive. Once this occurs, it can take years to get the mistake corrected. Imagine if it was against the law for you to work in ANY job during this period. During test runs of E-verify, 6.3% of checks resulted in false positives (e.g. legal citizens where declared illegals). In a country of 300 million, that comes to nearly 20 million law abiding citizens who would be unjustly banned from any form of employment. And people think this is a GOOD idea?

  130. is this a FIPS201 card, like HSPD-12 uses? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not the card, per se, that's as big a problem as the process through which one must establish one's identity. They don't want Robert Illegal to whip on down to the federal ID card issuing facility and just sign the form saying, yep, I'm Bob, present his fake drivers license, etc.

    So they'll impose a requirement for more complete authentication. But, oh yes, while we're doing that, why don't we take the opportunity to do a quick background check against the database, just to make sure that if you've got a warrant out, we can get you right then. And, then, maybe we should identify potentially dangerous people who present a security threat, so we can flag them in the future.

    the need for good id isn't the problem, it's the process for authenticating the first issuance, and even more, the creeping requirements beyond simple authentication that are the problem. The "while we've got you here..."

  131. Re:it's. not. a. big. deal. by kimb · · Score: 1

    I'm not a US citizen and I don't live in the US. I live in a European country where national ID, issued by the ministry of interior, i.e. police, has "always" existed, and it's considered normal (as is the case with many other European or other states in the world). I always considered people in UK, US and other states without a national ID card to be privileged in this regard.

    Why on earth would the government need to have my fingerprints, photo or residence on a file in a central database? To fight crime? It seems to me that states without this kind of record are managing just fine with capturing criminals. There is simply no legitimate (from the freedom perspective) reason for these kind of records to exist.

    There are many situations (some not so far-fetched) where this can be abused by the state. In "democracies" you may not feel immediately any consequences, but good luck when your democratic government decides it will not cooperate with your "freedoms" anymore. Weimar Republic was also a democracy, look how well that worked out.

    If you value administrative convenience over denying the government one more opportunity for potential abuse, I think you should give China or Russia a try (out of many other possible choices). There, the government has easy access to all your administrative information, and will usually not bother you if you are a good citizen.

  132. Social Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you don't have to pay SS if you never join it.

    Citation? I really do not believe that is the case. You can't file taxes without an SSN or ITIN, and the IRS won't issue an ITIN unless you do not qualify for an SSN. You also cannot renounce your SSN once it is assigned. Even if you have an ITIN (which is primary for illegal workers), you aren't exempt from paying the taxes.

    "In short, the payroll tax is mandatory on every worker, regardless of whether he or she has a Social Security number." -- Cato Institute (full disclosure: the link lists a short list of exempted workers, mostly government or people making far less than an amount that could be used to survive)

    As far as I can tell, the only way to mount a Constitutional challenge to the SSN requirement would be to mount a multigenerational strategem: conceive a US citizen child, resist years of incredible pressure from all of our entrenched institutions (government, public school, social "programs", etc), never claim the child on your tax return, and then convince the child to sue the government when their first prospective employer will not let them work because the child refuses to obtain/supply an SSN. The endgame could also come when attempting to file income taxes, but filing taxes is normally concomitant to employment.

    I am morally opposed to Social Security from a libertarian standpoint, but they closed the religious opposition loophole by requiring that any religious order claiming SS exemption must have been formed prior to 1951. Perversely, they still claim that Social Security is "optional". It is optional in the sense that it is optional to receive benefits (one must apply).

    For me, retirement is still decades away, and I recognize that I may revise my perspective later; however, I am planning to protest Social Security by never applying for benefits. Money isn't everything, and my principles matter more to me.

    For example, I have refused to participate in any 401(k) or traditional IRA because of the RMD provisions. I am saving for retirement in a taxable account, merely because I vociferously disagree with the RMD actuarial death table provisions. It is a perfect example that government-provided monetary "considerations" almost always come with strings attached. The fact that I will have less saved for retirement means less than the princple of the matter.

    In summary, as an SSN-branded indvidual my options are negligible. My only recourse is to protest the system by refusing to participate in the "benefits" the government tries to give me (deductions, credits, incentives, OASDI payouts, etc). They can force me to give them money, but they can't force me to take what they offer. It is small consolation, but that is all I have. I will not be beholden to the government.

    Natrually, I fully expect that most people will not share my perspective and will think I am exceedingly foolish. Such is life.

    An aside: it took me nearly a year to find health insurance that did not require an SSN to be provided... it also costs much more than I would pay with a typical plan. This is just another example of how hard it is to function in the US outside of the "system".

    Also, I learned a LONG time ago working on some very HUGE databases...you can not depend on SS as a primary key

    Absolutely. This is why one should always use semantically void primary keys. Haha, it's the only way to fly.

  133. A Friend of Mine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A friend of mine is not in the system. Never been officially employed, never been arrested/convicted, never had a license or ID-- nothing. The hospital he was born in had a fire, which resulted in a loss of ALL records. He has his birth certificate, but there is little or no record of him in the system. Guess what? He sells drugs.

  134. If the UK can't, no way the US will by gregconquest · · Score: 1

    I personally think ID cards and pervasive CCTV monitoring would be a good thing IFF the data were fed directly into an independent, accredited agency which only released or confirmed data under strict guidelines. However: A national ID doesn't have a prayer of being implemented in America anytime soon. The UK can't even pull this off, and those "apathetes" let their government watch them everywhere.

  135. Ouch by fuzzywig · · Score: 1
    As a brit, can I just remind you about all the stuff that was said by americans about our governments stupid bloody plans to make us use ID cards.

    Same back to you :)

  136. Why not use tattoos instead? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You could put a number on everyone's arm. It's worked before - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identification_in_Nazi_camps

  137. silly USAians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We'll have something like this in Brazil in a few years, hopefully it will replace the miriad of national-wide ID documents we now have... you merrikans are paranoid about this, it's so silly... go take a picture of that flying saucer flying over your backyard...