Total Posts:20|Showing Posts:1-20
Jump to topic:

National ID?

RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2010 6:07:27 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I favor it and posted a debate challenge on the subject some time ago. No one was willing to go Con. http://www.debate.org...

"An effective national ID system would produce substantial cost savings in immigration enforcement, tracking down criminals and missing persons, and preventing crime. There is no violation of privacy rights because identification is only required for public acts, not private acts. There is no requirement to carry an ID card."

There is no requirement for an ID card because, I claim, it is practical to work only with biometric data, basically pictures and fingerprints at this point.

If anyone would like to debate the topic, I'm willing to repost the challenge.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/15/2010 2:09:01 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Not having one thanks.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Zetsubou
Posts: 4,933
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/15/2010 12:04:30 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/14/2010 6:07:27 PM, RoyLatham wrote:
I favor it and posted a debate challenge on the subject some time ago. No one was willing to go Con. http://www.debate.org...

"An effective national ID system would produce substantial cost savings in immigration enforcement, tracking down criminals and missing persons, and preventing crime. There is no violation of privacy rights because identification is only required for public acts, not private acts. There is no requirement to carry an ID card."

There is no requirement for an ID card because, I claim, it is practical to work only with biometric data, basically pictures and fingerprints at this point.

If anyone would like to debate the topic, I'm willing to repost the challenge.

Compulsory?
'sup DDO -- july 2013
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/15/2010 12:26:41 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Ron Paul fail argument 1: I guess there would probably be a GPS chip in this. (Follow on rant for constitution and rights)

Propaganda and opinion rolled into one.

Ron Paul fail argument 2: Dictatorships have ID cards.

Lol, France has this system, as does other countries.

Ron Paul fail argument 3: The idea that you would have to trot down to your local post office to do this is ridiculous.

So wait, a quick drive down to your local post office isn't worth stopping illegal immigrants?

Ron Paul fail argument 4: If e had a decent economy, we woudl be beggign for workers.

Lol, you guys were, until the economy crashed.

Ron Paul fail argument 5: The government would use ID cards with your fingerprint to spy on you.

?

I commend a Fox news reporter for taking a logical stance on this. With a fingerprint, illegal immigrant is cut down, and more than that, investigating crimes is 1000x easier with everyone's fingerprint.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/15/2010 12:28:32 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/15/2010 11:21:17 AM, Nags wrote:
Nineteen Eighty-Four.

Come back to me when Ron Pauls Manifesto is made an illegal document, Ron Paul is made a scapegoat for everything wrong in America, and legislation authorising TV's that monitor you be put in your home.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/15/2010 12:28:47 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/15/2010 12:28:32 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 3/15/2010 11:21:17 AM, Nags wrote:
Nineteen Eighty-Four.

Come back to me when Ron Pauls Manifesto is made an illegal document, Ron Paul is made a scapegoat for everything wrong in America, and legislation authorising TV's that monitor you be put in your home is passed.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/15/2010 12:39:17 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/15/2010 12:28:32 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 3/15/2010 11:21:17 AM, Nags wrote:
Nineteen Eighty-Four.

Come back to me when Ron Pauls Manifesto is made an illegal document, Ron Paul is made a scapegoat for everything wrong in America, and legislation authorising TV's that monitor you be put in your home.

Just wait til you end up with a smart meter in your house mandated by Obama.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/15/2010 12:41:05 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/15/2010 12:26:41 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Ron Paul fail argument 3: The idea that you would have to trot down to your local post office to do this is ridiculous.

So wait, a quick drive down to your local post office isn't worth stopping illegal immigrants?

The post office:
1. Is a failing government agency on the verge of going bankrupt.
2. Would put the employers and employees into the system. Violation of privacy.
3. Government regulations of business are always bad, but this is just a major inconvenience. There's no point.
4. Would increase incentive to not hire people.
5. Would increase incentive to pay people under the table.

Ron Paul fail argument 4: If e had a decent economy, we woudl be beggign for workers.

Lol, you guys were, until the economy crashed.

What's your point?

Ron Paul fail argument 5: The government would use ID cards with your fingerprint to spy on you.

?

The government knows where you work and where you live. And the National ID card would eventually be used for identification of all purposes. Violation of privacy and big brother.

I commend a Fox news reporter for taking a logical stance on this. With a fingerprint, illegal immigrant is cut down, and more than that, investigating crimes is 1000x easier with everyone's fingerprint.

Illegal immigration can be cut down in other ways. Investigating crimes is 100000x easier with gps chips and tv monitors everywhere.

At 3/15/2010 12:28:32 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 3/15/2010 11:21:17 AM, Nags wrote:
Nineteen Eighty-Four.

Come back to me when Ron Pauls Manifesto is made an illegal document, Ron Paul is made a scapegoat for everything wrong in America

The first two? wut

and legislation authorising TV's that monitor you be put in your home.

PATRIOT Act. Close enough.

Right to privacy. Big Brother.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/15/2010 12:41:05 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/15/2010 12:28:32 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 3/15/2010 11:21:17 AM, Nags wrote:
Nineteen Eighty-Four.

Come back to me when Ron Pauls Manifesto is made an illegal document,

By that time it'll prolly be far too late.

If you're able to get a copy it'll prolly be the official Party 'trap' copy.

Ron Paul is made a scapegoat for everything wrong in America, and legislation authorising TV's that monitor you be put in your home.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/15/2010 12:47:44 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/15/2010 12:41:05 PM, Nags wrote:
At 3/15/2010 12:26:41 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Ron Paul fail argument 3: The idea that you would have to trot down to your local post office to do this is ridiculous.

So wait, a quick drive down to your local post office isn't worth stopping illegal immigrants?

The post office:
1. Is a failing government agency on the verge of going bankrupt.

Then put it in a non-failing government agency's buildings?

2. Would put the employers and employees into the system. Violation of privacy.

What system?

3. Government regulations of business are always bad, but this is just a major inconvenience. There's no point.

I'm sure employers would like to avoid employing illegal immigrants and avoid having to employ someone else and pay a fine.

4. Would increase incentive to not hire people.

Lol, that's like saying havign to fill out a job application will be an incentive to not work.

5. Would increase incentive to pay people under the table.

Which would be a very bad idea.


Ron Paul fail argument 4: If we had a decent economy, we would be begging for workers.

Lol, you guys were, until the economy crashed.

What's your point?

That Ron Paul thinking RonPaulopia will mean an endless stream of work for everyone.


Ron Paul fail argument 5: The government would use ID cards with your fingerprint to spy on you.

?

The government knows where you work and where you live. And the National ID card would eventually be used for identification of all purposes. Violation of privacy and big brother.

The government knows where you live regardless. And how is expanding an ID card to be used for identification a violation of privacy? A lot of business's can benefit form this.


I commend a Fox news reporter for taking a logical stance on this. With a fingerprint, illegal immigrant is cut down, and more than that, investigating crimes is 1000x easier with everyone's fingerprint.

Illegal immigration can be cut down in other ways. Investigating crimes is 100000x easier with gps chips and tv monitors everywhere.

But allowing stepping over a very clear line in the sand.


At 3/15/2010 12:28:32 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 3/15/2010 11:21:17 AM, Nags wrote:
Nineteen Eighty-Four.

Come back to me when Ron Pauls Manifesto is made an illegal document, Ron Paul is made a scapegoat for everything wrong in America

The first two? wut

Either you haven't read 1984 or have amnesia.

Replace Ron Paul with Goldstein.


and legislation authorising TV's that monitor you be put in your home.

PATRIOT Act. Close enough.

Which we aren't debating.


Right to privacy. Big Brother.

?
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/15/2010 1:00:16 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/15/2010 12:47:44 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Then put it in a non-failing government agency's buildings?

Contradiction.

What system?

A government database.

I'm sure employers would like to avoid employing illegal immigrants and avoid having to employ someone else and pay a fine.

Or they could just not tell the government they're hiring -- and then the government won't get the income taxes or payroll taxes.

Lol, that's like saying havign to fill out a job application will be an incentive to not work.

Filling out a job application is an incentive not to work. Complicating the process just increases the incentive not to work or hire.

Which would be a very bad idea.

For the business, no. For the government, yes.

That Ron Paul thinking RonPaulopia will mean an endless stream of work for everyone.

When the economy was good, there were more illegal immigrants. When the economy is now bad, there is less illegal immigrants. It has nothing to do with Ron Paul.

The government knows where you live regardless.

They don't know where I work nor where I constantly am located.

And how is expanding an ID card to be used for identification a violation of privacy?

Because the government knows everything about you -- including where you are always located. If you need to use the ID to identify yourself, then the location of the ID being used will be sent to the government database, which will then tell the government where you are located.

A lot of business's can benefit form this.

Government subsidies of businesses do tend to help those specific businesses, yes.

Illegal immigration can be cut down in other ways. Investigating crimes is 100000x easier with gps chips and tv monitors everywhere.

But allowing stepping over a very clear line in the sand.

Nope. I used your logic. You can't draw invisible lines. And you don't see the slippery slope? It's not a fallacy either.

Either you haven't read 1984 or have amnesia.

Replace Ron Paul with Goldstein.

Ron Paul wouldn't be the only person targeted in a situation like that in 1984.

PATRIOT Act. Close enough.

Which we aren't debating.

It's still Big Brother.

Right to privacy. Big Brother.

?

It violates the right to privacy. And apparently you've never read 1984 if you don't know what Big Brother is.
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/15/2010 1:05:56 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
The error in the "slippery slope" argument is that everything is on a slippery slope. Require identification to get a loan, driver's license, medical license, voter registration, or passport and, zowie, we are on the road to 1984 for sure. It's the same slippery slope away from total anonymity towards having a GPS chip implanted in your butt.

A technological society has a great deal more social interaction that an agrarian or tribal society. It comes with the turf that we have to move away from anonymity towards identifiably. The Pros and Cons ought to be weighed based upon what they are, not on some slippery slope. The Internet by itself has brought more loss of privacy then anything the government has done. Should we abolish he internet based upon an abstract slippery-slope argument?
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/15/2010 1:13:45 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/15/2010 1:05:56 PM, RoyLatham wrote:
The error in the "slippery slope" argument is that everything is on a slippery slope. Require identification to get a loan, driver's license, medical license, voter registration, or passport and, zowie, we are on the road to 1984 for sure. It's the same slippery slope away from total anonymity towards having a GPS chip implanted in your butt.

A technological society has a great deal more social interaction that an agrarian or tribal society. It comes with the turf that we have to move away from anonymity towards identifiably. The Pros and Cons ought to be weighed based upon what they are, not on some slippery slope.

The Internet by itself has brought more loss of privacy then anything the government has done.

AND the government should be Extremely limited on what kind of information it can glean from the internet... Investigating Terrorism..OK, seizing personal information without a warrant, or probable cause.. Not ok.

Should we abolish he internet based upon an abstract slippery-slope argument?
no. we should put limits on the Govt.

And get internet providers who won't be evil with your info... and not let the government buy that info to throw into their database.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/15/2010 1:13:54 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/15/2010 1:05:56 PM, RoyLatham wrote:
The error in the "slippery slope" argument is that everything is on a slippery slope. Require identification to get a loan, driver's license, medical license, voter registration, or passport and, zowie, we are on the road to 1984 for sure. It's the same slippery slope away from total anonymity towards having a GPS chip implanted in your butt.

I don't think we're too far away from requiring registration for all the above. First we have the PATRIOT Act. Then there's the National ID. Then the politicians say everything would be much more organized, streamlined, and efficient if only there was an ID that identified everyone for everything. This gets passed. Then the politicians say crime would fall by X if only there was a GPS in everyone. This gets passed. It's not too far-fetched if you ask me.

A technological society has a great deal more social interaction that an agrarian or tribal society. It comes with the turf that we have to move away from anonymity towards identifiably.

We are more social, ergo we must forfeit our right to privacy? Non sequitur.

The Pros and Cons ought to be weighed based upon what they are, not on some slippery slope. The Internet by itself has brought more loss of privacy then anything the government has done. Should we abolish he internet based upon an abstract slippery-slope argument?

You're not required to use the internet, now are you? You'd be required to use a National ID card though. Besides, there's all kinds of proxies and programs to conceal your identity on the internet.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/15/2010 1:24:29 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/15/2010 1:13:54 PM, Nags wrote:
Then the politicians say crime would fall by X if only there was a GPS in everyone.

I don't think "IN" people would pass in a democracy :)

People wouldn't like THAT Idea much at all.

Though I could see GPS (and DEFINITELY RFD's) being put in the Nat. ID card.
(both of which could be used to track/monitor people constantly)

And I could eventually see that ID becoming used for lots of stuff, down to managing Driving priveleges.

And so... I could see a law being passed that you Must carry it at all times (as NY says you must have some form of State ID on you at all times)

And so the tracking BEGINS.

Though It's already beginning if you've heard about the license plate identifiers that certain police departments are outfitting their squad cars with... It's a camera on the top of the car that scans the area for license plates and keeps a record of all the ones that were taken and in what area... So... eventually certain cities and states (prolly good ol' NY) will install these thingys on every other street corner so they can have a record of where you go/where you are (just in case they find such a thing would be useful).
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
collegekitchen7
Posts: 974
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/15/2010 2:09:20 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
to much precedence for abuse. Also it keeps too effective of a record of where i've been and what i do.
: At 3/24/2010 1:38:15 PM, Mirza wrote:
: But it's human nature. You're born inside your mother, so what's wrong with having some sexual activity with her?

: At 3/18/2010 6:48:05 AM, kelly224 wrote:
: read some credible history books, unplug from the matrix.

: At 3/21/2010 4:13:56 PM, Scott_Mann wrote:
: Stocks would not go up 30% over something that hasn't even happened yet.

: At 3/21/2010 6:06:10 PM, banker wrote:
: It apears you have a wierd grasp of english..! its only second to
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/15/2010 2:17:24 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/15/2010 1:13:54 PM, Nags wrote:

I don't think we're too far away from requiring registration for all the above.

We *now* require identification for medical licenses and all the other stuff. So are you in favor of eliminating all identification requirements. If not, why not? Your answer will involve public interaction, I suspect.

We are more social, ergo we must forfeit our right to privacy? Non sequitur.

In a tribal or agrarian society people deal almost entirely with those they know, and if you are not part of the tribe, the natural reaction is xenophobia. The situation is different when you must deal with large numbers of people you don't know. It is the necessity of dealing with strangers that is different and marks the technological age. Overall, this is a good thing, but a need for transparency goes with it.

You're not required to use the Internet, now are you?

No, but people do so voluntarily thereby recognizing that what they gain makes up for the loss of anonymity. They accept the trade off. Besides, many things like news stories, posts by friends or enemies, phone directories and court records get on there whether you like it or not. You didn't volunteer to ose ananymity, it happens as a consequence ofthe technology.

You'd be required to use a National ID card though.

The government should be restricted so the ID is only required for public activities, the logic being the same as for passports, professional licenses, business licenses, and the like.
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/15/2010 2:31:18 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/15/2010 2:17:24 PM, RoyLatham wrote:
We *now* require identification for medical licenses and all the other stuff. So are you in favor of eliminating all identification requirements. If not, why not? Your answer will involve public interaction, I suspect.

The identification isn't put into a system which tracks where that specific person is every time that person uses his or her identification. It's a one and done deal. A National ID would be used in daily life for all kinds of purposes. The analogy doesn't work.

In a tribal or agrarian society people deal almost entirely with those they know, and if you are not part of the tribe, the natural reaction is xenophobia. The situation is different when you must deal with large numbers of people you don't know. It is the necessity of dealing with strangers that is different and marks the technological age. Overall, this is a good thing, but a need for transparency goes with it.

I don't really see the point you're trying to make here.

There are better ways of dealing with illegal immigration though, without sacrificing civil liberties.

No, but people do so voluntarily thereby recognizing that what they gain makes up for the loss of anonymity. They accept the trade off.

Like I said before, it's easy to become anonymous on the internet. Proxies and privacy programs allow one to become anyone or no one. The internet is basically anarchy.

Besides, many things like news stories, posts by friends or enemies, phone directories and court records get on there whether you like it or not. You didn't volunteer to ose ananymity, it happens as a consequence ofthe technology.

News stories and posts by friends or enemies fall under Freedom of Speech. No problem there.

You can ask for your name to not be put in phone directories. And court records have always been available, internet or not.

The government should be restricted so the ID is only required for public activities, the logic being the same as for passports, professional licenses, business licenses, and the like.

Hiring someone is a private activity. I don't know what public activities you're talking about.