|
|
On October 29 2012 05:30 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2012 05:28 xDaunt wrote:On October 29 2012 05:17 DoubleReed wrote:
If it's a colorblind society, how would you know if you solved racial issues?
Has 'not talking about it will make it go away' ever worked for any issue ever? What makes you think it would work for race? What more can you ask for than no one giving a shit about race? Isn't that the ultimate goal? It should be, but I know it is not for democrats and liberals. They want to see equality of economic outcomes among races. I don't this goal as being objectionable, but I do object to how they want to get us there. In short, they ignore the inherent problems within the specific racial communities that are the real causes of their economic problems. not giving a shit about race is a liberal position. identity theorists like communitarian stuff better. recognizing and addressing real social problems with racial origins or defined impact is an entirely different issue. if you are proposing that, in order to solve racial issues once and for all so no one should raise it as an issue, we are to turn 10% of gdp as reparation for past racial sins, then i'd applaud your bravery. let's see these proposals lol
If you mean it is a "classically liberal" position, then you are correct. I'm using a democrat/republican dichotomy of liberal/conservative.
|
On October 29 2012 05:31 BluePanther wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2012 05:22 DoubleReed wrote:On October 29 2012 05:18 BluePanther wrote:On October 29 2012 04:30 Lmui wrote:On October 29 2012 03:56 BluePanther wrote:On October 29 2012 03:43 farvacola wrote:On October 29 2012 03:18 BluePanther wrote:I would argue the premise of that article is incorrect. The recent Wisconsin Governor election is living proof. Huge turnout, huge Republican win (in a Democratic state). Wisconsin is and always has been an outlier insofar as state political dynamics are concerned, going all the way back to the first utterance of "the Wisconsin Idea" in 1904. The mere fact that Wisconsin produced the likes of Russ Feingold, Joe McCarthy, and Paul Ryan is enough to suggest that the state is truly a unique "laboratory for democracy". Also a Wisconsin idea  That may be, but the blanket statement of "more turnout==more Democratic votes" is erroneous imo. The turnout referred to in the article is the demographic that votes largely democrat. The poor and minorities, generally low income voters that have traditionally been democrat leaning. They're the ones who're being hit hardest because they can least afford to pay to get ID to vote. I also don't understand the ID issue. I worked in a homeless shelter for a while and we provided IDs free of charge. And I'm talking the poorest of the poor. It's a non-factor. I don't understand why people use anecdotes when there are statistics in this regard. http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/15/measuring-the-effects-of-voter-identification-laws/ An unwillingness to get an id != an inability to get an id. Your statistics talk about voter turnout. They do not talk about inability to get an id. These are two separate issues that may have a causation link. But they are still different things.
Your argument still boils down to "deliberate disenfrachishement is okay if it's on the basis of laziness." The counterargument is, "deliberate disenfrachisement is not okay, PERIOD."
|
On October 29 2012 05:32 HunterX11 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2012 05:28 xDaunt wrote:On October 29 2012 05:17 DoubleReed wrote:
If it's a colorblind society, how would you know if you solved racial issues?
Has 'not talking about it will make it go away' ever worked for any issue ever? What makes you think it would work for race? What more can you ask for than no one giving a shit about race? Isn't that the ultimate goal? It should be, but I know it is not for democrats and liberals. They want to see equality of economic outcomes among races. I don't this goal as being objectionable, but I do object to how they want to get us there. In short, they ignore the inherent problems within the specific racial communities that are the real causes of their economic problems. Not giving a shit about race while black people are treated as inferiors and have less power and less wealth and are still actively discriminated against is not a laudable goal, it is a white supremacist goal. You're really going to say that the inherent problems within specific racial communities are the real causes of their economic problems? Since when did Teamliquid become Stormfront?
Here is a classic example of the runaway strawman post from a TL liberal. I used to respond to these, but I am a much happier person now that I don't.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On October 29 2012 05:33 BluePanther wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2012 05:23 farvacola wrote:On October 29 2012 05:18 BluePanther wrote:On October 29 2012 04:30 Lmui wrote:On October 29 2012 03:56 BluePanther wrote:On October 29 2012 03:43 farvacola wrote:On October 29 2012 03:18 BluePanther wrote:I would argue the premise of that article is incorrect. The recent Wisconsin Governor election is living proof. Huge turnout, huge Republican win (in a Democratic state). Wisconsin is and always has been an outlier insofar as state political dynamics are concerned, going all the way back to the first utterance of "the Wisconsin Idea" in 1904. The mere fact that Wisconsin produced the likes of Russ Feingold, Joe McCarthy, and Paul Ryan is enough to suggest that the state is truly a unique "laboratory for democracy". Also a Wisconsin idea That may be, but the blanket statement of "more turnout==more Democratic votes" is erroneous imo. The turnout referred to in the article is the demographic that votes largely democrat. The poor and minorities, generally low income voters that have traditionally been democrat leaning. They're the ones who're being hit hardest because they can least afford to pay to get ID to vote. I also don't understand the ID issue. I worked in a homeless shelter for a while and we provided IDs free of charge. And I'm talking the poorest of the poor. It's a non-factor. Give state institutions time and funding to cover free ID provision and I doubt anyone would have a problem; like oneofthem said, the timing is the biggest issue. Getting a free government issued ID is simply impossible in many states. In my state they passed the law quite a long time ago... The Dems keep stalling it in the courts, and now complain when the ruling is about to be issued before the election, pushing it off again. It's not the Republicans pushing it right before the election, it's the Democrats stalling it out and then screaming 'victim' when it is unfavorable to them. is the law accompanied by a scheme of providing ids to those who need them?
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On October 29 2012 05:33 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2012 05:30 oneofthem wrote:On October 29 2012 05:28 xDaunt wrote:On October 29 2012 05:17 DoubleReed wrote:
If it's a colorblind society, how would you know if you solved racial issues?
Has 'not talking about it will make it go away' ever worked for any issue ever? What makes you think it would work for race? What more can you ask for than no one giving a shit about race? Isn't that the ultimate goal? It should be, but I know it is not for democrats and liberals. They want to see equality of economic outcomes among races. I don't this goal as being objectionable, but I do object to how they want to get us there. In short, they ignore the inherent problems within the specific racial communities that are the real causes of their economic problems. not giving a shit about race is a liberal position. identity theorists like communitarian stuff better. recognizing and addressing real social problems with racial origins or defined impact is an entirely different issue. if you are proposing that, in order to solve racial issues once and for all so no one should raise it as an issue, we are to turn 10% of gdp as reparation for past racial sins, then i'd applaud your bravery. let's see these proposals lol If you mean it is a "classically liberal" position, then you are correct. I'm using a democrat/republican dichotomy of liberal/conservative.
i am using the standard definitions.
in any case, have you considered why the black community, as you call it, has these problems.
|
On October 29 2012 05:32 HunterX11 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2012 05:28 xDaunt wrote:On October 29 2012 05:17 DoubleReed wrote:
If it's a colorblind society, how would you know if you solved racial issues?
Has 'not talking about it will make it go away' ever worked for any issue ever? What makes you think it would work for race? What more can you ask for than no one giving a shit about race? Isn't that the ultimate goal? It should be, but I know it is not for democrats and liberals. They want to see equality of economic outcomes among races. I don't this goal as being objectionable, but I do object to how they want to get us there. In short, they ignore the inherent problems within the specific racial communities that are the real causes of their economic problems. Not giving a shit about race while black people are treated as inferiors and have less power and less wealth and are still actively discriminated against is not a laudable goal, it is a white supremacist goal. You're really going to say that the inherent problems within specific racial communities are the real causes of their economic problems? Since when did Teamliquid become Stormfront?
Black females make more money per education (a simplistic average wage vs. higher education ratio) than any other racial/gender group in America. I don't think it's lack of JOB opportunity. I think it has more to do with education rates and culture. Many blacks come from inner cities where less of an emphasis is placed on education. This is a cultural problem, and it disproportionately affects blacks. Their actual earning potential when educated dwarfs that of whites (AA in highly educated jobs gives GREAT opportunity).
I don't think its improper to classify it as a cultural issue.
(edit: when i say 'cultural issue', i'm not referring to black culture, but inner-city culture)
|
xdaunt, you have the same fallacy as JD when he talks about liberty. yes, the goal is a colorblind society (in some sense of the idea). But that is not a political strategy. You cannot confuse ends with means. you don't get to that stage just by declaring it exists, and the recognition that it does not in fact exist is not the reason for its lack of existence.
|
On October 29 2012 05:35 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2012 05:33 BluePanther wrote:On October 29 2012 05:23 farvacola wrote:On October 29 2012 05:18 BluePanther wrote:On October 29 2012 04:30 Lmui wrote:On October 29 2012 03:56 BluePanther wrote:On October 29 2012 03:43 farvacola wrote:On October 29 2012 03:18 BluePanther wrote:I would argue the premise of that article is incorrect. The recent Wisconsin Governor election is living proof. Huge turnout, huge Republican win (in a Democratic state). Wisconsin is and always has been an outlier insofar as state political dynamics are concerned, going all the way back to the first utterance of "the Wisconsin Idea" in 1904. The mere fact that Wisconsin produced the likes of Russ Feingold, Joe McCarthy, and Paul Ryan is enough to suggest that the state is truly a unique "laboratory for democracy". Also a Wisconsin idea That may be, but the blanket statement of "more turnout==more Democratic votes" is erroneous imo. The turnout referred to in the article is the demographic that votes largely democrat. The poor and minorities, generally low income voters that have traditionally been democrat leaning. They're the ones who're being hit hardest because they can least afford to pay to get ID to vote. I also don't understand the ID issue. I worked in a homeless shelter for a while and we provided IDs free of charge. And I'm talking the poorest of the poor. It's a non-factor. Give state institutions time and funding to cover free ID provision and I doubt anyone would have a problem; like oneofthem said, the timing is the biggest issue. Getting a free government issued ID is simply impossible in many states. In my state they passed the law quite a long time ago... The Dems keep stalling it in the courts, and now complain when the ruling is about to be issued before the election, pushing it off again. It's not the Republicans pushing it right before the election, it's the Democrats stalling it out and then screaming 'victim' when it is unfavorable to them. is the law accompanied by a scheme of providing ids to those who need them?
Nope, and it's not legally required to. But an ID card (non-driver) is <$10 if I remember. I paid $4 to replace mine once.
|
On October 29 2012 05:37 BluePanther wrote:
Many blacks come from inner cities where less of an emphasis is placed on education. This is a cultural problem, and it disproportionately affects blacks.
and how did THAT come about, hmmm?
|
On October 29 2012 05:35 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2012 05:32 HunterX11 wrote:On October 29 2012 05:28 xDaunt wrote:On October 29 2012 05:17 DoubleReed wrote:
If it's a colorblind society, how would you know if you solved racial issues?
Has 'not talking about it will make it go away' ever worked for any issue ever? What makes you think it would work for race? What more can you ask for than no one giving a shit about race? Isn't that the ultimate goal? It should be, but I know it is not for democrats and liberals. They want to see equality of economic outcomes among races. I don't this goal as being objectionable, but I do object to how they want to get us there. In short, they ignore the inherent problems within the specific racial communities that are the real causes of their economic problems. Not giving a shit about race while black people are treated as inferiors and have less power and less wealth and are still actively discriminated against is not a laudable goal, it is a white supremacist goal. You're really going to say that the inherent problems within specific racial communities are the real causes of their economic problems? Since when did Teamliquid become Stormfront? Here is a classic example of the runaway strawman post from a TL liberal. I used to respond to these, but I am a much happier person now that I don't.
That black people are treated unequally today is a fact. As for the second part, allow me to quote you:
"They want to see equality of economic outcomes among races. I don't this goal as being objectionable, but I do object to how they want to get us there. In short, they ignore the inherent problems within the specific racial communities that are the real causes of their economic problems."
That's not a strawman. You typed those words, and chose to post them. If you don't want people to quote your odious opinions, then don't post them in the first place!
e: Also, I'm not a liberal at all, so you're the only one making assumptions rather than addressing posts themselves
|
On October 29 2012 05:36 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2012 05:33 xDaunt wrote:On October 29 2012 05:30 oneofthem wrote:On October 29 2012 05:28 xDaunt wrote:On October 29 2012 05:17 DoubleReed wrote:
If it's a colorblind society, how would you know if you solved racial issues?
Has 'not talking about it will make it go away' ever worked for any issue ever? What makes you think it would work for race? What more can you ask for than no one giving a shit about race? Isn't that the ultimate goal? It should be, but I know it is not for democrats and liberals. They want to see equality of economic outcomes among races. I don't this goal as being objectionable, but I do object to how they want to get us there. In short, they ignore the inherent problems within the specific racial communities that are the real causes of their economic problems. not giving a shit about race is a liberal position. identity theorists like communitarian stuff better. recognizing and addressing real social problems with racial origins or defined impact is an entirely different issue. if you are proposing that, in order to solve racial issues once and for all so no one should raise it as an issue, we are to turn 10% of gdp as reparation for past racial sins, then i'd applaud your bravery. let's see these proposals lol If you mean it is a "classically liberal" position, then you are correct. I'm using a democrat/republican dichotomy of liberal/conservative. i am using the standard definitions. in any case, have you considered why the black community, as you call it, has these problems.
Absolutely, and I have openly discussed my thoughts on it numerous times in this thread. In short, I believe that the economic problems of blacks in America are predominantly caused by their own cultural problems, the most important of which is an epidemic failure of black nuclear families.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On October 29 2012 05:38 BluePanther wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2012 05:35 oneofthem wrote:On October 29 2012 05:33 BluePanther wrote:On October 29 2012 05:23 farvacola wrote:On October 29 2012 05:18 BluePanther wrote:On October 29 2012 04:30 Lmui wrote:On October 29 2012 03:56 BluePanther wrote:On October 29 2012 03:43 farvacola wrote:On October 29 2012 03:18 BluePanther wrote:I would argue the premise of that article is incorrect. The recent Wisconsin Governor election is living proof. Huge turnout, huge Republican win (in a Democratic state). Wisconsin is and always has been an outlier insofar as state political dynamics are concerned, going all the way back to the first utterance of "the Wisconsin Idea" in 1904. The mere fact that Wisconsin produced the likes of Russ Feingold, Joe McCarthy, and Paul Ryan is enough to suggest that the state is truly a unique "laboratory for democracy". Also a Wisconsin idea That may be, but the blanket statement of "more turnout==more Democratic votes" is erroneous imo. The turnout referred to in the article is the demographic that votes largely democrat. The poor and minorities, generally low income voters that have traditionally been democrat leaning. They're the ones who're being hit hardest because they can least afford to pay to get ID to vote. I also don't understand the ID issue. I worked in a homeless shelter for a while and we provided IDs free of charge. And I'm talking the poorest of the poor. It's a non-factor. Give state institutions time and funding to cover free ID provision and I doubt anyone would have a problem; like oneofthem said, the timing is the biggest issue. Getting a free government issued ID is simply impossible in many states. In my state they passed the law quite a long time ago... The Dems keep stalling it in the courts, and now complain when the ruling is about to be issued before the election, pushing it off again. It's not the Republicans pushing it right before the election, it's the Democrats stalling it out and then screaming 'victim' when it is unfavorable to them. is the law accompanied by a scheme of providing ids to those who need them? Nope, and it's not legally required to. But an ID card (non-driver) is <$10 if I remember. I paid $4 to replace mine once.
the fact that some people don't have ids is indicative of their fringe status in a society. it might take these people more effort than you to approach the system and get inside it.
now, further attempts at marginalizing these people is a classic case of disenfranchisement
|
|
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On October 29 2012 05:40 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2012 05:36 oneofthem wrote:On October 29 2012 05:33 xDaunt wrote:On October 29 2012 05:30 oneofthem wrote:On October 29 2012 05:28 xDaunt wrote:On October 29 2012 05:17 DoubleReed wrote:
If it's a colorblind society, how would you know if you solved racial issues?
Has 'not talking about it will make it go away' ever worked for any issue ever? What makes you think it would work for race? What more can you ask for than no one giving a shit about race? Isn't that the ultimate goal? It should be, but I know it is not for democrats and liberals. They want to see equality of economic outcomes among races. I don't this goal as being objectionable, but I do object to how they want to get us there. In short, they ignore the inherent problems within the specific racial communities that are the real causes of their economic problems. not giving a shit about race is a liberal position. identity theorists like communitarian stuff better. recognizing and addressing real social problems with racial origins or defined impact is an entirely different issue. if you are proposing that, in order to solve racial issues once and for all so no one should raise it as an issue, we are to turn 10% of gdp as reparation for past racial sins, then i'd applaud your bravery. let's see these proposals lol If you mean it is a "classically liberal" position, then you are correct. I'm using a democrat/republican dichotomy of liberal/conservative. i am using the standard definitions. in any case, have you considered why the black community, as you call it, has these problems. Absolutely, and I have openly discussed my thoughts on it numerous times in this thread. In short, I believe that the economic problems of blacks in America are predominantly caused by their own cultural problems, the most important of which is an epidemic failure of black nuclear families.
i suppose the free slave trades and subsequent economic marginalization is accounted for by your thoughtful analysis.
kind of hard to have a nuclear family when your kids are getting sold, or when you can't find jobs that pay for apartments in nice school districts, or when you got crack flowing through mesoamerica but the CIA is too busy beating up commies over there to care.
|
On October 29 2012 05:38 sam!zdat wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2012 05:37 BluePanther wrote:
Many blacks come from inner cities where less of an emphasis is placed on education. This is a cultural problem, and it disproportionately affects blacks. and how did THAT come about, hmmm?
I agree that it should be fixed. But it won't be until someone is willing to acknowledge the problem, and it's political suicide to suggest this factor. So it'll keep on going.
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
On October 29 2012 05:41 sam!zdat wrote:
yes but WHY!!
The $1 trillion question.
|
On October 29 2012 05:40 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2012 05:36 oneofthem wrote:On October 29 2012 05:33 xDaunt wrote:On October 29 2012 05:30 oneofthem wrote:On October 29 2012 05:28 xDaunt wrote:On October 29 2012 05:17 DoubleReed wrote:
If it's a colorblind society, how would you know if you solved racial issues?
Has 'not talking about it will make it go away' ever worked for any issue ever? What makes you think it would work for race? What more can you ask for than no one giving a shit about race? Isn't that the ultimate goal? It should be, but I know it is not for democrats and liberals. They want to see equality of economic outcomes among races. I don't this goal as being objectionable, but I do object to how they want to get us there. In short, they ignore the inherent problems within the specific racial communities that are the real causes of their economic problems. not giving a shit about race is a liberal position. identity theorists like communitarian stuff better. recognizing and addressing real social problems with racial origins or defined impact is an entirely different issue. if you are proposing that, in order to solve racial issues once and for all so no one should raise it as an issue, we are to turn 10% of gdp as reparation for past racial sins, then i'd applaud your bravery. let's see these proposals lol If you mean it is a "classically liberal" position, then you are correct. I'm using a democrat/republican dichotomy of liberal/conservative. i am using the standard definitions. in any case, have you considered why the black community, as you call it, has these problems. Absolutely, and I have openly discussed my thoughts on it numerous times in this thread. In short, I believe that the economic problems of blacks in America are predominantly caused by their own cultural problems, the most important of which is an epidemic failure of black nuclear families.
For the purposes of your argument, I think you mean endemic.....
|
On October 29 2012 05:41 BluePanther wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2012 05:38 sam!zdat wrote:On October 29 2012 05:37 BluePanther wrote:
Many blacks come from inner cities where less of an emphasis is placed on education. This is a cultural problem, and it disproportionately affects blacks. and how did THAT come about, hmmm? I agree that it should be fixed. But it won't be until someone is willing to acknowledge the problem, and it's political suicide to suggest this factor. So it'll keep on going.
sure, this is why I often find myself at odds with identity politics.
|
On October 29 2012 05:40 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2012 05:38 BluePanther wrote:On October 29 2012 05:35 oneofthem wrote:On October 29 2012 05:33 BluePanther wrote:On October 29 2012 05:23 farvacola wrote:On October 29 2012 05:18 BluePanther wrote:On October 29 2012 04:30 Lmui wrote:On October 29 2012 03:56 BluePanther wrote:On October 29 2012 03:43 farvacola wrote:On October 29 2012 03:18 BluePanther wrote:
[quote]
I would argue the premise of that article is incorrect. The recent Wisconsin Governor election is living proof. Huge turnout, huge Republican win (in a Democratic state). Wisconsin is and always has been an outlier insofar as state political dynamics are concerned, going all the way back to the first utterance of "the Wisconsin Idea" in 1904. The mere fact that Wisconsin produced the likes of Russ Feingold, Joe McCarthy, and Paul Ryan is enough to suggest that the state is truly a unique "laboratory for democracy". Also a Wisconsin idea That may be, but the blanket statement of "more turnout==more Democratic votes" is erroneous imo. The turnout referred to in the article is the demographic that votes largely democrat. The poor and minorities, generally low income voters that have traditionally been democrat leaning. They're the ones who're being hit hardest because they can least afford to pay to get ID to vote. I also don't understand the ID issue. I worked in a homeless shelter for a while and we provided IDs free of charge. And I'm talking the poorest of the poor. It's a non-factor. Give state institutions time and funding to cover free ID provision and I doubt anyone would have a problem; like oneofthem said, the timing is the biggest issue. Getting a free government issued ID is simply impossible in many states. In my state they passed the law quite a long time ago... The Dems keep stalling it in the courts, and now complain when the ruling is about to be issued before the election, pushing it off again. It's not the Republicans pushing it right before the election, it's the Democrats stalling it out and then screaming 'victim' when it is unfavorable to them. is the law accompanied by a scheme of providing ids to those who need them? Nope, and it's not legally required to. But an ID card (non-driver) is <$10 if I remember. I paid $4 to replace mine once. the fact that some people don't have ids is indicative of their fringe status in a society. it might take these people more effort than you to approach the system and get inside it. now, further attempts at marginalizing these people is a classic case of disenfranchisement
You're right, god forbid we verify a voter's identity in the chance it might hurt the feelings of someone who's socially inept. -_-
To be quite frank, anyone not motivated enough to get an ID (or too incompetent to) is not someone that should be voting anyways. It's one thing to have the opportunity to vote, it's another to force uninformed people to vote.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On October 29 2012 05:44 BluePanther wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2012 05:40 oneofthem wrote:On October 29 2012 05:38 BluePanther wrote:On October 29 2012 05:35 oneofthem wrote:On October 29 2012 05:33 BluePanther wrote:On October 29 2012 05:23 farvacola wrote:On October 29 2012 05:18 BluePanther wrote:On October 29 2012 04:30 Lmui wrote:On October 29 2012 03:56 BluePanther wrote:On October 29 2012 03:43 farvacola wrote:[quote] Wisconsin is and always has been an outlier insofar as state political dynamics are concerned, going all the way back to the first utterance of "the Wisconsin Idea" in 1904. The mere fact that Wisconsin produced the likes of Russ Feingold, Joe McCarthy, and Paul Ryan is enough to suggest that the state is truly a unique "laboratory for democracy". Also a Wisconsin idea That may be, but the blanket statement of "more turnout==more Democratic votes" is erroneous imo. The turnout referred to in the article is the demographic that votes largely democrat. The poor and minorities, generally low income voters that have traditionally been democrat leaning. They're the ones who're being hit hardest because they can least afford to pay to get ID to vote. I also don't understand the ID issue. I worked in a homeless shelter for a while and we provided IDs free of charge. And I'm talking the poorest of the poor. It's a non-factor. Give state institutions time and funding to cover free ID provision and I doubt anyone would have a problem; like oneofthem said, the timing is the biggest issue. Getting a free government issued ID is simply impossible in many states. In my state they passed the law quite a long time ago... The Dems keep stalling it in the courts, and now complain when the ruling is about to be issued before the election, pushing it off again. It's not the Republicans pushing it right before the election, it's the Democrats stalling it out and then screaming 'victim' when it is unfavorable to them. is the law accompanied by a scheme of providing ids to those who need them? Nope, and it's not legally required to. But an ID card (non-driver) is <$10 if I remember. I paid $4 to replace mine once. the fact that some people don't have ids is indicative of their fringe status in a society. it might take these people more effort than you to approach the system and get inside it. now, further attempts at marginalizing these people is a classic case of disenfranchisement You're right, god forbid we verify a voter's identity in the chance it might hurt the feelings of someone who's socially inept. -_- To be quite frank, anyone not motivated enough to get an ID (or too incompetent to) is not someone that should be voting anyways. It's one thing to have the opportunity to vote, it's another to force uninformed people to vote.
you attribute not getting a legal id with social inept? it's like i'm on a gaming website. whoa
some of these dudes don't have IDs because they don't have the need for one, like, they don't have a job. i wish i paid more attention in class so i could remember literature to link you to showing the nature of people 'outside of the grid'.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
