Should voters be required to show photo ID?

[garbon]

Again, who is going to provide those options?

Maybe solutions to complex social problems aren't simple enough that a single solution is adequate?

Of course not. I thought I suggested as much in my post.  However, if CC and Seedster are going to use this as an example of how the Republicans here are so unsympathetic then I'd like to see the plans they'd like endorsed.

You are missing the point then.  The response I get from the Goptards is people are like that because they dont care.

Seedy made the comment that people on this board were unsympathetic to such things and you agreed.  I don't think care was mentioned in your two posts but was a different side argument of yours.

[KRonn]

I think the people working the polls should show IDs to the voters...

[MadImmortalMan]

Is preventing vote fraud an important enough thing that it needs to be done even if you know a side effect will be a boost to the wrong party?

[garbon]

Is preventing vote fraud an important enough thing that it needs to be done even if you know a side effect will be a boost to the wrong party?

lulz

[Jacob]

My previous post (not the ones to grabon) were based on the assumption that we were talking specifically about inner city groceries.

If I were the head of the RNC and I hired you to come up with a plan to disenfranchise likely Democratic voters, and you came back with "require ID cards," I'd fire you and demand a refund.  The number of people in this country without a single ID is tiny.  The subset of those who vote is tinier still.  It's ridiculously easy to get an ID.

Most likely I'd be coming back with a multifaceted approach (they're all the rage these days). Requiring IDs would definitely be part of it.

But like I believe I said earlier, if ID requirements are coupled with programs to ensure that they are as easy to get as you say in practice, then I'm cool with that. I just never hear anything about such programs, so I assume they don't exist.

I think the term you were looking for is "blaming the victim," but that's nit-picking.  I don't deny that there is demonization of the underclass by some on the right (though significantly less than the demonization of the rich by some on the left IMO), but that fact doesn't mean that all opposition to expansion of the social safety net is based on demonization of the poor.

I do believe you that demonization of the poor is not necessarily the only reason to oppose expansion of the social safety net, but when such expansion is discussed the counter arguments inevitably feature such demonization so it's pretty natural to respond to that, I think.

As many tools and assistance as what?  Enough so that everyone makes good decisions?

Well, I'm under the impression that it's even up for debate whether the government should provide tools and assistance at all. But if we're in agreement that government should in fact provide do so, we can try to work out the details.

For my part I think the following is a baseline for what a successful government should provide for its population:

- An absence of food insecurity, combined with some basic information on home economics and nutrition.
- Basic level skills on personal finances, reading and writing.
- Access to more advanced education if the aptitude is there, without the students having to mortgage several decades of their lives.
- Basic shelter for everybody (so essentially no homelessness).
- Access to adequate health care such that easily treatable quality of life illnesses, diseases and defects are treated and critical illnesses and sudden accidents do not financially destroy families; as well as basic health care information is widely disseminated.

That's what a government ought to provide its citizenry*, however it does so. If it can do so in free-market, privatized environment that's fine, but I think the reality has shown us that that leaves large groups marginalized and chronically underserved. So I don't think that works. Of course, that doesn't matter if you don't agree that the government should even be in the business of looking after the citizenry.

So, let's talk about the poor dietary habits of poor inner city people. In general they don't have the time, equipment or knowledge to cook good healthy food and in many cases they don't like it or have any interest in it. Even if they did, there are major logistical and economical obstacles in the way since the only groceries nearby are over priced and carry mostly unhealthy stuff (because that's what people buy).

We can leave it to the free market and people caring enough, and nothing will happen. The only people who put any effort into changing the dietary habits of poor inner city dwellers are fast food corporations marketing their products at them, and that's not a recipe for improving anyone's health.

Do we care? If we do, we can fund home economic classes in school to provide the skills and knowledge to younger people about healthy cooking. We can subsidize or fund community organizers who want to teach about urban farming (grow some tomatoes in your window-sill) or bring fresh produces into the city from outlying farms for farmers markets. Build and staff a community centre, and in addition to all the other shit you could do there you could teach this sort of stuff to adults or even have a community kitchen. If somebody wants to open a community grocery store in the ghetto, maybe get them some good start-up loans and some business mentorship.

... it all costs money, of course. And I'm not saying that it's some sort of magical automatic fix or anything; I don't have the answer right here. But if you do want to do something about it, the first thing you do is to study the problem, develop some programs to address the causes you identify and then execute on the programs (which include funding them). Saying, "well, we shouldn't do anything because costs... oh, and freedom" isn't going to fix a thing.

The point is not that everyone is going to make smarter choices, and if they don't you force them to. The point is that you spend some effort and money in identifying systemic obstacles and developing plans to address them. You'll see some improvement then, I'm pretty sure; more so than if you just say "yeah, we're not going to do anything" that's for sure.

*There's also law enforcement, defence, transportation infrastructure and so on, but that's not really what we're talking about.

[derspiess]

Jake, if you care that much about nutrition for poor inner city folk, how about making a separate thread for it? 

[garbon]

Hey Jake, any thoughts as to my random musings on inner city nutrition? I guess per dernazi, in a new thread?

[KRonn]

But like I believe I said earlier, if ID requirements are coupled with programs to ensure that they are as easy to get as you say in practice, then I'm cool with that. I just never hear anything about such programs, so I assume they don't exist.   

I agree on making the IDs free and easy to get. And I assume this has been said before, and I said it too about states giving them for free. Most or maybe all states, at least the ones I've heard about that passed ID requirements, had programs to make them free to anyone. But of course, I assume most do have IDs. Even the poor need IDs to drive a car, or if they're poor they may be getting govt benefits so they must need IDs in some cases for those benefits.

[Martinus]

This must be one of these cultural differences - here it is a no-brainer - everyone gets issued a photo ID when they turn 18.

[merithyn]

Meh. Just read the rest of the thread. Short version of my post: No unless IDs are free and not through the DMV.

[Admiral Yi]

Jake: where are you picking up this demonization of the poor?

If a person has to be in favor of all those things you mentioned to avoid the accusation of neglect, that's most people in this country.  Probably in most countries.

[Razgovory]

Hans liked to demonize the poor.  Remember his rant against the social contract?

[Eddie Teach]

We all forgot it the moment you deleted it from your sig.

[Razgovory]

Everyone kept bitching at me.  I should learn to ignore you bastards.

[Ed Anger]

This must be one of these cultural differences - here it is a no-brainer - everyone gets issued a photo ID when they turn 18.

FATMAI! YOU PROMISED MONDAY!

MONDAY!