That is not dead which can eternal lie, and with strange aeons bring us some web forums whereupon we can gather
http://garbi.online/forum/
I looked and didn't see whether or not that link took into account what is taxed (via sales tax). It lists NJ at 7.0% (adjusted down by 0.03% because one county is exempt from state sales tax). But NJ doesn't tax clothing or unprepared food. Other states do, so just looking at the rate might not give you the right picture for comparison. Possibly.noxiousdog wrote:hmm
Nah, I'm pretty sure California just likes regressive taxes on poor people more than Texas.RunningMn9 wrote:I looked and didn't see whether or not that link took into account what is taxed (via sales tax). It lists NJ at 7.0% (adjusted down by 0.03% because one county is exempt from state sales tax). But NJ doesn't tax clothing or unprepared food. Other states do, so just looking at the rate might not give you the right picture for comparison. Possibly.noxiousdog wrote:hmm
MI doesn't tax unprepared food or periodicals. Also like NJ, we have an outrageous property tax, and a 4% Income tax... in addition the the rest of the taxes like exceptionally high sin taxes and gas taxes. The only thing we don't have is toll roads. That's apparently how we justify car eating pot holes on the highways and collapsing bridges.RunningMn9 wrote:I looked and didn't see whether or not that link took into account what is taxed (via sales tax). It lists NJ at 7.0% (adjusted down by 0.03% because one county is exempt from state sales tax). But NJ doesn't tax clothing or unprepared food. Other states do, so just looking at the rate might not give you the right picture for comparison. Possibly.noxiousdog wrote:hmm
Fireball wrote:The IDs are free. The documents required to produce them are not, and often require long trips to offices during work hours. A working class American who lives hand-to-mouth does not have the resources to take the extensive time off of work required to go to these offices during working hours, and a great many are in positions where they can never take time off work for any reason for fear of losing their jobs.Rip wrote:Why can't we shitcan the Obamaphone program and issue free IDs instead?
There's also no such thing as an "Obamaphone." You could call it a "Reaganphone," since the Lifeline telephone program was begun in 1984.
It is a very real issue for millions of Americans. But to repeat: these people *have* IDs. They just don't have photo IDs that meet the requirements laid out, by design, in the laws in question.Using lack of financial ability as an excuse for not having an ID is ridiculus.
In the South, as I mentioned, it is often compounded by the fact that many black Americans born before the Civil Rights era don't have birth certificates, and hundreds of thousands of other Americans across the country cannot get copies of their birth records because they have been lost to fires, time, water damage or mismanagement.
http://freebeacon.com/issues/fcc-kept-o ... d-program/Federal regulators were instructed to keep a massive fraud investigation under wraps until a day after a controversial vote to expand a program that was allegedly used to bilk taxpayers of tens of millions of dollars, one those regulators claims.
The Federal Communications Commission on Friday announced that it would seek $51 million in damages from a cell phone company that allegedly defrauded the federal Lifeline program of nearly $10 million.
Better make jury duty voluntary then.The IDs are free. The documents required to produce them are not, and often require long trips to offices during work hours. A working class American who lives hand-to-mouth does not have the resources to take the extensive time off of work required to go to these offices during working hours, and a great many are in positions where they can never take time off work for any reason for fear of losing their jobs.
Not sure what your point is. California and New York have higher sales tax rates? Yes, they do, and that's stupid and regressive. But their overall tax systems are less regressive because they also have income taxes that are varying degrees of progressive.noxiousdog wrote:?Fireball wrote:Yup. Texas is big on regressive, soak-the-poor taxation.Isgrimnur wrote:My state has no income tax. They make up for it in sales tax.
hmm
Fwiw, it's pretty damn easy to either get around jury duty and or make it get around you.noxiousdog wrote:Better make jury duty voluntary then.The IDs are free. The documents required to produce them are not, and often require long trips to offices during work hours. A working class American who lives hand-to-mouth does not have the resources to take the extensive time off of work required to go to these offices during working hours, and a great many are in positions where they can never take time off work for any reason for fear of losing their jobs.
It's pretty easy to get an ID too. The arguments that a person can't find a single afternoon off IN THEIR ENTIRE LIFE to get a govenment ID is preposterous.Combustible Lemur wrote:Fwiw, it's pretty damn easy to either get around jury duty and or make it get around you.noxiousdog wrote:Better make jury duty voluntary then.The IDs are free. The documents required to produce them are not, and often require long trips to offices during work hours. A working class American who lives hand-to-mouth does not have the resources to take the extensive time off of work required to go to these offices during working hours, and a great many are in positions where they can never take time off work for any reason for fear of losing their jobs.
You're grossly underestimating the hurdles some people face in getting this accomplished, IMO (and in my experience).noxiousdog wrote: It's pretty easy to get an ID too. The arguments that a person can't find a single afternoon off IN THEIR ENTIRE LIFE to get a govenment ID is preposterous.
I get the philosophical argument, but the reality, in all but the most extreme cases, is that it's laziness.
Well by golly we can force employers to offer insurance, so I move we require them to give each employee time, transport, and pay for them obtaining a voter ID. There are plenty of answers but no one wants to hear that because they wouldn't want them if they magically fell from the sky.geezer wrote:You're grossly underestimating the hurdles some people face in getting this accomplished, IMO (and in my experience).noxiousdog wrote: It's pretty easy to get an ID too. The arguments that a person can't find a single afternoon off IN THEIR ENTIRE LIFE to get a govenment ID is preposterous.
I get the philosophical argument, but the reality, in all but the most extreme cases, is that it's laziness.
Like many things, "can't" is an exaggeration, but for many, many people the consequences of missing even a day of work can be severe, and not just in terms of lost wages.
Last I checked, in order to get hired you need a photo ID because you have to prove you're a citizen.geezer wrote:You're grossly underestimating the hurdles some people face in getting this accomplished, IMO (and in my experience).noxiousdog wrote: It's pretty easy to get an ID too. The arguments that a person can't find a single afternoon off IN THEIR ENTIRE LIFE to get a govenment ID is preposterous.
I get the philosophical argument, but the reality, in all but the most extreme cases, is that it's laziness.
Like many things, "can't" is an exaggeration, but for many, many people the consequences of missing even a day of work can be severe, and not just in terms of lost wages.
If that were the problem it would be easy enough to attach such requirements to voter ID laws. Or to mail a voter ID to every person on the registered voter list. But they're not, because the point of the legislation is not to combat voter fraud.Rip wrote:Well by golly we can force employers to offer insurance, so I move we require them to give each employee time, transport, and pay for them obtaining a voter ID. There are plenty of answers but no one wants to hear that because they wouldn't want them if they magically fell from the sky.geezer wrote:You're grossly underestimating the hurdles some people face in getting this accomplished, IMO (and in my experience).noxiousdog wrote: It's pretty easy to get an ID too. The arguments that a person can't find a single afternoon off IN THEIR ENTIRE LIFE to get a govenment ID is preposterous.
I get the philosophical argument, but the reality, in all but the most extreme cases, is that it's laziness.
Like many things, "can't" is an exaggeration, but for many, many people the consequences of missing even a day of work can be severe, and not just in terms of lost wages.
It's just an excuse, period.
In her decision calling Texas’ voter ID law an unconstitutional poll tax, U.S. District Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos detailed just how hard it is for some people to get a photo ID.
In Texas, for example, the cost of traveling to the nearest Department of Public Safety office, Texas’ version of the DMV, can be burdensome: Of the 254 counties in Texas, 78 do not have a permanent DPS office. In some communities along the Mexican border, the nearest DPS office is between 100 and 125 miles away. And in rural communities in other states, the DMV offices are few and far between.
That means a person without a driver’s license is going to have to rely on a family member or a friend to drive them to the DMV (or, in Texas, the DPS) in order to get a photo ID card. Now ask yourself this—would you want to drive your Uncle Bob two hours each way and then stand in line at the DMV for god-knows-how-long to get a photo ID?
...
Oftentimes, people don’t even have the money to pay for the underlying documentation needed to get a photo ID card. Getting a photo ID invariably requires proof of identification; usually, that means you need your birth certificate. But what if you don’t have your birth certificate? Then you have to contact whatever government office is in charge of that sort of thing to get a copy of it. And that can be a real pain in the ass for a lot of reasons.
For that matter, a lot of birth certificates have mistakes on them. If your name is spelled wrong, then you have to go through a whole rigamarole to get that fixed before you can get your ID card.
Some people have never been issued a birth certificate. A lot of elderly Black folks, for example, were birthed by midwives at home. They don’t have birth certificates.
A lot of rural folks—Black, white, Latino, whatever—were born on farms. They don’t have birth certificates either.
And did you know that in 2010, the birth certificates of all American citizens born in Puerto Rico expired? Because they did. So if you were born in Puerto Rico and you need a birth certificate, well, good luck with that. Sure, you can pay five bucks to get a new one—and let’s not forget that for some people, like low-income folks or homeless folks, even five dollars is five dollars too much—but guess what you need in order to get a new birth certificate?
If you guessed “a photo ID card,” give yourself a pat on the back.
So if you’re Puerto Rican and you don’t have a photo ID or a driver’s license, you have to get a copy of your birth certificate from Puerto Rico. But in order to get your birth certificate, you have to have a photo ID. It’s a vicious circle. (And this sort of problem doesn’t exist only in Puerto Rico. In Texas, for example, in order to get a certified copy of your birth certificate, you need an ID card. And in order to get an ID card, you need a certified copy of your birth certificate. And round and round we go.)
If you’re trying to vote in a state where you live but weren’t born, simply trying to acquire a copy of your out-of-state birth certificate can be prohibitively expensive.
In the Texas voter ID litigation, one plaintiff testified that Louisiana wanted to charge him more than $80 for a copy of his birth certificate. Another plaintiff decided against obtaining his birth certificate from New Jersey, because that state wanted a $30 fee he didn’t have.
If there is no real issue, than why have the voter ID law?noxiousdog wrote:But both sides of this are using it for political gain; not because there's any real issue.
Because it riles up the base. Both sides love it.RunningMn9 wrote:If there is no real issue, than why have the voter ID law?noxiousdog wrote:But both sides of this are using it for political gain; not because there's any real issue.
I submit that both sides do not like Voter ID laws.noxiousdog wrote:Because it riles up the base. Both sides love it.
Because so many have been passed in democratically controlled states?RunningMn9 wrote:I submit that both sides do not like Voter ID laws.noxiousdog wrote:Because it riles up the base. Both sides love it.
65% of states have some form of ID law.Pyperkub wrote:Because so many have been passed in democratically controlled states?RunningMn9 wrote:I submit that both sides do not like Voter ID laws.noxiousdog wrote:Because it riles up the base. Both sides love it.
There are forms of valid IDs for work that do not require a photo ID, including voter registration cards and Social Security cards.noxiousdog wrote:So how do any of these people work? You must have two forms of government issued ID for an I-9.
When I worked in the Texas Legislatures and Voter ID bills were being pushed by Republicans, Democrats offered up many amendments to alleviate the major problems with voter ID laws, such as requiring DPS offices to be open on weekends and late on weekdays so that people could get to them without disrupting their schedules, setting requirements that would increase the density of the DPS offices so people didn't have to travel for hours to get to them, and ensuring that all documents needed to get an ID could be acquired without any cost.noxiousdog wrote:Because it riles up the base. Both sides love it.RunningMn9 wrote:If there is no real issue, than why have the voter ID law?noxiousdog wrote:But both sides of this are using it for political gain; not because there's any real issue.
Otherwise they'd fix the problem (you need a picture ID, but there's easy ways to get it) rather than blame each other for fraud and racism.
Of all the silly arguments in this thread, this might be the silliest.noxiousdog wrote:Also need a picture id to donate blood
Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
The fact that you think it is an argument might top it.ImLawBoy wrote:Of all the silly arguments in this thread, this might be the silliest.noxiousdog wrote:Also need a picture id to donate blood
Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
Sent from my computer using my fingers to type the letters out on a keyboard
Gasp! I'm shocked you want to blame Republicans. Shocked I tell you!Fireball wrote:When I worked in the Texas Legislatures and Voter ID bills were being pushed by Republicans, Democrats offered up many amendments to alleviate the major problems with voter ID laws, such as requiring DPS offices to be open on weekends and late on weekdays so that people could get to them without disrupting their schedules, setting requirements that would increase the density of the DPS offices so people didn't have to travel for hours to get to them, and ensuring that all documents needed to get an ID could be acquired without any cost.noxiousdog wrote:Because it riles up the base. Both sides love it.RunningMn9 wrote:If there is no real issue, than why have the voter ID law?noxiousdog wrote:But both sides of this are using it for political gain; not because there's any real issue.
Otherwise they'd fix the problem (you need a picture ID, but there's easy ways to get it) rather than blame each other for fraud and racism.
For some reasons, the Republicans voted all of these amendments down. I wonder why?
You need one from column A (always includes photo) OR (one from column B [Driver's licence or ID card, always includes photo] and C [Social Security Card, Birth Certificate, Citizen ID card]).Fireball wrote:There are forms of valid IDs for work that do not require a photo ID, including voter registration cards and Social Security cards.noxiousdog wrote:So how do any of these people work? You must have two forms of government issued ID for an I-9.
U.S.military card or draft record
...
Acceptable List B Documents for persons under age 18 who are unable to present a document listed above:
School record or report card
Clinic, doctor or hospital record
Day-care or nursery school record
But they still can't vote.Isgrimnur wrote:And yet the under 18 documents are still part of List B.
What did you mean by it then, if you could stop speaking in riddles for a moment? Please educate an ignoramus like myself. (And approximately 50% of my reason for posting that was to passive aggressively mock your Tapatalk signature.)noxiousdog wrote:The fact that you think it is an argument might top it.ImLawBoy wrote:Of all the silly arguments in this thread, this might be the silliest.noxiousdog wrote:Also need a picture id to donate blood
Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
Sent from my computer using my fingers to type the letters out on a keyboard
This is a bizarre hill you've chosen to die on. The fact of the matter, and it's really not debatable, is that it's not a simple matter for many people to comply with many o these voter id laws. Why keep insisting that it's not much of a burden? If you want to argue that it's OK if it's a burden to combat some sort of fraud, fine, let's have at it. But beyond that, I really don't get it.noxiousdog wrote:But they still can't vote.Isgrimnur wrote:And yet the under 18 documents are still part of List B.
And I'm not sure all list B have photo ID. There's some gap here. There's a note in the employer handbook that says in order to participate in e-verify, you have to have a list B photo doc. Maybe someone is reviewing the others manually?
The I-9 is supposed to establish identity and eligibility. LIst A does both. List B is for Identity, and C is for eligibility. I see no reason why you couldn't apply the same reasoning to voting though.
It means I happened to be donating blood right then and had to show my picture ID.ImLawBoy wrote:The "can't get a job" argument is still stupid, unless you're arguing that people who can't/don't get a job shouldn't be able to vote, or that people who work under the table shouldn't be able to vote.
What did you mean by it then, if you could stop speaking in riddles for a moment? Please educate an ignoramus like myself. (And approximately 50% of my reason for posting that was to passive aggressively mock your Tapatalk signature.)noxiousdog wrote:The fact that you think it is an argument might top it.ImLawBoy wrote:Of all the silly arguments in this thread, this might be the silliest.noxiousdog wrote:Also need a picture id to donate blood
Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
Sent from my computer using my fingers to type the letters out on a keyboard
Because it's a classic example of why politics is so crazy and people like Trump can get traction. For those that aren't invested in hating the other side, the solution is obvious. Get people the IDs they need to function and check them when they go vote.This is a bizarre hill you've chosen to die on. The fact of the matter, and it's really not debatable, is that it's not a simple matter for many people to comply with many o these voter id laws. Why keep insisting that it's not much of a burden? If you want to argue that it's OK if it's a burden to combat some sort of fraud, fine, let's have at it. But beyond that, I really don't get it.
Then I was right that it was silly, even if you didn't mean it as an argument. Given your other arguments on the topic, however, you can hardly blame me.noxiousdog wrote:It means I happened to be donating blood right then and had to show my picture ID.ImLawBoy wrote:The "can't get a job" argument is still stupid, unless you're arguing that people who can't/don't get a job shouldn't be able to vote, or that people who work under the table shouldn't be able to vote.
What did you mean by it then, if you could stop speaking in riddles for a moment? Please educate an ignoramus like myself. (And approximately 50% of my reason for posting that was to passive aggressively mock your Tapatalk signature.)noxiousdog wrote:The fact that you think it is an argument might top it.ImLawBoy wrote:Of all the silly arguments in this thread, this might be the silliest.noxiousdog wrote:Also need a picture id to donate blood
Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
Sent from my computer using my fingers to type the letters out on a keyboard
Isn't that only the case if you think there's a problem with voter fraud? It's been a while since I looked, but I do remember seeing that there wasn't actually much voter fraud going on, and it seems like the potential negative impact to otherwise legitimate voters outweighs whatever gains we're making in the fight against voter fraud. Maybe I'm wrong and we've discovered a lot of voter fraud in the last few years that would be resolved by picture ID laws.Because it's a classic example of why politics is so crazy and people like Trump can get traction. For those that aren't invested in hating the other side, the solution is obvious. Get people the IDs they need to function and check them when they go vote.This is a bizarre hill you've chosen to die on. The fact of the matter, and it's really not debatable, is that it's not a simple matter for many people to comply with many o these voter id laws. Why keep insisting that it's not much of a burden? If you want to argue that it's OK if it's a burden to combat some sort of fraud, fine, let's have at it. But beyond that, I really don't get it.