191–200 of 255 posts
Went to rent a mailbox at the UPS Store. My drivers license and passport weren't enough identification. I needed something additional. The owner suggested I get a library card and then he could rent me the mailbox. What did the library accept as identification? My drivers license. That was all. Seemed like a weird little bit of bureaucratic red tape that accomplished pretty much nothing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The process will vary by jurisdiction, but one approach is to identify if a voter has questionable eligibility when they arrive to the polling place, allow them to fill out a ballot, have them seal it in an envelope, and then label the envelope with the voter's information. You can then take the time to verify the votes validity before the envelope is reopened and the ballot is counted with the other votes. And just…
Oh I see. That makes sense if you can get the government to use paper ballots everywhere (best of luck in the US). It does make me wonder how well it would work out in practice though. If verification happens at the same time as the vote, then you can try to correct any issues that come up right then. (Maybe bring additional documentation right then? I don't know.) Whereas if you introduce a delay in between... how m…
You don’t want to verify eligibility before voting because it slows the process down. The longer it takes to vote, the fewer people vote. You just collect the voter’s information and then the responsibility for the rest of the verification is on the government. It occupies the government’s time to verify the vote and not the voter’s time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s not unusual among modern democracies for voters to provide proof of identity. We’re (and the UK?) the outliers in that, so no, I think it’s unrelated to authoritarianism. It’s got more to do with ensuring integrity of votes. India, Mexico, Argentina, Germany, Taiwan, Brazil, Iceland, Costa Rica, etc, require it. Among Americans all major demographics show majority support for voter ID reqs.
Australia doesn’t require voter ID either. Voter ID is a vehicle for voter suppression (and generally called for by the politically conservative).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> How do you prevent the tragedy of the commons without knowing who has what? Does this exact argument not apply to the "anonymous" corporations mentioned in the article?
Registering a corporation doesn't deny others utility of a communally owned good.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Registering a corporation doesn't deny others utility of a communally owned good.
It does if that corporation is used to conceal income in a way that reduces the local tax base, which could negatively affect the utility of nearly all communally owned goods/services.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Walking down the street and voting are not the same thing. ID's are common, the vast majority already have a passport or driver license. You need this much to even be employed so bringing it with you for an election is not an onerous requirement, it's actually completely reasonable. EDIT: It seems HN has rate-limiting for comments now.
In most countries where an id is a requirement for voting they have systems in place where you can easily get a national id card. In the US Republicans make it as hard as possible for poor people to get an id then are asking to make it mandatory as they are aware most poor people don't vote for them. If they want to enforce id checking for voting then they need to make sure people can easily get an id.
> " need to make sure people can easily get an id"
I agree. I don't think it's as simple or generic as a single political party preventing it though. Is there a clear example of what is stopping people from obtaining these IDs?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you know if its non-existent if you cant even measure it from lack of proper identification?
Well, we do have evidence that voter fraud - in the form of preventing people who can vote from voting, through imposition of onerous voting requirements is rampant. Denying the vote to someone who has the right to vote is mathematically just as problematic as granting it to someone who does not have the right.
Why is voting, which is critical to a democracy, considered onerous for requiring identification when driving, employment, banking, business and govt. programs all require it? Isn't that a strange balance?
Here's an example of what you need for a Delaware C-corp: https://www.incnow.com/delaware-corporation/ - Name of the corporation - Name and address of the Registered Agent of the corporation (usually a mail forwarding service) - Statement of the type of business that the corporation will engage in - Number of shares of authorized stock that the corporation will issue - Par value of each share - Name and signature of…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s not unusual among modern democracies for voters to provide proof of identity. We’re (and the UK?) the outliers in that, so no, I think it’s unrelated to authoritarianism. It’s got more to do with ensuring integrity of votes. India, Mexico, Argentina, Germany, Taiwan, Brazil, Iceland, Costa Rica, etc, require it. Among Americans all major demographics show majority support for voter ID reqs.
It’s not unusual among modern democracies for voters to provide proof of identity. We’re (and the UK?) the outliers in that, so no, I think it’s unrelated to authoritarianism. It’s got more to do with ensuring integrity of votes. India, Mexico, Argentina, Germany, Taiwan, Brazil, Iceland, Costa Rica, etc, require it. To which I can only think, "So what?" Why does the United States need to be like other countries? The…
Also disagree on the comments on the popular vote being a mess - why should the population of someone's state factor in to how much their vote matters? Disenfranchisement is someone who lives in California's vote mattering less than a voter in Wyoming. Especially problematic is the winner-take-all way of determining electoral votes. Having a state pledge all of its electors to one candidate when 49% of its citizens voted for the other is an absolute failure of representation.
I'd say that the 2000 election coming down to 540 votes in Florida is a much bigger mess than the idea of a popular vote.
Here's an example of what you need for a Delaware C-corp: https://www.incnow.com/delaware-corporation/ - Name of the corporation - Name and address of the Registered Agent of the corporation (usually a mail forwarding service) - Statement of the type of business that the corporation will engage in - Number of shares of authorized stock that the corporation will issue - Par value of each share - Name and signature of…
At first I thought, this makes no sense. Why would the Patriot Act care more about who's getting a library card than incorporating when the dirty money is obviously flowing through the entity? And then I realized, the government gets all of the ID information they need about the corporation the moment the entity needs to open a bank account. ID not just for the single corporator, but information about all of the offi…
Only if the corporation has a US bank account. A Cayman Islands bank account, not so much.
There's too much tolerance of anonymous corporations. In California, it is a criminal misdemeanor to ask for a credit card number on line before the actual name and address of the business has been given to the consumer. BPC § 17538. Useful to know if you have a dispute.