> Every single person in the US would be considered privileged by people in nations with extreme poverty (living on less than $1 per day). I agree. I therefore

> Every single person in the US would be considered privileged by people in nations with extreme poverty (living on less than $1 per day). I agree. I therefore propose we limit this discussion to the US (and possibly western/central Europe). > NYT is political biased to an extreme degree to authoritarian and collectivist ideologies That's interesting. What make you think that? According to Media Bias/Fact Check[0] the NYT is considered center-left, hardly the of domain authoritarian ideologues. What do you think? > you seem to simply want to ignore these things to push your political cause You makes me curious! What do you think my political cause to be? > The "costs" your study talks about has been mitigated in any number of ways I have outlined in at least 4 comments now. If there is no need for voter ids, every cost related to them is an unnecessary barrier for the populate to fulfill its obligation to vote an thus to participate in democracy. Yes; the costs are mitigated to a degree, but as you agree yourself; why bother at all, especially if they risk to weight especially on poorer people that might otherwise be discouraged to vote? > The need for ID happens in all facets of life and fail to see a compelling reason that voting should be excluded from this. That's a strange formulation. But anyway; I fail to see why an ID should be necessary for most facets of life, as you put it. Why should it? > You believe Voter ID laws disenfranchise poor people, I think poor people not having access to an ID is far far far more likely to disenfranchise them [...] So why erect further barriers rather than removing the need for an ID in all these cases? Especially a government-issued ID? Thanks for this interesting exchange so far! [0] https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/new-york-times/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/new-york-times/