zlacker

>>DamonH+(OP)
It almost feels predestined for this to not solve the problems at hand, overrun on costs and timelines (furthering the first point), in no way streamline existing processes or cut costs, leave behind parts of society, and present security vulnerabilities that can be capitalised on through either social engineering or malware (also furthering the first point, only now citizens will be accused of tax fraud)

I hate to be pessimistic and there are elements of the idea I like, but when reflecting on the issues at hand this feels like popping the toaster because you smell burnt toast, but the rest of the house is on fire

>>mhotch+ra
Indeed. It'll be a gravy train for one of the usual big consulting companies. Billions of much needed cash will be wasted and nothing of any value will be achieved.

This ID system is touted as somehow stopping illegal boat crossings (the current political hot topic in the UK) because it will apparently somehow stop illegal work. This is obvious nonsense. Employers are already supposed to do ID checks and face heavy fines for employing illegal workers. Illegal employers obviously don't bother with such checks and pay cash in hand. They will continue not to bother doing any such checks, with or without ID cards.

A great deal of illegal work is actually caused by arm's-length employers such as food delivery apps and other similar platforms. These companies already do fairly robust ID checks. What happens though is people rent out their accounts (often for surprisingly small amounts of money) with the ID check already passed to illegals who actually do the work. The problem is nothing to do with ID checks, it's the fact that the employer never sees the employee in person and doesn't verify on a day-to-day basis who is actually completing the work.