I suppose...
it comes down to a question of trust based on past performance.
Think of the following:
- Do you believe that the government is able to safely hold your personal data without risking it being stolen/misplaced/other?
- Do you believe that the government would, in a market predominated by deregulated capitalism, hesitate to sell your details on to an unregulated company if it generated an attractive amount of income?
- Do you believe that the centralised database would make a significant contribution or change to the way our data is stored?
- Do you believe it is right to hold a nation's data on a centralised database, thus putting the onus on the individual to prove they are innocent rather than the authorities having to justify asking you to ID yourself to them?

If you answered "no" to any of the above, you're never going to be persuaded that a centralised database is a good idea. It might be, if one trusted one's government. Until that trust is established, the debate is going to go around in circles. It might be a great idea, but if there's little confidence in the body that handles the data, not many people are going to think it's a great idea.
(Biscuit Burlesque wants to be Dita von Teas, Fri 11 Sep 2009, 15:47, Reply)