[nutjob2]

What a joke. So you have no DL, no passport, you don't have any bank accounts or credit cards, no internet account or phone account, no national health insurance account, and no address?

Thats great! Since you're not required to have an ID card then you can't be identified and your privacy is secure.

Also you're homeless, probably destitute and unable to live or participate in society.

[1ris]

No, UK citizens are not homeless. Neither are identity papers necessary for anything you listed. Go troll somewhere else.

[nutjob2]

Ok, since the subtle approach isn't working I'll spell it out for you in big letters:

ALL OF THOSE THINGS I LISTED WILL IDENTIFY YOU.

Having government ID is irrelevant.

[1ris]

They not necessary do. Yes, for most parts it irrelevant, but it increases the cost for the "attacker"

[EliRivers]

In the UK, one does not need government approval or permission to live in a house, so it's quite possible not to be homeless and also not to have government ID. Crazy times.

[nutjob2]

You miss my point entirely. If you have an address you have a unique identifier which is shared widely, usually publicly. You therefore you can be easily identified.

[EliRivers]

And do I need to present that address to interact with society? If a policeman stops me in the streets, can he demand to see my address for no reason at all? Is it now, or will it one day be illegal for me not to carry that address around with me?

The problem isn't that it's possible to identify people. This is something that can be done, for example, by looking at someone. The problem is in the relationship between the state and the citizen.