I filled out the Census! Did you?

[slingblade]

LostAngeles:
It doesn't .
That's where some exceptional actions may be justified ..

While we're at it, how do those homeless people and cave dwellers, figure into the pork distribution ?

I also happen to know the definition of another fallacy: the loaded question.
You just asked one.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

...................
Have you read any of the non-government articles linked for your edification?

I have already stated I am not interested in being edified with regard to how and by whom, the data is being used.

I do not approve of data, other than enumeration, being collected by the Census Bureau at taxpayer expense..

 

[Donal]

So, you just want to complain and play rebel?

 

[slingblade]

Yes, it appears that when he says there's no good reason to collect this data, he knows he must remain willfully ignorant to maintain his argument.

Therefore, he's simply not worth the trouble.

 

[Complexity]

Yes, it appears that when he says there's no good reason to collect this data, he knows he must remain willfully ignorant to maintain his argument.

Therefore, he's simply not worth the trouble.

Nonsense. Skeptical Greg's been the only one in this discussion who makes sense.

Your throwing links at him that can't be relevant to him (or to me) because we don't care how people may use the information.

You persist in ignoring the fact that the constitutional mandate to conduct a periodic census can not require the collection of additional information.

Thanks, Greg.

Shame on the rest of you.

 

[LostAngeles]

LostAngeles:
It doesn't .
That's where some exceptional actions may be justified ..

While we're at it, how do those homeless people and cave dwellers, figure into the pork distribution ?

They count for the purposes of determining representative allocation. They also can tell service providers the extent of the homeless problem, as well.

You need to study up on what ad hominem means, as well as what a fallacy is.

I just keep hearing what sounds like a Census Bureau, employee indoctrination lecture, and I'm really curious as to whether or not I am talking to a Census Bureau employee ..

I have no doubt I am being told the truth, I just don't agree with the justification of some of the questions being asked, and how the information is being used ...

"employee indoctrination lecture?"

Really?

Hey, think you or Complexity can show us where that kind of population data can be gotten from if not the Decennial Census?

 

[chainlink]

I ran across this interesting commentary"

Take your Census form and shove it!

link: arabwritersgroup.wordpress.com/2009/07/16/07-16-09-take-your-census-form-and-shove-it/

 

[slingblade]

Nonsense. Skeptical Greg's been the only one in this discussion who makes sense.

Funny how people tend to believe that about those with whom they agree.

Your throwing links at him that can't be relevant to him (or to me) because we don't care how people may use the information.

Yeah, I get that you don't care. I don't get why you don't care, but you have every right to jam your fingers in your ears and la-la-la all you like. Enjoy.

You persist in ignoring the fact that the constitutional mandate to conduct a periodic census can not require the collection of additional information.

Apparently it can. That you don't like it or refuse to see the need for it doesn't mean much at all.

Shame on the rest of you.

Right back atcha.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

Yes, it appears that when he says there's no good reason to collect this data, he knows he must remain willfully ignorant to maintain his argument.

Therefore, he's simply not worth the trouble.

Please point ( with context ) to where I have ever stated :

" there's no good reason to collect this data "

You are the one who is woefully ignorant .. You continue to spout your company line, while not actually reading what I am saying.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

So, you just want to complain and play rebel?

I'll be waiting for our master debater to call you on that loaded question with a little straw thrown in .. ..

No wait ! That won't happen .. It's only the other side of the argument where fallacies are committed..

 

[cStyle]

I filled out my census form about a month ago, but have not mailed it yet, but the reason has more to do with laziness then anything else.

I do see value in the data, but i think the format is outdated... for some reason the writers of the constitution did not have enough forethought to envision a world with our Google overlords.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

............
Hey, think you or Complexity can show us where that kind of population data can be gotten from if not the Decennial Census?

Again, that would be up to those who wish to collect and use the data ( other than enumeration ), at other than taxpayer expense..

 

[Complexity]

Hey, think you or Complexity can show us where that kind of population data can be gotten from if not the Decennial Census?

Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn.

 

[MikeSun5]

I would have found the silly little rants about white guys not wanting to identify their race dumb anyway.

Seconded.

I do see value in the data, but i think the format is outdated... for some reason the writers of the constitution did not have enough forethought to envision a world with our Google overlords.

Another "seconded."

Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn.

lol. (betcha this will not be his last post) It's all good.... I think I can give the answer a shot:

Hey, think you ... can show us where that kind of population data can be gotten from if not the Decennial Census?

DMVs
police records
school records
military service records
voter registration records

...just some ideas. Notice I left out facebook.

cStyle mentioned something about laziness... I believe that most people that didn't send in their forms probably just had it slip their minds, or simply didn't care about it (rather than some silly protest). I think it's a safe assumption to say that an equal percentage of white and non-white people either forgot or didn't care.
When the government is allocating funds (slingblade's tribes example, for instance), it would be in their best interest to get the most accurate information possible. Relying on citizens to not be lazy or forgetful is a bit of a stretch... I'm sure demographic statistics can be obtained in more accurate (and automated) ways than our current census.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

Nicely put MikeSun5 ... Particularly:

I'm sure demographic statistics can be obtained in more accurate (and automated) ways than our current census.

P.S.
By the way, I did complete my census form accurately, and return it before April 1st ....

 

[Cavemonster]

Voter registration only covers 70% of the adult population, and a good chunk of that is not updated for current residence.

But ignoring the huge gaps in each of these and the ones shared collectively, how does a census worker put together someone who is documented in all these ways? Someone can easily have a driver's liscense in one town, kids in school in another (except for one in a private school in a third town) A previous arrest while living on the other side of the country, an out of date voter registration with yet another address. And a few agencies with simple misspellings of both his name and address. He's in the process of divorce, so his kids, who live part time with each of them are double listed on all kinds of forms.

This is not an absurd outlier, these are incredibly common circumstances. To merge the lists you're talking about, from different agencies with remarkably different protocols, would take detective work to rule out all these redundancies and mistakes for every single name that pops up.

And you think that's more efficient than a direct survey?

 

[Donal]

Of course it is. Government agencies are well known for their ability to share data.

 

[MikeSun5]

And you think that's more efficient than a direct survey?

Well not now.... Your arguments are valid, but only because the census is currently in place. If it was done away with, obviously those other agencies would have to clean up their paper trails.

And I doubt it would take detective work to reconcile information. A computer program could sort through that mess and determine who needs to be contacted until a better system was in place.

 

[stevea]

So, do all you little freedom fighters make as big a deal about the gender question as you do the race question? Let's be honest, in a 21st Century Western Democracy, who cares about ovaries vs testicles when it comes to Congressional districts?

Nice bit of condescension there. Sadly you make no coherent argument agaist the position - so condescension is not justified. The sexes are more evenly distributed geographically, and recent governments are less likely to select on sex for advantage/disadvantage than race or income or even religion. It's a lesser problem but still it's an invalid question for the census since the 19th amendment. Yes it should be eliminated.

And just exactly how many of you self congratulatory Jefferson wannabes actually went to the Census Bureau to get the answers to your questions? None of you, it seems. Your JAQing seems to be in the same vein as the Twoofers JAQing.

Perhaps your reading skills need improvement. Re-read post #46 where I linked-to and quoted the government census site, then try again. The rest is typical namecalling. The ad hominem argument has a special appeal to people who cannot mount a logical rebuttal.

Explain why you trust government with clearly abusable information, information which can have no valid legal use, despite a history of repeated violations.

==

Apologies to Mr.D if I misunderstood his point - but to be fair I think it was not well described.

Yes "at-large" candidates is a system which generally allows selection from among a pool of M candidated for N offices. There are variations in the math and procedures for the selection process. It's still inferior to direct democracy, but that's not a practical alternative IMO, despite technology.

There is a good deal written on the issue in certain journals "problem of democracy" and "mathematics" will google it up. There was a Nobel prize awarded a few decades ago on the issue/findings. This forum is sadly not about clear thinking or critical thinking and I'm afraid any serious discussion would result in the typical torrent of dim-witted quips and namecalling.

 

[Cavemonster]

Well not now.... Your arguments are valid, but only because the census is currently in place. If it was done away with, obviously those other agencies would have to clean up their paper trails.

And I doubt it would take detective work to reconcile information. A computer program could sort through that mess and determine who needs to be contacted until a better system was in place.

I think it would be possible for those agencies to attempt the job.

For that to be desirable, you'd need to make a case that they could do it with comparable or greater accuracy for comparable or lesser cost.

There are enough glaring holes in those agencies data and unsolved problems in merging it effectively, that it's a tough case to make.