Cutting the Census

[fitzgibbon]

The funny thing is offering up such 'punishment' only ensures the Conservatives will have an even tougher time getting any votes here. Seems to me if he was really the crafty politician some say he is he'd be sweet talking the city to try and score at least some of the (many) seats the area has to offer.

They've written-off municipalities like Toronto proper because it'd cost them too much per vote to change that tide. The allocation of seats makes it cheaper and more efficient for them to own the allegiance of dozens in the hinterland vs. thousands in the metropolises (metropoli?).

Today it was announced the Conservative government has a deal worth $9 billion to purchase 65 of the F-35 JSF. I wonder if this $9 billion was already accounted for in their future budgets in terms of deficit reduction...

You're forgetting the additional $7 Billion worth of maintenance contract. All to give Peter McKay a photo-op in a simulator.

And with Flaherty fudging the figures, you can bet they'll claim balance the same way Harris did (that is until somebody else had a chance to check the figures).

 

[Corsair 115]

You're forgetting the additional $7 Billion worth of maintenance contract.

No, I didn't forget it. According to the news reports I saw earlier today, the maintenance contract is still yet to be negotiated, so that's why I left it out.

 

[fitzgibbon]

Given the Tory's ability in the negotiation department, I fully expect the figure to be somewhat higher.

 

[Captain.Sassy]

In what is possibly the only good thing to come out of this sorry debacle so far, Industry Minister Tony Clement described the merits of the NHS vs the Census Long Form thusly:

"...it will give us the data that everyone hankers for."
http://www.canada.com/technology/Fr...mandatory long form census/3287248/story.html

Mmmm-MMM. You smell that home cooked data!? Gives me a hankering something fierce!!!

 

[Jorghnassen]

Looks like there's a new position available at StatCan. But, yay, statistics are in the news, slightly more than a week before JSM in Vancouver...

 

[Jimbo07]

in Toronto because the voting trend is "Anything But Tory".

Somebody told me that I engage in "ABC" voting - Anything But Conservative.

 

[fitzgibbon]

The Globe sums it up nicely.

I'm just wondering where Tony hid the pickles.

 

[Captain.Sassy]

/\/\/\
Love it!


Anyways, for anyone still following this, here are some interesting commentaries:



http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/ca...ensus-bid-to-galvanize-analysts-99162874.html

"The Conservatives' insistence that the long census questionnaire must be made voluntary plays pits the "Tea Party types" against the academics, researchers and elites of the country, said pollster Allan Gregg, chairman of Harris/Decima.

"It's a classic culture-war cleavage."

For the Tories, it motivates their core base of voters. And they need a motivated base in order to hang onto their power in the next election.

But they're playing with fire, Gregg warned.

If the elites who so adamantly oppose the Conservative position on the census successfully define the debate as a war between an evidence-based professional class and a purely ideological political party, the elites could gain the upper hand, he said."

Nice to see Allan Gregg venturing what seems like an informed opinion. He usually seems over his head on At Issue, but maybe that's just cause Chantal Hebert and Andrew Coyne are pretty keen. -Ed.



http://thechronicleherald.ca/TheNovaScotian/1193629.html

" "It looks to me that people are fearful about giving good advice, if it’s not the kind of advice that the government wants to hear," said John Langford, a professor at the University of Victoria’s school of public administration.

"It’s a very unpleasant atmosphere because it means your advice is not being respected and you’re being asked to do things that may really only have an ideological basis but there is no evidence to suggest they will work." "

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

I suggest a huge e-mail campaign to Mr Harper to let him know that we don't like paying income tax. Maybe he'll get a hundred or so and respond to the "people"'s request in the same way.

 

[Segnosaur]

I rather suspect that all this will probably not result in any significant differences and/or changes.

Granted, in past elections there was a law requiring people to fill out the census, but I'm not aware of any individual that was actually jailed or fined for not completing it. If the census were voluntary, it may just end up resulting in a difference in the way the forms are worded.

 

[Captain.Sassy]

If the census were voluntary, it may just end up resulting in a difference in the way the forms are worded.

Yeah maybe, but the surveys being mandatory means taht StatCan is allowed to follow up with non-respondents and kinda bug them for an answer. I'm not sure that they'll be allowed to do this if the census is not mandatory.

 

[Corsair 115]

Caught some news reports on the hearings today in Ottawa on the question. There was a great moment when Clement was asked a very simple question: How many people have been jailed since 1971 for not completing the long census form? Clement replied with something about why the government was making this decision. He was interrupted, it was pointed out that his reply had nothing to do with the question, which was asked again. Again Clement avoided answering the question. The question asked a third time. Clement looked like a deer caught in the headlights. The fact that he avoided answering the very simple question spoke volumes.

(The answer, incidentally, is zero. No one has been jailed for refusing to fill out the long census form.)

 

[Captain.Sassy]

I f'n hate when people do that.

Anyhoo, neat piece in teh Glome and Bail today:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/race-is-on-to-find-census-compromise/article1652599/

Please please please take it Tony, make the face saving compromise.

I hanker for evidence-based policy.


Also I worry that this whole kerfuffle has 'poisoned the well'. Whereas people before may not even have thought too much of filling out the census, now that the issue has been framed as one of privacy and big-brotherish intrusion, I wouldn't be surprised if participation rates (even if they keep the LF mandatory) go down especially among certain demographics.

 

[Corsair 115]

A couple of days ago there was a report on the CBC noon news 'round here that made an interesting connection (assuming I'm remembering the item correctly). The Conservatives have suggested they want to end the affirmative action-like programs the federal government has in regards to hiring. Interestingly, according to the report, the long census forms provide the data used to make the assessments in regards to such hiring.

Conincidence? Killing two birds with one stone? I don't know.

I do know that this current scenario says, to me, that we are beginning to see the current Conservatives reveal their true stripes. (I miss the days of the Progressive Conservatives...)

 

[Segnosaur]

If the census were voluntary, it may just end up resulting in a difference in the way the forms are worded.

Yeah maybe, but the surveys being mandatory means taht StatCan is allowed to follow up with non-respondents and kinda bug them for an answer. I'm not sure that they'll be allowed to do this if the census is not mandatory.

Well, just wondering, how often are non-respondents tracked down by census takers, and when they are, is the data they provide really that reliable? (After all, if someone didn't answer a question because they thought the results were embarrassing/private, then they may just end up just giving false information.

 

[Segnosaur]

A couple of days ago there was a report on the CBC noon news 'round here that made an interesting connection (assuming I'm remembering the item correctly). The Conservatives have suggested they want to end the affirmative action-like programs the federal government has in regards to hiring. Interestingly, according to the report, the long census forms provide the data used to make the assessments in regards to such hiring.

Conincidence? Killing two birds with one stone? I don't know.

Seems like that's a pretty flimsy connection. I doubt that anyone really has to point to population demographics when they make up a job description that says "white men need not apply"; they only have to assume that minorities have somehow been oppressed at some point in time.

I do know that this current scenario says, to me, that we are beginning to see the current Conservatives reveal their true stripes. (I miss the days of the Progressive Conservatives...)

Really? I'd much rather see a "true" conservative party, one that truly believes in reducing government influence in our lives, both economically and socially.

 

[Corsair 115]

Really? I'd much rather see a "true" conservative party, one that truly believes in reducing government influence in our lives, both economically and socially.

If I wanted American-style conservatism, I'd move to the United States. We've got our own way of doing things here and our own history which shapes that way.

And it seems to me we're doing just fine, all things considered, and better than our American friends. So I can't see this pressing need for "true" conservatism, whatever that is. (What precisely does "reducing government influence in our lives, both economically and socially" mean exactly? I often hear that statement, or something rather like it, said, but rarely is a concise definition ever given as to what it means on a practical level.)

I'd say our blend of things is working rather well overall and to our advantage.

Note that ideology for the sake of ideology is meaningless as far as I'm concerned. I'm far more interested in what actually works.

 

[fitzgibbon]

Well, just wondering, how often are non-respondents tracked down by census takers,

Pretty simple thing, I should think. They only send out X number of long-form censuses and make note of who they sent them to (or left them with). Do you really think it'd be that difficult for them to make note of who's responded and who hasn't?

and when they are, is the data they provide really that reliable? (After all, if someone didn't answer a question because they thought the results were embarrassing/private, then they may just end up just giving false information.

I'm sure their statistical model has a built-in allowance for people who'll fudge. But inasmuch as they aren't asking the length of one's johnson or how often you and the Mrs. are doing the deed, I doubt very much that honest embarrassment enters into the equation (except perhaps as an embarrassment of riches.

 

[fitzgibbon]

The Conservatives have suggested they want to end the affirmative action-like programs the federal government has in regards to hiring. Interestingly, according to the report, the long census forms provide the data used to make the assessments in regards to such hiring.

Conincidence? Killing two birds with one stone? I don't know.

Seems like that's a pretty flimsy connection. I doubt that anyone really has to point to population demographics when they make up a job description that says "white men need not apply"; they only have to assume that minorities have somehow been oppressed at some point in time.

Of course, we really wouldn't want to try to have a civil service that's demographically representative of the country's population now would we?

I do know that this current scenario says, to me, that we are beginning to see the current Conservatives reveal their true stripes. (I miss the days of the Progressive Conservatives...)

Really? I'd much rather see a "true" conservative party, one that truly believes in reducing government influence in our lives, both economically and socially.

Ah! I see! You'd rather their not be a civil service at all! Now things are becoming clearer. The fact is that the general population wouldn't long stand for the nasty-brutal-and-short politics engendered in "true" conservatism (at least conservatism as it's morphed into).

Seems your brand of conservatism would prefer to have kept the National Dream as a nighttime reverie.

 

[fitzgibbon]

(What precisely does "reducing government influence in our lives, both economically and socially" mean exactly? I often hear that statement, or something rather like it, said, but rarely is a concise definition ever given as to what it means on a practical level.)

It's a truncation of "I'm alright, Jack. Up yours!" An attitude most often found in healthy, well-placed, white boys under age 22.