I got my Census today.
-
tk421
And it costs 14 Billion to do a headcount? Get real. Census workers are making 15-20 dollars an hour. You think that's a wise use of government resources?LJ wrote:
So you don't know what apportionment is?tk421 wrote:
It is a total waste of money and resources. The government is spending over 14 Billion on the census.LJ wrote:
Just admit it, you are against the census all together.eersandbeers wrote:Glory Days wrote:
its not, but you can think it is. the supreme court has heard this case many times and as recent as 2000.
I'm assuming you are referring to the Morales decision. I also think there was far more to the ruling, but I'll look it up.
A couple of interesting tidbits I learned:
1. Hitler used the census to track and round up all the Jews in Germany
2. FDR used the census to round up all the Japanese American to place them in internment camps
3. The FBI wanted to use the census data to track Muslims after 9/11
So people are delusional if they think this isn't used for other purposes. -
LJ
So wait... what are you arguing here? That the census itself is a waste and of time and money? Or that the way that the gov't handles it is a waste of money? I would say that you are wrong on the first part and correct on the second one.tk421 wrote:
And it costs 14 Billion to do a headcount? Get real. Census workers are making 15-20 dollars an hour. You think that's a wise use of government resources?LJ wrote:
So you don't know what apportionment is?tk421 wrote:
It is a total waste of money and resources. The government is spending over 14 Billion on the census.LJ wrote:
Just admit it, you are against the census all together.eersandbeers wrote:Glory Days wrote:
its not, but you can think it is. the supreme court has heard this case many times and as recent as 2000.
I'm assuming you are referring to the Morales decision. I also think there was far more to the ruling, but I'll look it up.
A couple of interesting tidbits I learned:
1. Hitler used the census to track and round up all the Jews in Germany
2. FDR used the census to round up all the Japanese American to place them in internment camps
3. The FBI wanted to use the census data to track Muslims after 9/11
So people are delusional if they think this isn't used for other purposes. -
eersandbeersLJ wrote:
that's never been it. EVER. People want to cite the constitution and what the people of the time did, well, even in the very first census it was more than that.
I've never argued it was. However, have you heard of the fines and mandatory answering before this year? I'm not sure exactly when it became illegal to not answer all the questions, but this is the first year where they act like they are going to enforce it.
I'm also arguing that Constitutional obligations place it at only a headcount. Nothing above and beyond that. If people want to voluntarily answer questions about race then that is their choice. -
Little Danny
If people are bitching now, imagine how fired up they would be if ACORN (Obama's original choice) was running it. -
tk421
And it shouldn't be. All that is required for apportionment is the number of people living in a certain state.LJ wrote:
that's never been it. EVER. People want to cite the constitution and what the people of the time did, well, even in the very first census it was more than that.eersandbeers wrote:
I'm not against a simple headcount.LJ wrote:
Just admit it, you are against the census all together.eersandbeers wrote:Glory Days wrote:
its not, but you can think it is. the supreme court has heard this case many times and as recent as 2000.
I'm assuming you are referring to the Morales decision. I also think there was far more to the ruling, but I'll look it up.
A couple of interesting tidbits I learned:
1. Hitler used the census to track and round up all the Jews in Germany
2. FDR used the census to round up all the Japanese American to place them in internment camps
3. The FBI wanted to use the census data to track Muslims after 9/11
So people are delusional if they think this isn't used for other purposes.
Such as how many males and how many females. That should be it. -
Glory Days
the laws protecting the privacy of the census were not in place when that happend.tk421 wrote:
I'm sure the Japanese Americans would agree with that.I Wear Pants wrote: It is useful. No matter how much you want to believe there is some conspiracy at work here...there isn't.
yeah its the Morales one. i didnt dive into it either, but when referencing whether the census violated the 4th amendment, thats the one it points to. i believe there were a few others around the turn of the last century too(1900). plus the one in 1970 involving how the punishment can be dealt out.eersandbeers wrote:Glory Days wrote:
its not, but you can think it is. the supreme court has heard this case many times and as recent as 2000.
I'm assuming you are referring to the Morales decision. I also think there was far more to the ruling, but I'll look it up.
A couple of interesting tidbits I learned:
1. Hitler used the census to track and round up all the Jews in Germany
2. FDR used the census to round up all the Japanese American to place them in internment camps
3. The FBI wanted to use the census data to track Muslims after 9/11
So people are delusional if they think this isn't used for other purposes.
plus, 2 of your 3 examples dont apply. this isnt germany and privacy laws for the census were not established during WWII. and your third example, you even say they "wanted" to use the census. i am assuming something stopped them? -
tk421
I think it's a waste of time and money. The government can get an accurate count of all the people in this country without the census.LJ wrote:
So wait... what are you arguing here? That the census itself is a waste and of time and money? Or that the way that the gov't handles it is a waste of money? I would say that you are wrong on the first part and correct on the second one.tk421 wrote:
And it costs 14 Billion to do a headcount? Get real. Census workers are making 15-20 dollars an hour. You think that's a wise use of government resources?LJ wrote:
So you don't know what apportionment is?tk421 wrote:
It is a total waste of money and resources. The government is spending over 14 Billion on the census.LJ wrote:
Just admit it, you are against the census all together.eersandbeers wrote:Glory Days wrote:
its not, but you can think it is. the supreme court has heard this case many times and as recent as 2000.
I'm assuming you are referring to the Morales decision. I also think there was far more to the ruling, but I'll look it up.
A couple of interesting tidbits I learned:
1. Hitler used the census to track and round up all the Jews in Germany
2. FDR used the census to round up all the Japanese American to place them in internment camps
3. The FBI wanted to use the census data to track Muslims after 9/11
So people are delusional if they think this isn't used for other purposes. -
bases_loaded
I got my SECOND census today....but it makes sense I am in a democrat leaning ward. -
tk421
And you think privacy laws will stop the government from using this information however they want? Ha.Glory Days wrote:
the laws protecting the privacy of the census were not in place when that happend.tk421 wrote:
I'm sure the Japanese Americans would agree with that.I Wear Pants wrote: It is useful. No matter how much you want to believe there is some conspiracy at work here...there isn't. -
LJ
That makes 0 sense and has to be the worst argument I have ever heardtk421 wrote:
I think it's a waste of time and money. The government can get an accurate count of all the people in this country without the census.LJ wrote:
So wait... what are you arguing here? That the census itself is a waste and of time and money? Or that the way that the gov't handles it is a waste of money? I would say that you are wrong on the first part and correct on the second one.tk421 wrote:
And it costs 14 Billion to do a headcount? Get real. Census workers are making 15-20 dollars an hour. You think that's a wise use of government resources?LJ wrote:
So you don't know what apportionment is?tk421 wrote:
It is a total waste of money and resources. The government is spending over 14 Billion on the census.
From Merriam Webster
Main Entry: cen·sus
Pronunciation: \?sen(t)-s?s\
Function: noun
Etymology: Latin, from cens?re
Date: 1634
1 : a count of the population and a property evaluation in early Rome
2 : a usually complete enumeration of a population; specifically : a periodic governmental enumeration of population
3 : count, tally
In other words, that is exactly what the census is and what the word means. It's not some arbitrary program made up by the U.S. gov't. -
Glory Days
haha yeah, i do. because if they really wanted to, they dont need the census to find you!tk421 wrote:
And you think privacy laws will stop the government from using this information however they want? Ha.Glory Days wrote:
the laws protecting the privacy of the census were not in place when that happend.tk421 wrote:
I'm sure the Japanese Americans would agree with that.I Wear Pants wrote: It is useful. No matter how much you want to believe there is some conspiracy at work here...there isn't. -
tk421
Where were the privacy laws here? Or do Arab Americans not deserve the same privacy? Government and privacy have nothing to do with each other. The fact is any information given to the government can be used against you.Glory Days wrote:
haha yeah, i do.tk421 wrote:
And you think privacy laws will stop the government from using this information however they want? Ha.Glory Days wrote:
the laws protecting the privacy of the census were not in place when that happend.tk421 wrote:
I'm sure the Japanese Americans would agree with that.I Wear Pants wrote: It is useful. No matter how much you want to believe there is some conspiracy at work here...there isn't.
http://epic.org/privacy/census/foia/On July 23, 2004, EPIC obtained documents revealing that the Census Bureau provided the Department of Homeland Security statistical data on people who identified themselves on the 2000 census as being of Arab ancestry. The special tabulations were prepared specifically for the law enforcement agency. There is no indication that the Department of Homeland Security requested similar information about any other ethnic groups. The tabulations apparently include information about United States citizens, as well as individuals of Arab descent whose families have lived in the United States for generations. -
tk421
Do you honestly not think that between all the government bureaucracy and agencies that the U.S. government does not know right now the exact number of people living in this country? They really need to send out a form and waste 14 Billion dollars to get a count?LJ wrote:
That makes 0 sense and has to be the worst argument I have ever heardtk421 wrote:
I think it's a waste of time and money. The government can get an accurate count of all the people in this country without the census.LJ wrote:
So wait... what are you arguing here? That the census itself is a waste and of time and money? Or that the way that the gov't handles it is a waste of money? I would say that you are wrong on the first part and correct on the second one.tk421 wrote:
And it costs 14 Billion to do a headcount? Get real. Census workers are making 15-20 dollars an hour. You think that's a wise use of government resources?LJ wrote:
So you don't know what apportionment is?tk421 wrote:
It is a total waste of money and resources. The government is spending over 14 Billion on the census.
From Merriam Webster
Main Entry: cen·sus
Pronunciation: \?sen(t)-s?s\
Function: noun
Etymology: Latin, from cens?re
Date: 1634
1 : a count of the population and a property evaluation in early Rome
2 : a usually complete enumeration of a population; specifically : a periodic governmental enumeration of population
3 : count, tally
In other words, that is exactly what the census is and what the word means. It's not some arbitrary program made up by the U.S. gov't. -
LJ
You still aren't making any sense.tk421 wrote:
Do you honestly not think that between all the government bureaucracy and agencies that the U.S. government does not know right now the exact number of people living in this country? They really need to send out a form and waste 14 Billion dollars to get a count?
Are you against enumeration?
Do you understand what apportionment is?
or
Do you just feel the gov't is extremely inefficient in how they go about doing the census?
And while they may know how many people, I thought you were a constitutionalist? -
Glory Days
did you look at the actual documents? they are no names or anything that identifies a person. so Lakewood Ohio has a 4% arab population....ok now what?tk421 wrote:
Where were the privacy laws here? Or do Arab Americans not deserve the same privacy? Government and privacy have nothing to do with each other. The fact is any information given to the government can be used against you.Glory Days wrote:
haha yeah, i do.tk421 wrote:
And you think privacy laws will stop the government from using this information however they want? Ha.Glory Days wrote:
the laws protecting the privacy of the census were not in place when that happend.tk421 wrote:
I'm sure the Japanese Americans would agree with that.I Wear Pants wrote: It is useful. No matter how much you want to believe there is some conspiracy at work here...there isn't.
http://epic.org/privacy/census/foia/On July 23, 2004, EPIC obtained documents revealing that the Census Bureau provided the Department of Homeland Security statistical data on people who identified themselves on the 2000 census as being of Arab ancestry. The special tabulations were prepared specifically for the law enforcement agency. There is no indication that the Department of Homeland Security requested similar information about any other ethnic groups. The tabulations apparently include information about United States citizens, as well as individuals of Arab descent whose families have lived in the United States for generations. -
tk421
Then tell me, how exactly is this information used for that purpose? All that is needed is an accurate headcount. What does a person's race, telephone #, whether or not they owned or rented, their name, sex, age and date of birth have to do with apportionment? Each state is assigned a certain number of representatives based entirely on the population, what do those other questions have anything to do with it?LJ wrote:
You still aren't making any sense.tk421 wrote:
Do you honestly not think that between all the government bureaucracy and agencies that the U.S. government does not know right now the exact number of people living in this country? They really need to send out a form and waste 14 Billion dollars to get a count?
Are you against enumeration?
Do you understand what apportionment is?
or
Do you just feel the gov't is extremely inefficient in how they go about doing the census?
And while they may know how many people, I thought you were a constitutionalist? -
Gardens35
Probably do not know the exact number of people living in this country........and probably because of the bureaucracy and agencies that you refer to.tk421 wrote:
Do you honestly not think that between all the government bureaucracy and agencies that the U.S. government does not know right now the exact number of people living in this country? They really need to send out a form and waste 14 Billion dollars to get a count? -
tk421
Nothing, I give up. If you are perfectly fine with the government knowing everything about you, more power to you. I can't imagine that the stand up quality people in charge of this country would ever misuse this data.Glory Days wrote:
did you look at the actual documents? they are no names or anything that identifies a person. so Lakewood Ohio has a 4% arab population....ok now what?tk421 wrote:
Where were the privacy laws here? Or do Arab Americans not deserve the same privacy? Government and privacy have nothing to do with each other. The fact is any information given to the government can be used against you.Glory Days wrote:
haha yeah, i do.tk421 wrote:
And you think privacy laws will stop the government from using this information however they want? Ha.Glory Days wrote:
the laws protecting the privacy of the census were not in place when that happend.tk421 wrote:
I'm sure the Japanese Americans would agree with that.I Wear Pants wrote: It is useful. No matter how much you want to believe there is some conspiracy at work here...there isn't.
http://epic.org/privacy/census/foia/On July 23, 2004, EPIC obtained documents revealing that the Census Bureau provided the Department of Homeland Security statistical data on people who identified themselves on the 2000 census as being of Arab ancestry. The special tabulations were prepared specifically for the law enforcement agency. There is no indication that the Department of Homeland Security requested similar information about any other ethnic groups. The tabulations apparently include information about United States citizens, as well as individuals of Arab descent whose families have lived in the United States for generations. -
queencitybuckeye
The paranoia here is amazing. Give me your address and I'll find out everything about you that the census asks for (and a lot more) in ten minutes. They aren't exactly deep-diving into your darkest secrets here.tk421 wrote:
Nothing, I give up. If you are perfectly fine with the government knowing everything about you, more power to you. I can't imagine that the stand up quality people in charge of this country would ever misuse this data. -
tk421
So because the information is already out there, we should volunteer it? That's a good argument. Call me paranoid if you want, I do not and never will trust the government.queencitybuckeye wrote:
The paranoia here is amazing. Give me your address and I'll find out everything about you that the census asks for (and a lot more) in ten minutes. They aren't exactly deep-diving into your darkest secrets here.tk421 wrote:
Nothing, I give up. If you are perfectly fine with the government knowing everything about you, more power to you. I can't imagine that the stand up quality people in charge of this country would ever misuse this data. -
LJ
So you are changing your argument again? It's empirical data that is a very important historical snapshot of our country. I am not 100% sure on what information can be seen by whom, but the info could be very important for the building of schools, hospitals, fire houses, police stations, etc etc etc etctk421 wrote:
Then tell me, how exactly is this information used for that purpose? All that is needed is an accurate headcount. What does a person's race, telephone #, whether or not they owned or rented, their name, sex, age and date of birth have to do with apportionment? Each state is assigned a certain number of representatives based entirely on the population, what do those other questions have anything to do with it?LJ wrote:
You still aren't making any sense.tk421 wrote:
Do you honestly not think that between all the government bureaucracy and agencies that the U.S. government does not know right now the exact number of people living in this country? They really need to send out a form and waste 14 Billion dollars to get a count?
Are you against enumeration?
Do you understand what apportionment is?
or
Do you just feel the gov't is extremely inefficient in how they go about doing the census?
And while they may know how many people, I thought you were a constitutionalist? -
queencitybuckeye
I don't trust them either, but I don't see how putting information on a piece of paper, every bit of it readily available to the entire world puts me at any sort of risk.tk421 wrote:
So because the information is already out there, we should volunteer it? That's a good argument. Call me paranoid if you want, I do not and never will trust the government.queencitybuckeye wrote:
The paranoia here is amazing. Give me your address and I'll find out everything about you that the census asks for (and a lot more) in ten minutes. They aren't exactly deep-diving into your darkest secrets here.tk421 wrote:
Nothing, I give up. If you are perfectly fine with the government knowing everything about you, more power to you. I can't imagine that the stand up quality people in charge of this country would ever misuse this data. -
tk421
No, I'm saying that the constitution calls for a head count only. That's it. How many people live at this address? Done. The other questions are not needed. It is a total waste of time and money. The government doesn't need to pay people 15 dollars an hour to hound citizens for days to get information from them. It doesn't need GPS coordinates of every household in this country. I don't care about the historical records, that's not important to me.LJ wrote:
So you are changing your argument again? It's empirical data that is a very important historical snapshot of our country. I am not 100% sure on what information can be seen by whom, but the info could be very important for the building of schools, hospitals, fire houses, police stations, etc etc etc etctk421 wrote:
Then tell me, how exactly is this information used for that purpose? All that is needed is an accurate headcount. What does a person's race, telephone #, whether or not they owned or rented, their name, sex, age and date of birth have to do with apportionment? Each state is assigned a certain number of representatives based entirely on the population, what do those other questions have anything to do with it?LJ wrote:
You still aren't making any sense.tk421 wrote:
Do you honestly not think that between all the government bureaucracy and agencies that the U.S. government does not know right now the exact number of people living in this country? They really need to send out a form and waste 14 Billion dollars to get a count?
Are you against enumeration?
Do you understand what apportionment is?
or
Do you just feel the gov't is extremely inefficient in how they go about doing the census?
And while they may know how many people, I thought you were a constitutionalist?
I've got an idea for the Census. How many household in this country don't get U.S mail service? I'd bet the post office has the address of every home on file. Why not have the postal workers stop for less than 3 minutes one day and ask that very question. One question, record the address and number of people. No money spent, no fuss. This would be way to simple and easy for the government to do, though. -
Glory Days
it doesnt cost the govt any more money if they ask 1 question or 10 questions. and they wouldnt have to waste money going door to door if people(like you) answered the questions.tk421 wrote:
No, I'm saying that the constitution calls for a head count only. That's it. How many people live at this address? Done. The other questions are not needed. It is a total waste of time and money. The government doesn't need to pay people 15 dollars an hour to hound citizens for days to get information from them. It doesn't need GPS coordinates of every household in this country. I don't care about the historical records, that's not important to me.LJ wrote:
So you are changing your argument again? It's empirical data that is a very important historical snapshot of our country. I am not 100% sure on what information can be seen by whom, but the info could be very important for the building of schools, hospitals, fire houses, police stations, etc etc etc etctk421 wrote:
Then tell me, how exactly is this information used for that purpose? All that is needed is an accurate headcount. What does a person's race, telephone #, whether or not they owned or rented, their name, sex, age and date of birth have to do with apportionment? Each state is assigned a certain number of representatives based entirely on the population, what do those other questions have anything to do with it?LJ wrote:
You still aren't making any sense.tk421 wrote:
Do you honestly not think that between all the government bureaucracy and agencies that the U.S. government does not know right now the exact number of people living in this country? They really need to send out a form and waste 14 Billion dollars to get a count?
Are you against enumeration?
Do you understand what apportionment is?
or
Do you just feel the gov't is extremely inefficient in how they go about doing the census?
And while they may know how many people, I thought you were a constitutionalist? -
LJ
Wow. So you don't care about schools, fire stations, hospitals, police stations, etc?tk421 wrote:
No, I'm saying that the constitution calls for a head count only. That's it. How many people live at this address? Done. The other questions are not needed. It is a total waste of time and money. The government doesn't need to pay people 15 dollars an hour to hound citizens for days to get information from them. It doesn't need GPS coordinates of every household in this country. I don't care about the historical records, that's not important to me.LJ wrote:
So you are changing your argument again? It's empirical data that is a very important historical snapshot of our country. I am not 100% sure on what information can be seen by whom, but the info could be very important for the building of schools, hospitals, fire houses, police stations, etc etc etc etctk421 wrote:
Then tell me, how exactly is this information used for that purpose? All that is needed is an accurate headcount. What does a person's race, telephone #, whether or not they owned or rented, their name, sex, age and date of birth have to do with apportionment? Each state is assigned a certain number of representatives based entirely on the population, what do those other questions have anything to do with it?LJ wrote:
You still aren't making any sense.tk421 wrote:
Do you honestly not think that between all the government bureaucracy and agencies that the U.S. government does not know right now the exact number of people living in this country? They really need to send out a form and waste 14 Billion dollars to get a count?
Are you against enumeration?
Do you understand what apportionment is?
or
Do you just feel the gov't is extremely inefficient in how they go about doing the census?
And while they may know how many people, I thought you were a constitutionalist?
Knowing that there is a large number of owned houses with a married couple and 2 kids under the age of 3 in a decent sized statistical area is extremely important when it comes to city planning. Historical trends are also extremely important to city planning.
Also, the constitution does not call for a head count only, it calls for enumeration that the terms of are decided by congress.