Census done!

[August]

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

useless dribble from a sprawling bureaucracy IMHO

I have elected to fill out the only part of the census required - and i'm receiving flack for it?

interesting.

Only because the Democrats are in power. Had the Republicans been in charge the same people would be cheering you on.

[GoldenRivet]

Originally Posted by August

Only because the Democrats are in power. Had the Republicans been in charge the same people would be cheering you on.

Yup

[Aramike]

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

useless dribble from a sprawling bureaucracy IMHO

I have elected to fill out the only part of the census required - and i'm receiving flack for it?

interesting.

It's not interesting, in my opinion. It's absolutely indefensible albeit expected.

One person wishes to remain a private citizen. He's confronted with several individuals who believe that said private information should be recorded (and could never be abused and therefore used against you). Yet they rhetorically attack you for the very stance of witholding such information, as though it's somehow counter-productive.

Hell, with people like that in power, its no wonder that you wouldn't want the government to know such details. If those kind of people can come down on you for the simple fact of your maintaining your privacy, imagine what they could do with REAL information about your demographic?

Nice job, libs. Previously I wasn't concerned with releasing such information about my family (as indicated in an earlier post in this thread). Your intellectual masturbations have done nothing more than to compel me to deny the feds such information.

Maybe the individuals of the so-implied "tolerant" political persuasion will someday learn that tolerance includes ideas that they don't agree with. History forces me to doubt that eventuality, but one can still hope...

In any case, does not anyone else see the pattern? Someone who's generally conservative states an opinion about a government function, and those of the opposite viewpoint unite to shoot it down!

Quite frankly, an intellectually honest person would have either thought or said, "I understand, although I disagree." But it requires an intellectual response (rather than an emotional one) to reach that conclusion, so I suppose my expectations are too high.

Resultingly, like I said, I will be withholding certain information, and I hope that other independent thinkers follow suit, as its clear the type of people who want the information the most are the most intolerant of said info.

Again, nicely done, libs. I can only hope that I will someday be able to shut off my brain to such an extent as you have.

useless dribble from a sprawling bureaucracy IMHO

So things that come under bits of the constitution you like are perfect and noble and bits you don't like are useless dribble.

I have elected to fill out the only part of the census required - and i'm receiving flack for it?

Yes, because of the gaping flaws in your reasoning. If your action made sense or was consistant you wouldn't be getting much flak for it.

[GoldenRivet]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Yes, because of the gaping flaws in your reasoning. If your action made sense or was consistant you wouldn't be getting much flak for it.

my reasoning is quite simple.

perhaps if i list it out you will understand it better...

here are the 6 super easy basic points you should understand, please review them

Number 1:

I DO NOT think the government is going to round up my family - or anyone for that matter - based on census data. how many times do i have to repeat this statement in one thread???

Number 2:

The constitution is the "supreme law of the land" in the United States. It specifically gives the U.S. Census the power to "enumerate people".

Number 3:

Of the 10 questions on the form... Only question number one is required. "How many people currently occupy your residence?"

Number 4:

As a United States Citizen, I have the right to choose whether i DO or i DO NOT provide an answer to the remaining nine questions.

Number 5:

I have elected to exercise my right NOT to provide those answers.

Number 6:

My original post made no remarks concerning politics, race, creed, religion or age. Nor did it make any remarks about whether or not i think the census is a good thing or a bad thing. My original post made no remarks or hints as to whether or not i view the census as necessary or unnecessary.

The original post simply stated my actions as

a. filling out the required form

b. mailing the SOB in (SOB is by no means meant to be derogatory... i live in deep East Texas... "son of a bitch" is a phrase that is applied to many things in every day conversation)

c. an off color joke about water boarding (grow a sense of humor... like the government is going to actually force me to provide census answers under duress hahaha )

---------------

FACT: as a result of expressing myself, the peace loving, tolerant left wing members of this forum almost immediately attacked me for my opinions.

i hope this post has helped you to understand my position.

EDIT:

Originally Posted by Tribesman

So things that come under bits of the constitution you like are perfect and noble and bits you don't like are useless dribble.

code of federal regulations (CFR) is NOT a part of the United States constitution.

my reasoning is quite simple.

perhaps if i list it out you will understand it better...

I understand your reasoning fine, it just makes no real sense.

For example

Number 2:

The constitution is the "supreme law of the land" in the United States. It specifically gives the U.S. Census the power to "enumerate people".

wow, what else does it do?
Oh yeah that involves "useless dribble" because some parts of the constitution you claim to love so much does things you don't like.

Number 3:

Of the 10 questions on the form... Only question number one is required. "How many people currently occupy your residence?"

Thats funny, even the first census put together only 2 years after the ratification asked more than that.
Since the people that were the government then and did the set up for the census were the same people who did the constitution it strongly suggests you are reading their intentions wrong.

Number 4:

As a United States Citizen, I have the right to choose whether i DO or i DO NOT provide an answer to the remaining nine questions.

Indeed, which means the government must go to more expense and add more layers of bureaucracy to get the information it needs.
Its one major reason why your reasoning is flawed.
You complain about a sprawling bureaucracy and its intrusiveness and then act to make it even bigger and more intrusive.

code of federal regulations (CFR) is NOT a part of the United States constitution.

Indeed, but its the constitution allows for them...or is that one of the things the constitution allows that you don't like rather than the bits of the constitution you do like.

[August]

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

FACT: as a result of expressing myself, the peace loving, tolerant left wing members of this forum almost immediately attacked me for my opinions.

It never pays to feed the troll GR.

It never pays to feed the troll GR.

You really shouldn't put yourself down like that august.

Originally Posted by Tribesman

You really shouldn't put yourself down like that august.

August wasn't putting himself down.

Tribesman, you realy should read the US Constitution before commenting on it.
Your knowledge thereof appears to be slightly higher than Zero.

[GoldenRivet]

Originally Posted by August

It never pays to feed the troll GR.

[tater]

Race questions aree absurd, since race is not a useful concept in the first place, and the so-called races available are not even races. "Hispanic" is not a race.

I've seen attempt to put Homo sapiens into a clade with sub-species as races---basically what used to be caucusoid, negroid, mongoloid, but where the mongoloid splits into a 2 with one being native americans, and adds oceania (New Guinea and Australian Aborigines) as another.

Regardless, it's effectively meaningless, and given add-mixtures in the US utterly pointless except to facilitate institutional racism (sometimes called "reverse" racism, it is none the less simple racism).

IMO, the biggest problem is counting non-citizens. Your citizenship status is a question that should be there, but is not. If you're not a citizen (or legal resident) you frankly should not count.

[AVGWarhawk]

I answered for each SS# in my household. I just want to make sure my county gets the proper amount of money from the Feds. I answered honestly. In the end it is just a head count.

August wasn't putting himself down.

Really???????

Tribesman, you realy should read the US Constitution before commenting on it.

Thats rich considering you are defending someone who makes a point about not knowing what they are commenting on and flatly refuses to read the documents they wish to comment on.
So Snestorm which part of the US constitution and legislation that arises from it would you like to discuss in relation to the topic in hand and the questions raised herein....or are you just being a troll as usual?


Whats up goldenrivet? have you found that your position makes no sense with the comprehension that your worrying "modern developments" in relation to the census deviating from the constitution actually go all the way back to the first census carried out by the people who wrote the constitution.

I just want to make sure my county gets the proper amount of money from the Feds. I answered honestly. In the end it is just a head count.

Best answer in the topic

[August]

Originally Posted by tater

Race questions aree absurd, since race is not a useful concept in the first place, and the so-called races available are not even races. "Hispanic" is not a race.

I've seen attempt to put Homo sapiens into a clade with sub-species as races---basically what used to be caucusoid, negroid, mongoloid, but where the mongoloid splits into a 2 with one being native americans, and adds oceania (New Guinea and Australian Aborigines) as another.

Regardless, it's effectively meaningless, and given add-mixtures in the US utterly pointless except to facilitate institutional racism (sometimes called "reverse" racism, it is none the less simple racism).

IMO, the biggest problem is counting non-citizens. Your citizenship status is a question that should be there, but is not. If you're not a citizen (or legal resident) you frankly should not count.

Exactly. We're supposed to be a melting pot yet our government seems to do all it can to sub divide us.

[GoldenRivet]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Whats up goldenrivet? have you found that your position makes no sense with the comprehension that your worrying "modern developments" in relation to the census deviating from the constitution actually go all the way back to the first census carried out by the people who wrote the constitution.

sigh...

Sorry, i have a life which requires my presence elsewhere quite frequently

As it was recommended to me - i am simply trying to stop "feeding the troll"

My argument is a simple one, it does not have anything to do with the way the census was done 10 years ago or 100 years ago or even the very first census etc.

I dont care if there were 10,000 questions on the 287 page census 200 years ago... i dont.

the fact of the matter is as follows:

Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons. The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years

The sole purpose of the census, in accordance with the above direct quote from the United States Constitution is that representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned based on the enumeration of person every ten years.

this census, as those before it, comes every ten years. If the census has two questions on it... that is ONE QUESTION TOO MANY if you go by the strictest letter of interpretation of the above quotation.

all of that aside...

my argument is - I have exercised my right as a citizen to answer the only ONE required question on the form versus answering all ten.

thats it. That sir, represents the bulk of my point.

the way you whip this dead horse to a blood soaked unrecognizable mass... you would think i broke the law... or performed some wickedly evil deed which deeply affected you on a personal, financial or professional level

I really dont understand your strong personal desire to convince me that it was "wrong" or "immoral" or "dastardly" in some way for me elect not to not provide the other 9 answers on my own free will.

it might not have been the "right thing to do" in your eyes... or the eyes platapus... or even in the eyes of Mr. mookie or any number of other people...

but it was the right thing to do from my viewpoint.

In the end, you sir must learn to live by the saying "to each his own"

the decision to fill out the census in the manner which i selected was MY decision alone to make - a choice belonging to none other than me.

I shouldn't be chastised... least of all by you... for that decision.