The USA Census

fatchowmein

Hillbilly61 wrote: »

Your response is worth $3000 in direct benefit for services (and only includes you - household members are direct multipliers of the $3000 you community received) that are received from the government at all levels. That includes having your street snow plowed,pot holes patched, how you kids receive their education... pretty much anywhere the government can supply money.

Attention all DFW Polkies: Write down 10,000 for the number of people living at your abode so we can get all the federal money to turn our toll roads into regular highways for the next 10 years.

hearingimpared

bobman1235 wrote: »

ALSO, if anyone can explain to me what they get out of the census that they can't get from tax information, I'd love to hear it.

Every legal American is required to file taxes, which includes dependents like children. The only thing the Census adds is illegals to the equation, and I could give a **** if they get counted.

Not true Bob. I haven't had to send a tax return since I've been on SSD according to the IRS.

hearingimpared

mhmacw wrote: »

B.S. see the top of the scale" filing status" that means you have to file wether you owe or not:rolleyes:

Not true.

I don't know Hillbilly. I am very suspicious of giving anything more than the amount of people living in my home. I don't care what their claims of confidentiality are. The federally and state run programs such as welfare and Social Security are too full of holes and they will find a way to screw you out of the money anyway they can. I've experienced this problem in the past.

One more thing. How are they guaranteeing confidentiality? A hacker can get into any system, government or private sector so I don't feel that comfortable giving them anymore information than a head count.

hearingimpared

Continued from above.

I think the Social Security Administration and the Welfare Board will be able to use any information put in the census return against you if they think it will save them money.

It is a fact that the SSIA turn down 90% of first time claims. This is in hopes that a great percentage of people will give up or don't know to get an SSI attorney. SSI attorneys typically get 25% or just under $6000 dollars of your "awarded" money, whichever is less, to represent you in SS court. Why do I need an attorney to collect funds that I've put into the system for over 35 years? Is it not my money? It took three years for me to get my "awarded" money, in the meantime I had to go on welfare and live like a pauper for those three years. They didn't have to wait three years to get the SSI/Welfare taxes out of my paycheck, no, it came out instantly.

It's as simple as this. If the Social Security Administration can stop my SSD payments because they saw pictures of me on Facebook dancing and smiling at my sons wedding because I don't look depressed or full of panic at the time. Why would they not use any information given in the census against me? I am very suspicious of the way our government works in these matters. So as far as I am concerned they get a head count, not that I have anything to hide, a head count, period.

dave shepard

hearingimpared wrote: »

Not true.

One more thing. How are they guaranteeing confidentiality? A hacker can get into any system, government or private sector so I don't feel that comfortable giving them anymore information than a head count.

It was a couple years ago when a Census "Stupid ****" went into a resturant leaving the laptop containing all the personal information of countless thousands of people in his car when someone came along seen the laptop in his car, broke in and stole it. That was on the news a couple years ago and I thought well that was just one of the smartest things anybody could do especally someone with that kind of information :rolleyes:.

Bobman stated that illegals were put into the equation, my question would be if you are here ilegally how do they know you are here that way? and why are they still here? don't they use you SS# to put you on the list for recieving the questionaire?

Dave

Demiurge

dave shepard wrote: »

don't they use you SS# to put you on the list for recieving the questionaire?

Dave

Don't quote me on this, but it's my understanding that they send these out to every single residential address. They would have no idea whether you or the people living in your home are legal US citizens or not.

hearingimpared

Demiurge wrote: »

Don't quote me on this, but it's my understanding that they send these out to every single residential address. They would have no idea whether you or the people living in your home are legal US citizens or not.

So they are not asking for SS numbers on the form?

bobman1235

hearingimpared wrote: »

So they are not asking for SS numbers on the form?

Correct.



As for the filing taxes comment above, I admit I was obviously wrong. I guess the POINT was that even if you don't file taxes, the government knows you exist. Somewhere they're alerted that you're making money below the threshold and don't need to pay taxes. If you're subsiding on social security, guess what? That's a government organization, and they know they're paying you social security. If you're living on disability? Same schpiel.

This isn't 1820. It takes a concerted effort for the feds to NOT know you exist, and if you're going through that effort, you're not filling out a census either. Rather than spending hundreds of millions of dollars advertising and sending out pieces of paper by carrier pigeon, maybe they should pool all this information they have elsewhere. There's these magical things called computers that can correlate information pretty damned well.

nooshinjohn

Hillbilly61 wrote: »

The Census is used by Uncle Sam to spend the moneys that he collects via our taxes. Once collected, the money becomes his to spend. Except we get a say and the Census is the starting point!

The census was never meant to determine how tax dollars are spent.

mhmacw

it seems ive used the wrong terminology and for that i appologise. let me digress. whether you are on the giving end (taxpayer/worker) or the receiving end (ssi/disability/welfare/politicion...whatever) your income is being REPORTED. wether you report it via a tax return or an extention or the like or its reported by the agency you are getting your check from. the fact remains...there is all the info the census needs at the irs. stop spending our tax dollars to send out and burdon our mail system with 300000000+ census forms.

cstmar01

mhmacw wrote: »

it seems ive used the wrong terminology and for that i appologise. let me digress. whether you are on the giving end (taxpayer/worker) or the receiving end (ssi/disability/welfare/politicion...whatever) your income is being REPORTED. wether you report it via a tax return or an extention or the like or its reported by the agency you are getting your check from. the fact remains...there is all the info the census needs at the irs. stop spending our tax dollars to send out and burdon our mail system with 300000000+ census forms.

But then the post office would have nothing to deliver, doesn't everyone believe in email now-a-days??

jk.

dkg999

The only legal requirement is to provide how many people reside at your address. I believe the constitutional requirement was to take a count of the people to insure fair representation, what we refer to now as redistricting. The census is sent to addresses, names or other information isn't even used or included in the file that is built to drive the mailing of the census forms. I used to help build that file. The number of addresses the census should be mailed to is in the 205 million range. The USPS counts around 168 million delivery points for their carriers, not every address receives USPS mail delivery. The Census Bureau is looking at ways to use the internet, mobile messaging, etc. to facilitate the census.

Hillbilly - are you one of the census workers being paid to promote the census via social networks and other online sites?

madmax

Demiurge wrote: »

I don't really care about my name and phone number being compromised. That information is already out there for anyone who wants it. The point is that it doesn't need to be on the census form.

None of the questions about race have any bearing on anything either (or shouldn't, more importantly) It's how that data will be used that has people very skeptical. I'm glad for you that you're so trusting. Keep in mind the information is only as safe as the people protecting it.

Why do you choose to call tax dollars government funds? The less the federal government is taking in and doling out the better.

+1

And, they should not ask race but should ask immigration status.

shepx2

Hillbilly61 wrote: »

You are TOTALLY safe. That is about the only thing I will trust re. the government keeping confidential. The confidentiality is per requirements laid out by the Constitution.

Sorry, but I don't ever feel totally safe when the government is involved.

Oh, and the Constitution hasn't stopped them from ignoring it when convenient for themselves.

concealer404

The founding fathers specified a head count. That's what they'll get from me. No more. No less.

unc2701

madmax wrote: »

+1

And, they should not ask race but should ask immigration status.

Legally, they can ask anything and constitutionally they have to count everyone.

In addition to the mail addresses, they have a method identifying every residential unit in an area, that basically involves sending people out to follow certain paths on the streets. It's a total pain, but usually only done in areas where they know that the mailing points aren't sufficient (I had to do it for a survey sampling class).

One of the byproducts of the census are the TIGER maps- useful when you do GIS and can't find a better source for an area.

polktiger

The purpose of the census is NOT to divy up the federal government budget. The sole purpose (currently) is to count the population for purposes of allocating representatives in the House and therefore also allocating the electoral college votes.

Clause 3: 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. (See Note 2) 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, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct. The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative; and until such enumeration shall be made, the State of New Hampshire shall be entitled to chuse three, Massachusetts eight, Rhode-Island and Providence Plantations one, Connecticut five, New-York six, New Jersey four, Pennsylvania eight, Delaware one, Maryland six, Virginia ten, North Carolina five, South Carolina five, and Georgia three.

http://www.house.gov/house/Constitution/Constitution.html

The above has obviously been amended by the 13th and 14 amendments which got rid of the 3/5 compromise and "free persons." This is also why we count illegal immigrants. The 16th amendment superceeded the above language related to taxes.

Nowhere in the above do you find that the census is to be used to accumulate additional demographic data. However, that govenment that we can trust to keep our information confidential has been gathering unnecessary information via the census for at least a century if not longer. Also you will see that there is no such thing as a Constitutional requirement to keep the information gathered via the census confidential. The confidential requirement is in Title 13 of the US Code, so it is merely a "law" and not a constitutional requirement. The fine in section 214 of title 13 sets forth a whopping max $5,000 fine and/or 5 years in jail for illegally disclosing information.

schutz2106

Question here.... Why send out a advance letter? Do they think we are all that stupid that we cant read the big print on the front of the envelope when the form actually comes. And all the millions on ads. Then the actual form. AND then we had census workers walk half our town and personally drop forms off at houses. Seems kinda stupid to me. 1 mass bulk mailing to every address in the US and it would be done and over. Then we could move on and worry about the mess that our country is in.

concealer404

schutz2106 wrote: »

Question here.... Why send out a advance letter? Do they think we are all that stupid that we cant read the big print on the front of the envelope when the form actually comes. And all the millions on ads. Then the actual form. AND then we had census workers walk half our town and personally drop forms off at houses. Seems kinda stupid to me. 1 mass bulk mailing to every address in the US and it would be done and over. Then we could move on and worry about the mess that our country is in.

Someone's gotta keep the USPS in business.

Demiurge

schutz2106 wrote: »

Question here.... Why send out a advance letter? Do they think we are all that stupid that we cant read the big print on the front of the envelope when the form actually comes. And all the millions on ads. Then the actual form. AND then we had census workers walk half our town and personally drop forms off at houses. Seems kinda stupid to me. 1 mass bulk mailing to every address in the US and it would be done and over. Then we could move on and worry about the mess that our country is in.

Compared to all the money they piss away on absolute BS this is a drop in the bucket, but it's a valid point none the less.

unc2701

schutz2106 wrote: »

Question here.... Why send out a advance letter? Do they think we are all that stupid that we cant read the big print on the front of the envelope when the form actually comes. And all the millions on ads. Then the actual form. AND then we had census workers walk half our town and personally drop forms off at houses. Seems kinda stupid to me. 1 mass bulk mailing to every address in the US and it would be done and over. Then we could move on and worry about the mess that our country is in.

See above for the issues about mailing.

Regarding the advertising and pre-mailing, it's good survey methodology. Since they're tasked with getting a response from every household in America, doing those things to get the response rate up on the initial mailing is actually cheaper than what they have to do to find the non-responders.

treitz3

shepx2 wrote:

Sorry, but I don't ever feel totally safe when the government is involved.

Oh, and the Constitution hasn't stopped them from ignoring it when it's convenient for themselves.

Texas knows what's going on. Nail, hammer, head...that sort of thing.

concealer404 wrote:

The founding fathers specified a head count.

Ding, ding, ding....we have a winner.

dkg999

Every 1% additional response saves the Census Bureau $85 million in costs for the enumerators to visit the addresses to collect the information. The estimate was that they could improve response rates by 4% minimum with the advance letter, so the potential ROI is pretty good.

bobman1235

I just think they could save a hell of a lot more than that if they used the already existing information out there to compile census data rather than relying on what is essentially an anonymous poll.

And to those harping on the fact that it's in the Constitution, when they wrote it they didn't have a concept of "computers" and the vastness of counting 300 million people. Times have changed, and there are more accurate and MUCH more cost-effective ways to get this information than sending out a survey.

Danny Tse

bobman1235 wrote: »

I just think they could save a hell of a lot more than that if they used the already existing information out there to compile census data rather than relying on what is essentially an anonymous poll.

I think you are on the right track, although I think the Feds want info tailored to their needs.

I don't know what's the big fuss about the census here....it's just a survey conducted by the Feds every 10 years. Would it kill you to do your 10 minutes of civil duty? I must say that I do work the government (but not the Feds) and I used to work with demographics so that we can provide better service to those who needs it.

bobman1235

My fuss isn't about the effort (it took me 30 seconds to fill out the form), just the enormous amounts of money spent to actually conduct the Census itself. If the ADVERTISING budget was 130 million dollars, I can't imagine what the actual operating budget was.

Demiurge

bobman1235 wrote: »

My fuss isn't about the effort (it took me 30 seconds to fill out the form), just the enormous amounts of money spent to actually conduct the Census itself. If the ADVERTISING budget was 130 million dollars, I can't imagine what the actual operating budget was.

I agree with that and all of the crap with race is also completely unnecessary. If all men are created equal as far as the government is concerned, why does the government need to know our race? This isn't a **** about this particular census, because it's been going on for a long time. They've been asking the race questions since 1970.

Bugs me. Seems like they want to figure out how much they have to pander.

dpowell

Hillbilly61 wrote: »

You are TOTALLY safe. That is about the only thing I will trust re. the government keeping confidential. The confidentiality is per requirements laid out by the Constitution.

If information is in a database on a network, it is not TOTALLY safe. PERIOD.

unc2701

dpowell wrote: »

If information is in a database on a network, it is not TOTALLY safe. PERIOD.

Identifying information isn't entered into the database and they do local tabulation.

So for example, on the long form, your salary doesn't go into the database; they do the statistics for your block group and that information is stored under the block group, not for individual households.

For the current population survey (between the Census years), if you are really good with the sample weight algorithms and know some information about your neighbors, it is possible for a person to get some estimates at the block level that are only tabulated at the block group level, but you wouldn't be able to confirm that your assumptions were correct.

bobman1235

dpowell wrote: »

If information is in a database on a network, it is not TOTALLY safe. PERIOD.

Any information you're going to give them already EXISTS on a database on a network. PERIOD.