Put a lock in your underwear drawer....

[alan1]

What is your religion?

Isn't that a loaded question? It has an inherent assumption that you have a religion.

 

[DiveCon]

the only thing the Census has the constitutional authority to ask is how many people live there
thats IT

 

[DamnYankee]

The Census questions are coming!
...

What the hell?

Questions: How old are you and members of your household? What is your religion? Have you ever been on food stamps? What is your phone number? What is your race?

Census bureau spokesperson Shelly Lowe: if anyone over 18 refuses to answer any of the questions asked by census takers you can be fined up to $100.

Oh... yeah.... I REALLY liked THAT one.... And Sarah's criticizing Bachman here....

 

[Care4all]

the only thing the Census has the constitutional authority to ask is how many people live there
thats IT

DC, until it is constitutionally challenged in court, with a ruling eventually ending at the SC....the Laws on the books now, have to be followed...and presumed constitutional.

the census in 2000 had all the same questions, and i have not seen this be challenged or any challenge being ruled on by the SC or any higher courts, have you, the past 9 years? really, i am not certain if it has been challenged?

care

 

[DiveCon]

the only thing the Census has the constitutional authority to ask is how many people live there
thats IT

DC, until it is constitutionally challenged in court, with a ruling eventually ending at the SC....the Laws on the books now, have to be followed...and presumed constitutional.

the census in 2000 had all the same questions, and i have not seen this be challenged or any challenge being ruled on by the SC or any higher courts, have you, the past 9 years? really, i am not certain if it has been challenged?

care

nor have i heard of anyone being fined or jailed for only answering the constitutionally mandated questions and ignoring those that arent

 

[DamnYankee]

The census, among other things will determine representation. Congresswoman Bachmann could lose her seat if enough people refuse to be counted.

poor mrs Bachmann.....

Bachmann is one of the biggest embarrassments in congress. These Rs sure can pick 'em.

yea so can those D's....Pelosi Reid Boxer Kennedy Kerry Franks and the newest Franken....all embarrassments...go ahead Sarah...give us a laugh and defend them....

Was beginning to wonder about you after the first comment.

 

[DamnYankee]

The Census questions are coming!
...

What the hell?

Questions: How old are you and members of your household? What is your religion? Have you ever been on food stamps? What is your phone number? What is your race?

Census bureau spokesperson Shelly Lowe: if anyone over 18 refuses to answer any of the questions asked by census takers you can be fined up to $100.

Can you be fined for answering with a question?

How old are you and members of your household? Cumulatively?
What is your religion? Can you define all the religions so I can make up my mind?
Have you ever been on food stamps? Do you mean before or after I reached the age of suffrage?
What is your phone number? The phone I answer, or the one with the answering machine?
What is your race? I like all racing, horse racing, car racing, bicycle racing, swim races, running races, etc, can you narrow the question down for me?

the only thing the Census has the constitutional authority to ask is how many people live there
thats IT

DC, until it is constitutionally challenged in court, with a ruling eventually ending at the SC....the Laws on the books now, have to be followed...and presumed constitutional.

the census in 2000 had all the same questions, and i have not seen this be challenged or any challenge being ruled on by the SC or any higher courts, have you, the past 9 years? really, i am not certain if it has been challenged?

care

The 2000 Census Questions
Census 2000 Questionnaire Questions

Planned for 2010
2010 Census: Census Bureau Submits Questions for 2010 Census and American Community Survey to Congress

Personally, I find them both intrusive and waaaay more than anyone needs to know for the purposes of election districting or population counting to allocate funding. Punitive threats for non-compliance tend to be effective, don't they? Well, by adding a little more intrusion, and another type of "tea party" seems to be brewing.

 

[Epsilon Delta]

You don't HAVE to answer everything on the census... right? Do you even have to answer it at all?

Censuses are useful tools for a variety of reasons; planning, fund-allocation, poverty statistics, etc. I don't know why you guys are so scared.

 

[RadiomanATL]

You don't HAVE to answer everything on the census... right? Do you even have to answer it at all?

Yes, but charges have never been pursued against those that do not answer the questions. Too much a waste of resources.

 

[DamnYankee]

You don't HAVE to answer everything on the census... right? Do you even have to answer it at all?

Censuses are useful tools for a variety of reasons; planning, fund-allocation, poverty statistics, etc. I don't know why you guys are so scared.

Just because you missed it the first 3 (?) times

Census bureau spokesperson Shelly Lowe: if anyone over 18 refuses to answer any of the questions asked by census takers you can be fined up to $100.

 

[DamnYankee]

You don't HAVE to answer everything on the census... right? Do you even have to answer it at all?

Yes, but charges have never been pursued against those that do not answer the questions. Too much a waste of resources.

Ohhhh..... That must be something like it being "too much a waste of resources" to pursue those that do not pay their taxes..... Ya think?

 

[RadiomanATL]

You don't HAVE to answer everything on the census... right? Do you even have to answer it at all?

Yes, but charges have never been pursued against those that do not answer the questions. Too much a waste of resources.

Ohhhh..... That must be something like it being "too much a waste of resources" to pursue those that do not pay their taxes..... Ya think?

Not really the same thing. I mean on taxes you're talking about serious money on the ones that they pursue. Uncle Sam gets very jealous if you mess with the money that he thinks is his. On the census if someone doesn't answer some questions it just won't have that positive/negative an impact on the census as a whole.

 

[DamnYankee]

Yes, but charges have never been pursued against those that do not answer the questions. Too much a waste of resources.

Ohhhh..... That must be something like it being "too much a waste of resources" to pursue those that do not pay their taxes..... Ya think?

Not really the same thing. I mean on taxes you're talking about serious money on the ones that they pursue. Uncle Sam gets very jealous if you mess with the money that he thinks is his. On the census if someone doesn't answer some questions it just won't have that positive/negative an impact on the census as a whole.

Q: Taxes have an annual due date, with a payer ID # associated with the filed records (your SS#). If you happen to miss the due date on any of your other obligations, you arereminded, with increasing frequency and intensity, until the obligation is met. How is it that Uncle Sam was not jealous in the case of (how many?) Obama appointees (and God only knows how many others)?

THAT money is/was supposed to PAY for the resulting data from the Census questions that WERE answered. And IF the questions are NOT answered, THEIR theory is that THEY cannot allocate that money (that's not being pursued in the first place) for the QUESTIONS they SPENT THE RESOURCES to think up and print and hand out and pursue answers to.

 

[RadiomanATL]

Ohhhh..... That must be something like it being "too much a waste of resources" to pursue those that do not pay their taxes..... Ya think?

Not really the same thing. I mean on taxes you're talking about serious money on the ones that they pursue. Uncle Sam gets very jealous if you mess with the money that he thinks is his. On the census if someone doesn't answer some questions it just won't have that positive/negative an impact on the census as a whole.

Q: Taxes have an annual due date, with a payer ID # associated with the filed records (your SS#). If you happen to miss the due date on any of your other obligations, you arereminded, with increasing frequency and intensity, until the obligation is met. How is it that Uncle Sam was not jealous in the case of (how many?) Obama appointees (and God only knows how many others)?

THAT money is/was supposed to PAY for the resulting data from the Census questions that WERE answered. And IF the questions are NOT answered, THEIR theory is that THEY cannot allocate that money (that's not being pursued in the first place) for the QUESTIONS they SPENT THE RESOURCES to think up and print and hand out and pursue answers to.

Not quite sure why you want the Feds to waste more of our money pursuing cases against people who refuse to answer the census fully, but OK. You want the feds to pursue the fines. I get it. I just disagree. The benefits ($100 to $500 depending on infraction) aren't worth the cost (thousands of dollars in labor etc).

 

[editec]

With all the shit coming down on so many of us, we're worried about the census invading our privacy?

Must be nice to be that clueless.

 

[Skull Pilot]

With all the shit coming down on so many of us, we're worried about the census invading our privacy?

Must be nice to be that clueless.

Yeah that privacy thing is sooooo yesterday.

We might as well just all tattoo our SS numbers on our foreheads. While we're at it we should also tattoo our most recent adjusted gross income on our forearms so we can identify all those evil rich people at a glance.

 

[DamnYankee]

You don't HAVE to answer everything on the census... right? Do you even have to answer it at all?

Yes, but charges have never been pursued against those that do not answer the questions. Too much a waste of resources.

Ohhhh..... That must be something like it being "too much a waste of resources" to pursue those that do not pay their taxes..... Ya think?

Not really the same thing. I mean on taxes you're talking about serious money on the ones that they pursue. Uncle Sam gets very jealous if you mess with the money that he thinks is his. On the census if someone doesn't answer some questions it just won't have that positive/negative an impact on the census as a whole.

Q: Taxes have an annual due date, with a payer ID # associated with the filed records (your SS#). If you happen to miss the due date on any of your other obligations, you arereminded, with increasing frequency and intensity, until the obligation is met. How is it that Uncle Sam was not jealous in the case of (how many?) Obama appointees (and God only knows how many others)?

THAT money is/was supposed to PAY for the resulting data from the Census questions that WERE answered. And IF the questions are NOT answered, THEIR theory is that THEY cannot allocate that money (that's not being pursued in the first place) for the QUESTIONS they SPENT THE RESOURCES to think up and print and hand out and pursue answers to.

Not quite sure why you want the Feds to waste more of our money pursuing cases against people who refuse to answer the census fully, but OK. You want the feds to pursue the fines. I get it. I just disagree. The benefits ($100 to $500 depending on infraction) aren't worth the cost (thousands of dollars in labor etc).

You must have missed the point. I do NOT want Census "violators" pursued for failure to answer "all questions". Already made that clear. I'm just really interested in your answer to Epsilon, given the clear answer I gave. Generally, for us little people, it's the THREAT that ensures compliance, and the big guys get away with BREAKING THE LAW because THEY CAN.

 

[RadiomanATL]

Yes, but charges have never been pursued against those that do not answer the questions. Too much a waste of resources.

Ohhhh..... That must be something like it being "too much a waste of resources" to pursue those that do not pay their taxes..... Ya think?

Q: Taxes have an annual due date, with a payer ID # associated with the filed records (your SS#). If you happen to miss the due date on any of your other obligations, you arereminded, with increasing frequency and intensity, until the obligation is met. How is it that Uncle Sam was not jealous in the case of (how many?) Obama appointees (and God only knows how many others)?

THAT money is/was supposed to PAY for the resulting data from the Census questions that WERE answered. And IF the questions are NOT answered, THEIR theory is that THEY cannot allocate that money (that's not being pursued in the first place) for the QUESTIONS they SPENT THE RESOURCES to think up and print and hand out and pursue answers to.

Not quite sure why you want the Feds to waste more of our money pursuing cases against people who refuse to answer the census fully, but OK. You want the feds to pursue the fines. I get it. I just disagree. The benefits ($100 to $500 depending on infraction) aren't worth the cost (thousands of dollars in labor etc).

You must have missed the point. I do NOT want Census "violators" pursued for failure to answer "all questions". Already made that clear. I'm just really interested in your answer to Epsilon, given the clear answer I gave. Generally, for us little people, it's the THREAT that ensures compliance, and the big guys get away with BREAKING THE LAW because THEY CAN.

But in the case of the census, the little guys can get away with it as easily as the big guys. So again, not even close to the same thing.

 

[jillian]

You must have missed the point. I do NOT want Census "violators" pursued for failure to answer "all questions". Already made that clear. I'm just really interested in your answer to Epsilon, given the clear answer I gave. Generally, for us little people, it's the THREAT that ensures compliance, and the big guys get away with BREAKING THE LAW because THEY CAN.

seems you have a couple of choices then. you can comply with the law as written and complain after; you can violate the law and when prosecuted under it, can mount a constitutional challenge; or you can get the ACLU or some other similar group to sue for you.

it's kind of funny though that no one complained about the census when Bush was pres. Bachman's kind of a freak.... and given the lack of mouth from the right's loonies last go-'round, i'm thinking this is just more faux outrage.

and for the record, do you really think govt doesn't ALREADY know the stuff they're asking in census?

 

[DamnYankee]

Ohhhh..... That must be something like it being "too much a waste of resources" to pursue those that do not pay their taxes..... Ya think?

Not quite sure why you want the Feds to waste more of our money pursuing cases against people who refuse to answer the census fully, but OK. You want the feds to pursue the fines. I get it. I just disagree. The benefits ($100 to $500 depending on infraction) aren't worth the cost (thousands of dollars in labor etc).

You must have missed the point. I do NOT want Census "violators" pursued for failure to answer "all questions". Already made that clear. I'm just really interested in your answer to Epsilon, given the clear answer I gave. Generally, for us little people, it's the THREAT that ensures compliance, and the big guys get away with BREAKING THE LAW because THEY CAN.

But in the case of the census, the little guys can get away with it as easily as the big guys. So again, not even close to the same thing.

ENFORCING THE CENSUS LAWS. - Article Preview - The New York Times

Editorial: Census 2000 Creates a National Racial Profile.