2020 Census

lordfarquat

Really Really Experienced
Joined
Jul 21, 2015
Posts
391
I still find it interesting that Latinos are still classified as White on the US Census. Historically speaking, the majority of us are mestizos with some Iberian (Spanish or Portuguese) blood mixed with indigenous Americans. However, shouldn't it be its own category?
There are numerous issues with the Census. What are other people's gripes?
 
There were a large influx of Sicilian/Southern Italians immigrating to the US from the 1880s-1920s. They were not considered caucasians either. In fact, they were cast below free blacks and the Irish.

As for the census, the constitution requires an enumeration. All these other questions are technically, unconstitutional. During WW2, the FBI used census data to round up Japanese Americans to internment camps.
 
Last edited:
That there are any questions other than how many adults and how many children legally reside here.

We have a plethora of modern statistical tools and methods for garnering the answer(s) to any other questions that the government has about the makeup of the population. The census is the worst possible way to gather that information, but government is a control freak on crack.
 
So the Census is terrible. We should thus ditch it along with other Constitutional relics like the Post Office, Patent Office, and search warrants. Got it.
 
I think that of everything you just mentioned, only the Census is a part of the Constitution. It cannot be done away with, but it is currently being used as a tool of intrusive political power by SJWs.
 
So the Census is terrible. We should thus ditch it along with other Constitutional relics like the Post Office, Patent Office, and search warrants. Got it.

I think that of everything you just mentioned, only the Census is a part of the Constitution. It cannot be done away with, but it is currently being used as a tool of intrusive political power by SJWs.
They're all constitutional. See http://constitutionus.com

And the Trompian move is rather anti-SJW, trying to inhibit counts in Dum-leaning states. Yet more political manipulation with dire consequences. Gups know they can't win free and fair elections so this works hand-in-hand with gerrymnandering and voter suppression. Despicable.
 
You Be The Judge



Here are questions 12 – 14 from the 2000 Census, conducted under President Bill Clinton:

census-question-2000.png


https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/2000_long_form.pdf



 
The Post Office should be privatized. They run at a 7 billion dollar deficit each year. Approximately 95% of the first class mail they deliver is junk mail. Only 5% is correspondence. UPS & FedEX can't deliver 1st class mail because there is a law on the books that only allows the Post Office to deliver that.

The Patent office needs to be reformed because of litigious patent trolls.
 
They're all constitutional. See http://constitutionus.com

And the Trompian move is rather anti-SJW, trying to inhibit counts in Dum-leaning states. Yet more political manipulation with dire consequences. Gups know they can't win free and fair elections so this works hand-in-hand with gerrymnandering and voter suppression. Despicable.

Now you are trying to be semantically clever. I said IN the Constitution, not constitutional.
There is a bit of a difference there.
 
They're all constitutional. See http://constitutionus.com

And the Trompian move is rather anti-SJW, trying to inhibit counts in Dum-leaning states. Yet more political manipulation with dire consequences. Gups know they can't win free and fair elections so this works hand-in-hand with gerrymnandering and voter suppression. Despicable.
AJ can't read links. You have to spell things out for him.

ARTICLE I Section 8 - Congress shall have the power
7: To establish Post Offices and post Roads;

8: To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

Amendment IV - The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
 
And, the other things enumerated in her list?

(Not to mention that is says they have the power to, but not that they must do...)
 
If strict constructionism is what people are getting at, our government has reached far beyond its legal bounds. No one can deny that there is no significant check on our government because big business and the 1% that controls the finances of this country. I opine that the Constitution is an antiquated document with undeserved reverence.

In terms of the Census, I second the suggestion that only the number of adults and children in a residence is necessary. Other information can be shared via transparent means (preferably not from social media)
 
If strict constructionism is what people are getting at, our government has reached far beyond its legal bounds. No one can deny that there is no significant check on our government because big business and the 1% that controls the finances of this country. I opine that the Constitution is an antiquated document with undeserved reverence.

In terms of the Census, I second the suggestion that only the number of adults and children in a residence is necessary. Other information can be shared via transparent means (preferably not from social media)

The only reason that the "big business and the 1% that controls the finances" is only possible because central government was allowed to grow so large and powerful that they had no choice but to purchase indulgences.

As far as the second point (as per my first post) we are in agreement.
 
The only reason that the "big business and the 1% that controls the finances" is only possible because central government was allowed to grow so large and powerful that they had no choice but to purchase indulgences.

As far as the second point (as per my first post) we are in agreement.


I'm not quite sure if I'm in agreement about the first part. The Industrial Revolution led to the rise of Robber Barons and multimillionaires whose power quickly superseded those in power. The central government of the "Gilded Age" featured poor federal leadership to the extent that the South was segregated, most of the western states were locally run, and unions found themselves more at war with local police than the federal government.
 
I'm not quite sure if I'm in agreement about the first part. The Industrial Revolution led to the rise of Robber Barons and multimillionaires whose power quickly superseded those in power. The central government of the "Gilded Age" featured poor federal leadership to the extent that the South was segregated, most of the western states were locally run, and unions found themselves more at war with local police than the federal government.
USA's Gilded Age coincided with the 1870-95 global depression. Mere coincidence? USA in those days was widely known for corruption; its federal gov't was small, weak, and venal. Those jokes about locking up your money and women when the legislature was in session had a basis, yes?

WWI kicked off the era of big federal gov't; New Deal relief grew gov't more; WWII exploded it; and the postwar Cold War nurtured even more bloat. Welcome to the military-industrial complex's National Security State, spending more on 'security' than the rest of the world combined.

Here we are, the most powerful and prosperous nation in world history, and now the third most populous, after China and India. How is the nation's operating software? Are we trying to run a supecomputer with CP/M? How well can the nation run without knowing who's in it?
 
I'm not quite sure if I'm in agreement about the first part. The Industrial Revolution led to the rise of Robber Barons and multimillionaires whose power quickly superseded those in power. The central government of the "Gilded Age" featured poor federal leadership to the extent that the South was segregated, most of the western states were locally run, and unions found themselves more at war with local police than the federal government.

Weak central government is a feature, not a problem. The problem you point to was a local problem and one which would have rectified itself over time, which is not to say that I agree with what went on, but human nature is such that you just do not abrogate if by legal decree. Like any addict, people in the South had to want to change.

As for Robber Barons, who cares? It only lasts until the grandchildren get their hands on the fortune. I mean, if Robber Barons are so problematic in keeping people poor, why don't we rail against the half-dozen or so that we have now created by the tech boom? Is it because they are reliably Progressive and support the Democrat Party, agenda and seek to keep them in the position to govern? Why don't we go full-Hypoxia and blame them for Hypoxia's Great Bush Depression?
 
A little more on Robber Barons

At least the former group, the Industrialists put people, in great numbers, to work and gave them wages sufficient to pull them up into the Middle Class. Today's Robber Barons do not require very much manpower. And when they do, they use the central government's visa system to import as much cheap labor as they can. Are their profits then more moral than the profits taken by those of the past?
 
Back
Top