What will you tell the census taker?

[dmccormack]

I'll take it one step further - the authority to make the statute comes from the Constitution.

See post #78

 

[tdager]

They aren't asking income questions this year, so you can relax...

http://2010.census.gov/2010census/how/interactive-form.php

But if they were, and you didn't answer on the mail-in form, they'd send a census taker to your home to get the answers. Somehow, protesting government inefficiency by causing inefficiency seems like a counterproductive way to register your objections...kind of like being the sole pax on a business jet traveling to the climate summit.


Trapper John

I guess I would just have to live with my inconsistency and pay the $100 fine because I still would not answer the question.

 

[Obi Heed Kenobi]

In Texas, disclosure of the purchase price is not mandatory, and Deeds of Trust can be drafted without including that information;

....

No kidding. I thought most states were getting away from that. It used to be that way in Maryland, but the law changed 5 or so years ago.

I can see it both ways. Personally, I'd prefer that my financial information (as in, value of my home, amount/term of my loan, etc.) not be publicly available - why is that anyone's business?

At the same time, however, in terms of title searching, I think there's a legitimate need for it. If I'm buying a house, I think I should be able to see what the loan amounts are on the property - it's in my interests that the loan be paid off, unless I want to have the risk of assuming an unknown amount if it's not....

 

[Obi Heed Kenobi]

See post #78

You beat me to it.

 

[Trapper John]

I'll take it one step further - the authority to make the statute comes from the Constitution.

Yeah, I guess I should have said, "current authority for the current set of questions."


Trapper John

 

[Trapper John]

No kidding. I thought most states were getting away from that. It used to be that way in Maryland, but the law changed 5 or so years ago.

I can see it both ways. Personally, I'd prefer that my financial information (as in, value of my home, amount/term of my loan, etc.) not be publicly available - why is that anyone's business?

At the same time, however, in terms of title searching, I think there's a legitimate need for it. If I'm buying a house, I think I should be able to see what the loan amounts are on the property - it's in my interests that the loan be paid off, unless I want to have the risk of assuming an unknown amount if it's not....

In a number of states, a real estate transfer tax is levied, so the powers that be need to know the transaction price to collect the tax.


Trapper John

 

[Obi Heed Kenobi]

In a number of states, a real estate transfer tax is levied, so the powers that be need to know the transaction price to collect the tax.


Trapper John

That's actually one of the reasons Maryland started requiring the actual purchase price be in the instruments (namely the deeds) - taxes were calculated based on that, and too many people were abusing the privilege.

There's certainly an argument as to the rightness/wrongness of transfer taxes and the like (as in, they get us coming and going), but the law's the law, and you gots to obey it.

 

[Everskyward]

Personally, I'd prefer that my financial information (as in, value of my home, amount/term of my loan, etc.) not be publicly available - why is that anyone's business?

That ship has already sailed a long time ago, though. Anyone can look up the approximate value of your house on sites like Zillow.com as long as they know your address.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

But Dave, others have said that they're not using the long form this decade. Do you have a reason to believe that's incorrect?

It looks to me as if it asks for name, home ownership, phone (in case followup is needed), DOB, race, gender, and Hispanic ethnicity. I don't even see occupation or relationship anymore!

Grant they are circulating the other form which I refer to as the long firm to one out of six folks. Sorry, I'm at work and can't give the cites. If you look at what Dave Taylor posted early in this thread, if differentiates and explains.

Best,

Dave

 

[Dave Siciliano]

That ship has already sailed a long time ago, though. Anyone can look up the approximate value of your house on sites like Zillow.com as long as they know your address.

For someone in the RE business like me, Zillow is not a reliable source at all. Some pricing I've seen on there isn't even close to FMV.

Best,

Dave

 

[Everskyward]

Grant they are circulating the other form which I refer to as the long firm to one out of six folks. Sorry, I'm at work and can't give the cites. If you look at what Dave Taylor posted early in this thread, if differentiates and explains.

I think people are getting mixed up because the 2010 Census does not include the long form but there is another tracking method called the American Community Survey which supposedly has been going on since 2005.

http://www.census.gov/acs/www/SBasics/What/What1.htm

 

[gprellwitz]

Grant they are circulating the other form which I refer to as the long firm to one out of six folks. Sorry, I'm at work and can't give the cites. If you look at what Dave Taylor posted early in this thread, if differentiates and explains.

Best,

Dave

Dave,
According to the census bureau, there will be no long form this year, at least under that name:

Planning for the 2010 Census began soon after the 2000 Census, and incorporated new or improved components, including: a new annual American Community Survey (ACS) to replace the Decennial Census long-form and provide more timely data; an improved address list and mapping database that brings all street center lines into GPS alignment; a new short-form only Decennial Census; technology to capture data from paper, telephone and field sources; and replacement of legacy systems for tabulating and disseminating results. A major aspect of this reengineered Census will be data collected using handheld computers (HHCs) for Address Canvassing. This is conducted in the year prior to the decennial to verify housing unit addresses in each census block. HHCs were to have been used for Non-Response Follow-Up, which collects information from households that do not return the Census questionnaire by mail, and for other processes; under the replan, NRFU will now be paper-based.

And "the Census Bureau mails ACS questionnaires only to approximately 1 out of every 480 households"so, even though it's annual instead of decennial, it's nowhere near 1 in six.

Of course, the fines have grown:

Respondents are required to answer all questions on the American Community Survey (ACS) to the best of their ability. Response to this and other Census surveys is required by law (Section 221 of Title 13, Chapter 7, United States Code). This chapter also contains information regarding offenses and possible penalties. According to Section 221, persons who do not respond shall be fined not more than $100. Title 18 U.S.C. Section 3571 and Section 3559, in effect amends Title 13 U.S.C. Section 221 by changing the fine for anyone over 18 years old who refuses or willfully neglects to complete the questionnaire or answer questions posed by census takers from a fine of not more than $100 to not more than $5,000. More information.

 

[Everskyward]

For someone in the RE business like me, Zillow is not a reliable source at all. Some pricing I've seen on there isn't even close to FMV.

But it's probably as accurate as someone's estimate of the value of their house who is not in the RE business. I have no idea really what the value of my house is, just the assessed value, which is what shows up on Zillow.

 

[Ted]

Thus the census determines Representation.

But that is strictly number of persons in a given district. Any information beyond that is unnecessary. IRS finds out how much money you make, why do you need to report that?

 

[Trapper John]

But it's probably as accurate as someone's estimate of the value of their house who is not in the RE business. I have no idea really what the value of my house is, just the assessed value, which is what shows up on Zillow.

That's what Zillow shows for my place, too. I think that's what their valuation model defaults to, unless there are a lot of comps in the area to draw from.

But, if your local assessor is good, you'll get a reasonable estimate. And, there are plenty of people in the RE business that won't get you any better information. As far as I can tell, the person with the best sense of real estate value out there isn't even a realtor or developer, it's John Paulson, of Paulson & Associates, who made about $15 billion in the CDS market after researching and realizing how overvalued the RE market was.


Trapper John

 

[Trapper John]

But that is strictly number of persons in a given district. Any information beyond that is unnecessary. IRS finds out how much money you make, why do you need to report that?

And when that was written, we had a whole class of people who only got counted as 3/5 of a person. That didn't get fixed until the 14th Amendment...


Trapper John

 

[dmccormack]

But that is strictly number of persons in a given district. Any information beyond that is unnecessary. IRS finds out how much money you make, why do you need to report that?

I agree.

 

[Ted]

And when that was written, we had a whole class of people who only got counted as 3/5 of a person. That didn't get fixed until the 14th Amendment...

And if we still had 3/5 people then that would be relevant. Fortunately that has been fixed, so all that matters is the number of people in your household. Income, background, and other personal information does not increase or decrease your representation.

 

[Trapper John]

And if we still had 3/5 people then that would be relevant. Fortunately that has been fixed, so all that matters is the number of people in your household. Income, background, and other personal information does not increase or decrease your representation.

If you look at the first census from 1790, you'll find "An act providing for the actual enumeration of the inhabitants of the United States" enacted into law on March 1, 1790, that the census was intended to not only count people for the purpose of representation, but also for taxation.

So, if you're trying to say, "All the law allows for is counting people for representation", you'd be incorrect from the very first census on.


Trapper John

 

[Obi Heed Kenobi]

And if we still had 3/5 people then that would be relevant. Fortunately that has been fixed, so all that matters is the number of people in your household. Income, background, and other personal information does not increase or decrease your representation.

I know you're not a lawyer, but I think you're taking the "narrow interpretation." Which is fine, but I think the census power extends beyond merely counting people.

The provisions are certainly made in the context of representation, which implies merely counting people. But, the provision itself refers merely to an enumeration; it's not limited to people, at least not of its own terms. Looking at the context it's made in, you can certainly reach the conclusion that it does refer only to counting people, but I think that takes a narrow view.

Look at the 2nd Amendment, for instance. It refers to guns in the context of militias. Does that mean that it's limited only to militias? As we learned about two years ago in Heller, the Supreme Court doesn't think so - rights re: firearms extend well beyond militias.

I think the same thing applies to the census. It's created in the context of representation, but it's broader than merely representation.

Maybe look at it this way. Suppose I tell my son the following: "because it's necessary for you to get to school, I hereby give you use of this vehicle."

What have I given him? The use of a vehicle only for transportation to/from school? Or the use of a vehicle in a more broad sense, in order to facilitate him getting to/from school?

Welcome to the game of statutory/constitutional interpretation.

P.S. - I didn't raise the 2nd Amendment to get all political. I just raised it to show that there are things in the Constitution that go beyond the context they're presented in.

 

[Ted]

David, your post caused me to take drastic measures - I had to go prepare my oatmeal. Without that vital food for body, I would not be able to properly process your food for thought.

I know you're not a lawyer, but I think you're taking the "narrow interpretation." Which is fine, but I think the census power extends beyond merely counting people.

The provisions are certainly made in the context of representation, which implies merely counting people. But, the provision itself refers merely to an enumeration; it's not limited to people, at least not of its own terms. Looking at the context it's made in, you can certainly reach the conclusion that it does refer only to counting people, but I think that takes a narrow view.

That's generally how I operate. After all, I am an engineer.

Look at the 2nd Amendment, for instance. It refers to guns in the context of militias. Does that mean that it's limited only to militias? As we learned about two years ago in Heller, the Supreme Court doesn't think so - rights re: firearms extend well beyond militias.

Well, that depends on what the definition of "militia" is. At the time it was written, to me a militia is comprised of the people, who may or may not be "card-carrying" members of said militia. So, therefore it would expand to people.

I think the same thing applies to the census. It's created in the context of representation, but it's broader than merely representation.

Maybe look at it this way. Suppose I tell my son the following: "because it's necessary for you to get to school, I hereby give you use of this vehicle."

What have I given him? The use of a vehicle only for transportation to/from school? Or the use of a vehicle in a more broad sense, in order to facilitate him getting to/from school?

You've given him confusion! With my mom it was much simpler:

Me: "Mom, can I borrow the car?"
Mom: "Where are you going?"
Me: "To school."
Mom: "Ok, you can take the car to school and back home."

Rather hard to misinterpret that.

Welcome to the game of statutory/constitutional interpretation.

Yes, and the fact that lawyers and poets have written many of our laws has created many problems with regards to interpretation of said laws. Engineers have this down much better. So, you lawyers should go to engineering school.

P.S. - I didn't raise the 2nd Amendment to get all political. I just raised it to show that there are things in the Constitution that go beyond the context they're presented in.

I understand your point, but it seems to me that it still comes down to one of interpretation, which is where the problems come into play. I don't like broad interpretations in general because that allows flexibility that can (and in this case I believe does) go well beyond the initial intent. If the IRS collects your income information and the like, then I see no reason why the Census needs to, etc. etc. It's not my problem if the government is so inefficient that it can't talk to itself.

The census taker can go ahead and come to my house. Seeing as I'm never there, it will take him a while to find me.

 

[dmccormack]

Yes, and the fact that lawyers and poets have written many of our laws has created many problems with regards to interpretation of said laws. Engineers have this down much better. So, you lawyers should go to engineering school.

I think the scariest world I can imagine would be one run by engineers...

Then again, wasn't that the Soviet Union?

 

[Clark1961]

I think the scariest world I can imagine would be one run by engineers...

Then again, wasn't that the Soviet Union?

Yabut the basic Russian engineer has a knack for building the ugliest functional item that can possibly be imagined.

In other words, ya gotta find the right type of engineers if ya want it to look good *and* work.

 

[Ted]

I think the scariest world I can imagine would be one run by engineers...

Then again, wasn't that the Soviet Union?

I was simply referring to them going to engineering school to learn how to be unambiguous in their writing.

 

[dmccormack]

Yabut the basic Russian engineer has a knack for building the ugliest functional item that can possibly be imagined.

In other words, ya gotta find the right type of engineers if ya want it to look good *and* work.

I've yet to find a single engineer with a design sense. Typically the only "good looking" engineering products are function drive (airplanes).

Otherwise, the standard engineer mantra is: "Who cares about ugly, it works, doesn't it?"

 

[dmccormack]

I was simply referring to them going to engineering school to learn how to be unambiguous in their writing.

Ambiguity is what keeps lawyers employed.

 

[AuntPeggy]

I was simply referring to them going to engineering school to learn how to be unambiguous in their writing.

The genius of our Constitution is that it was written so that it could be used for over 225 years with so few words. Mostly it is general guidelines about who can make rules for whom. Amazing and wonderful at the same time. Enumeration is mandated in the Constitution. How it is done is up to the current administration.

 

[Trapper John]

I was simply referring to them going to engineering school to learn how to be unambiguous in their writing.

Interesting. One of the key benefits of an engineering education is problem solving ability. Too many non-engineers jump to attempting to develop a solution without a problem statement and definition.

And one of the weaknesses in engineering education curricula is very little emphasis in written or verbal communication.

BTW, I'm an engineer...


Trapper John

 

[Obi Heed Kenobi]

Yabut the basic Russian engineer has a knack for building the ugliest functional item that can possibly be imagined.

In other words, ya gotta find the right type of engineers if ya want it to look good *and* work.

Russians built Subarus?

 

[Obi Heed Kenobi]

Ambiguity is what keeps lawyers employed.

It's funny 'cuz it's true!

 

[dmccormack]

And one of the weaknesses in engineering education curricula is very little emphasis in written or verbal communication.

BTW, I'm an engineer...


Trapper John

AAAAAmen!!!!!

 

[Obi Heed Kenobi]

David, your post caused me to take drastic measures - I had to go prepare my oatmeal. Without that vital food for body, I would not be able to properly process your food for thought.



That's generally how I operate. After all, I am an engineer.



Well, that depends on what the definition of "militia" is. At the time it was written, to me a militia is comprised of the people, who may or may not be "card-carrying" members of said militia. So, therefore it would expand to people.



You've given him confusion! With my mom it was much simpler:

Me: "Mom, can I borrow the car?"
Mom: "Where are you going?"
Me: "To school."
Mom: "Ok, you can take the car to school and back home."

Rather hard to misinterpret that.



Yes, and the fact that lawyers and poets have written many of our laws has created many problems with regards to interpretation of said laws. Engineers have this down much better. So, you lawyers should go to engineering school.



I understand your point, but it seems to me that it still comes down to one of interpretation, which is where the problems come into play. I don't like broad interpretations in general because that allows flexibility that can (and in this case I believe does) go well beyond the initial intent. If the IRS collects your income information and the like, then I see no reason why the Census needs to, etc. etc. It's not my problem if the government is so inefficient that it can't talk to itself.

The census taker can go ahead and come to my house. Seeing as I'm never there, it will take him a while to find me.

The points are both good, and too lengthy to respond to.

 

[Ghery]

Yabut the basic Russian engineer has a knack for building the ugliest functional item that can possibly be imagined.

In other words, ya gotta find the right type of engineers if ya want it to look good *and* work.

If an architect builds a building without an engineer, the building will fall down.

If an engineer builds a building without an architect, the neighbors will want to tear it down.

I'm an engineer and I endorse this message.

I was simply referring to them going to engineering school to learn how to be unambiguous in their writing.

Hear, hear!

I've yet to find a single engineer with a design sense. Typically the only "good looking" engineering products are function drive (airplanes).

Otherwise, the standard engineer mantra is: "Who cares about ugly, it works, doesn't it?"

See my comment above.

Ambiguity is what keeps lawyers employed.

Isn't that the truth? They write laws (lawyers in congress or the legislature) so that no two lawyers will agree on what they mean, thereby creating more work for lawyers. Conflict of interest, pure and simple.

 

[Trapper John]

I've yet to find a single engineer with a design sense. Typically the only "good looking" engineering products are function drive (airplanes).

Otherwise, the standard engineer mantra is: "Who cares about ugly, it works, doesn't it?"

Sounds more like a failure of management to provide design criteria guidance and direction than anything else...


Trapper John

 

[dmccormack]

Sounds more like a failure of management to provide design criteria guidance and direction than anything else...


Trapper John

 

[Trapper John]

AAAAAmen!!!!!

The engineers that can make the transition to management are the ones that can communicate outside the engineering world.

I've known terrific engineers that you wouldn't dare take to a client presentation. But a lot of them just don't have any interest in that kind of stuff, and that's just fine, too.


Trapper John

 

[dmccormack]

The engineers that can make the transition to management are the ones that can communicate outside the engineering world.

I've known terrific engineers that you wouldn't dare take to a client presentation. But a lot of them just don't have any interest in that kind of stuff, and that's just fine, too.


Trapper John

That's kept me employed managing engineers for the last 15+ years....

 

[TangoWhiskey]

You've given him confusion! With my mom it was much simpler:

Me: "Mom, can I borrow the car?"
Mom: "Where are you going?"
Me: "To school."
Mom: "Ok, you can take the car to school and back home."

Rather hard to misinterpret that.

She didn't specify "directly back home..." ;-)

 

[Ted]

I've yet to find a single engineer with a design sense. Typically the only "good looking" engineering products are function drive (airplanes).

Otherwise, the standard engineer mantra is: "Who cares about ugly, it works, doesn't it?"

Generally true, but that's why there's a design department as well as an engineering department. However note that there are a number of elegant engineering products out there. Aircraft engines I find to be very elegant in general.

The genius of our Constitution is that it was written so that it could be used for over 225 years with so few words. Mostly it is general guidelines about who can make rules for whom. Amazing and wonderful at the same time. Enumeration is mandated in the Constitution. How it is done is up to the current administration.

So what yu're saying is that by sheer coincidence, we've had enough administrations in a row that have not somehow destroyed the government in spite of a Constitution that lacks sufficient specifics, and is generally ignored.

Not saying it's not a great document, but I really dislike that argument as to why it's great. I'd say it's great because the general rules and regulations it spells out are correct. Now if only people would actually follow it and work within those rules and regulations...

 

[Ted]

She didn't specify "directly back home..." ;-)

My mom raised me to be smart enough to know that when she said to school and home, that I knew it meant directly to school and directly home, unless a deviation was approved from her. If you deviate while on an IFR flight plan, you may get a call from the FAA. If you deviate while on a mom let you borrow the car plan, my mom would yell enough to tear down the building.

We call this "parenting".