![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
tniassaint.livejournal.com) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpolitics2010-04-06 05:40 pm
More pointless things for people to complain about
Ahhhh the census.
All the rancor surrounding it are simply amusing and astounding. There is nothing wrong with census taking. There is nothing wrong with the questions being asked. As for the craziness regarding the encouragement that the US Census Bureau is giving to gay and lesbian couples to indicate that they are married; who really cares? Truth is that this information is not available to the public. The public moral fiber is not threatened in anyway and the data has little effect society’s acceptance or lace of acceptance of such issues. Truth is that the people that don’t support gay marriage still won’t support it just because the gay couple next door privately checked a box on a private form that will be counted and handled far from the public eye (at least for 72 years).
Maybe there will be some statistical release that indicates that the number of gay couples living in a self proclaimed state of matrimony is a larger percentage of the population than we had previously - again, so what? If you are a parent, parent your children as you see fit. These folk, the ones going off on this subject, these people will simply never accept same sex couples.
As for the government, if they want to gather marital status for statistical purposes and the determination of proper representation, I could care less. Issues like this will hardly matter to the purpose of the census. Most of the data is used for simple unrelated statics and demographics. It’s also Constitutionally required. Anyone claiming to be a Constitutionalist has to support the taking of the census.
As for accusations of people being “liars” if they are half of a same sex couple and they indicate they are “married” on the census; oh please! It is not as if this lends any credibility or credence to the status. Government has not place, no place at all, in defining the interpersonal relations of anyone. Marital questions and all marital supports, recognition and etc should be removed from government. Count the people in the residence. The selection of “married” on some form is only validating to the person checking it - and I am certain they can validate this in their deeds without some form.
Why should government even have any official recognition of the marital status of a couple?
Re: Gracias - and a return on that
Tax havens? So what? I think they should crack down on tax havens. I don't see any sort of massive exodus from the horrid oppressive tax state. What a farce.
No it doesn't “... make sense that the whole reasoning behind the census is to help the government detect tax evaders or cases where people may be mis-reporting their income, then hitting them with a $5,000 fine for filling their out census form with faulty data”. That is about as sensible as saying that since I don't know why the stereo in the next room came on by itself 10 minutes ago it must be that I have a poltergeist. Sure it could be imagined to be so but there is no real evidence. I can imagine all sorts of things. I can imagine that Nancy Pelosi and Newt Gingrich are aliens conspiring to ruin the US so that they can signal their minions will have an easier time in genetically altering our food supply and turn us all into mindless worker bees supporting their intergalactic search for artificial red fruit punch. That don't make it so.
It is simply required... and the “other sources” are not answerable for their data, have no or little voracity to their data, and are not obligated by law to gather or even be honest about their data. They have no legal requirement to provide it, would do so with a fee (typically) and have little to no incentive to protect the data they gather (demonstrated) and are not OF the people, BY the people, or FOR the people.
So, tell me . . . who has been fined for this and when?
Re: Gracias - and a return on that
I never said anyone had been fined or jailed. Only that it was an unfair and disproportionate law and should be abolished.
Tax havens? So what? I think they should crack down on tax havens. I don't see any sort of massive exodus from the horrid oppressive tax state. What a farce.
So, you don't understand that your government is in desperate need of money and constantly inventing new ways to take it out of your pockets. And, you also don't understand that raising taxes and the other things the government is doing won't fix the problem?
No it doesn't “... make sense that the whole reasoning behind the census is to help the government detect tax evaders or cases where people may be mis-reporting their income, then hitting them with a $5,000 fine for filling their out census form with faulty data”. That is about as sensible as saying that since I don't know why the stereo in the next room came on by itself 10 minutes ago it must be that I have a poltergeist. Sure it could be imagined to be so but there is no real evidence. I can imagine all sorts of things. I can imagine that Nancy Pelosi and Newt Gingrich are aliens conspiring to ruin the US so that they can signal their minions will have an easier time in genetically altering our food supply and turn us all into mindless worker bees supporting their intergalactic search for artificial red fruit punch. That don't make it so.
Yes, it does. Do you know what eminent domain is, or how it has been abused recently? Do you know what debtor's prisons are, and that they have been re-implemented in some cases? And, do you know that these things are indicative of a growing need for money? Anyway, regardless of whether or not they enforce a policy that allows them to hand down a $5,000 fine for a typo. The government should not have that power, period.
Maybe, the US government isn't desperate enough to resort to a $5,000 fine for a typo, yet. But, it may very well be a matter of time. Why encourage it?
And, if you have to go so far as to compare Pelosi to poltergeists to prove a point, I hope you don't strain yourself.
It is simply required...
Being "required" doesn't justify something.
and the “other sources” are not answerable for their data, have no or little voracity to their data, and are not obligated by law to gather or even be honest about their data. They have no legal requirement to provide it, would do so with a fee (typically) and have little to no incentive to protect the data they gather (demonstrated) and are not OF the people, BY the people, or FOR the people.
Heh. So, you don't understand that those information services make things like stalking and identity theft, easier? And, you don't understand that the government is supposed to 'regulate' and protect against things like identity theft?
So, tell me . . . who has been fined for this and when?
I never said anyone was fined. Another one grasping for straws.
Re: Thanks again - and so...
Jailing and fining:
While I agree that the jailing and fining is excessive, there has to be some measure to compel response if one is to have any sort of accuracy of any sort in the census. As for the validity of the census itself, I will return to that.
Desperate for $:
Of course - all governments are always desperate for money. In the Christian tradition I will note “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s...” More on that later if you like - it's about WHY that is that is the real discussion on that thread - but it would need a thread of its own.
Logical Causality:
No , sorry; it don't make it so. In order for it to be “so” there needs to be more supporting evidence and facts - or it is just paranoid noise. Start a new thread on that one if you see fit.
Eminent Domain:
Yes of course I am familiar with eminent domain (actually, I deal with it in my line of work). Again - it makes do difference to the subject as discussed. But since you go there... I have also seen how it has been used for positive outcome. It is a tool like any other tool. I also know that what is considered by some to be an abuse is considered quite reasonable by others. Cite examples and lets see how they play out. I am sure we can both show great examples of the pros and cons.
Debtor's Prisons:
I almost laughed and choked on my gourmet bean coffee on that one. There have not been debtor's prisons in the US in more than a century - almost two! The government's ability to arrest someone over non-payment of a fine is perceived by some as a debtor's incarceration, but that claim is somewhat laughable and certainly arguable. Any and every government must have the authority to enforce its rules and laws or the laws are based on nothing. I'm sure that will come up again.
Strain myself?:
No so far it has been effortless. While I do consider Pelosi something of a wretch, it was not her I compared to a poltergeist; rather, it is the spurious logic I (accurately) compared. I did not think I needed to spell it out in such fine detail. I rather prefer to leave some of the thinking to the reader - it is interesting to see what people will read into things.
Simply required...:
Oh I agree - I did not feel that either of us needed me to go back and cite the reasoning and logic behind it as it is all well clarified and enumerated in our Constitution and etc. I did not and do not feel the need to go back through it all. If you feel that is needed I will do so - it's just so dry a read - and a different thread.
“Those other information services...”:
No I DO understand that... I am not sure why you would think that had anything to do with the discussion and if anything you have only reinforced why such groups are not the ones that should have access to or in any way be involved with this sort of process. I have never implied they should. Also, with freedom of information act laws and the whole absurd concept that corporations should be granted the equal rights (but not the responsibilities) of a person in the eyes of the law - they have the right to public information and use it as any other “entity” in the eyes of the distorted law (we need to fix that one.)
So grasping at straws? Hardly. I am on firm ground. If I am grasping it is only to pull weeds. Hope you have a parachute. There's quite a bit of hot air under you.