# Lifestyles & Discussion > Privacy & Data Security >  The purpose of the CENSUS and privacy - your opinions, please

## bravebulwark

The purpose of the census is to get an accurate "head count" for fair representation in government.

Because of this, I have no concerns about giving a "total" for my home.  And I am OK with listing their names individually (even though it's not required IMO).

Also, anything listed as "Optional" on the form is OK too (no threats for leaving this blank)
If citizens want to volunteer data that may give a more accurate picture of the neighborhood, that's cool with me too

But if anyone here thinks that they don't have this info already, you're fooling yourself - here is what they have that's "volunteered" to them all the time

IRS records
Credit card applications
Auto info (value, ownership, etc)
Bank records (money in, money out, payday amounts)
Phone records
SS# and work history

From these simple data points I would estimate that the govt has an 80-90% complete profile on each of us that's - at worst - 3 years out of date.

If you are in gov't service or healthcare, then its 90-100% complete and current as of 1 year ago.

100 years ago, the task of tracking that much data was impossible due to a lack of technology to handle the volume.  Obviously, this has been resolved... and we, the tech consumer, demanded it...

The question is...  *Should gov't keep track of all this information???*

We allow companies to do it thru loyalty cards, online ordering, etc

And, if you successfully make the argument that the Federal Gov't should NOT be doing this, what stops the state & local gov'ts from doing the same???

I ask the forum...

Assuming all the governments were doing *only noble things* in agreement with the people's authority to govern, would it be OK for them to catalog this information on you???

(Note:  I intentionally created the scenario to factor out the corrupt and over-reaching gov't so you can't use that as a decision factor - sneaky...)   

Thanks in advance for your comments.

----------


## Bruno

> Assuming all the governments were doing *only noble things* 
> 
> .


Pure fantasy

----------


## bravebulwark

> Pure fantasy


I know... it's impossible but that's why I asked...

We hiss at gov't for doing the same thing that Walmart, Radio Shack, etc do all the time and we have no stronger belief in those companies than any other...

Why do we not want gov't to track this stuff?

{Unless, we simply fear what it may do with it...}

{But if we fear what they *MAY*  do with our *data*, then should we really trust them with anything???}

{Or, perhaps said better, our data is not more critical or serious than compared to our freedom, money, liberty, safety, borders, etc. IMO.}

Your comments go here.

----------


## DamianTV

I do my damnedest to make sure that neither the govt nor Wal Mart can get any more information about me excluding a head count and probably whether I have a cock n balls or not.

----------


## osan

> The question is...  *Should gov't keep track of all this information???*


No.  They should be strictly prevented on pain of a life sentence in prison, hard time for any government official caught with any such data.




> We allow companies to do it thru loyalty cards, online ordering, etc


I'd put an end to that as well.




> And, if you successfully make the argument that the Federal Gov't should NOT be doing this, what stops the state & local gov'ts from doing the same???


The same argument, backed by the force of a sufficiently motivated body of citizens.




> I ask the forum...
> 
> Assuming all the governments were doing *only noble things* in agreement with the people's authority to govern, would it be OK for them to catalog this information on you???


A ridiculous assumption, given that the past 8 thousand years of documented human history has yet to produce a single example of this ever having occurred.

But granting this absurdity, the answer isn't "no", but rather "hell no" because "noble things" have resulted in more death and destruction of people than all the dark conspiracies of history put together.  People are what they are and they are not likely to change any time before the sun goes <poof> and the galaxy collapses.  With that in mind, it becomes clear that the ever changeable nature of people and their opinions of what constitutes "the greater good" (BLECH!) renders them unsuitable to wield great and centralized power.  Keep the role of government *proper*.  That means absolute minimal scope and authority.

Here, read this: http://freedomisobvious.blogspot.com/2010/03/state.html

That should set you straight on the nature of "the state".  If it does not, read it again and again until it sinks in.  Read until you are on your deathbed, angels circling overhead like vultures in wait, if you must.  Better that than to live a life of woeful ignorance on such matters.





> (Note:  I intentionally created the scenario to factor out the corrupt and over-reaching gov't so you can't use that as a decision factor - sneaky...)   
> 
> Thanks in advance for your comments.


Factor out corruption?  Pure madness.  That is like factoring out lungs or beating hearts.  Corruption is part and parcel of what we are.  The better among us fight that side of themselves daily because the temptations are ALWAYS there to dominate others.  I'm the most extremely liberty minded person I know, believing in keeping my nose out of other peoples' business.  Yet, if I see my neighbor mistreating his dog I am nonetheless sore tempted to interfere.  I have to fight my impulse to do so when reason, and I mean REAL reason, tells me to butt out.  These are the most difficult things we are ever called upon to do, save perhaps giving up television, which is the most evilly addictive drug ever contrived.

----------


## MelissaWV

I was reading some interesting passages from the Census' website to the chatroom last night.  If you're not already mad, this might piss you off...

The Census website can be translated into 59 languages, theoretically to allow all the various immigrants to understand what's going on.  This normally implies the same level of compliance throughout, but it fails, because I am 99% sure that if I call their hotline and only speak Dinka, I will not get a service representative who speaks Dinka.  I will be "forced" to speak to someone in another language.  They're out of compliance with their own feel-good standards.  Additionally, many languages are conspicuously absent.  There are no translations in Norwegian, Slovak, Swedish, Finnish, or Danish, to name a few.

Just a sample, by the way, from the FAQ about the "American Community Survey:




> What is the American Community Survey?
> 
> The ACS is part of the Decennial Census Program. It is a survey that is sent to a small percentage of our population on a rotating basis. These data previously were collected only in census years in conjunction with the decennial census. Since the ACS is conducted every year, rather than once every ten years, it will provide more current data throughout the decade.
> 
> The ACS is conducted under the authority of Title 13, United States Code, Sections 141 and 193. The Census Bureau may use the information it collects only for statistical purposes. Title 13 requires the Census Bureau to keep all information about you, and all other respondents, strictly confidential. 
> 
> Do I have to answer the ACS questions?
> 
> Yes. Response to this survey is required by law (Section 221 of Title 13 ).
> ...


* * *

There are Fact Sheets about why questions on the ACS are asked.  Here's a sampling of that:




> Hispanic origin is used in numerous programs and is vital in making policy decisions. These data are needed to determine compliance with provisions of antidiscrimination in employment and minority recruitment legislation. Under the Voting Rights Act, data about Hispanic origin are essential to ensure enforcement of *bilingual election rules*. Hispanic origin classifications used by the Census Bureau and other federal agencies meet the requirements of standards issued by the Office of Management and Budget in 1997 (Revisions to the Standards for the
> Classification of Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity). These standards set forth guidance for statistical collection and reporting on race and ethnicity used by all federal agencies.


(I love the assumptions they're making here.  I'm of "Hispanic origin," but my English is certainly fine, and I don't need any kind of bilingual help during an election.)




> The number of children born in the past 12 months is *a measure of fertility* that is used to project the future size of the population, a *basic planning tool for agencies of the government*. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services uses these data to carry out various programs required by statute, including determining the need for family planning services within the Indian Health Service, investigating matters on child welfare in the Children’s Bureau, and conducting research for voluntary family planning programs.


This is a really nasty question, and it's extra-revolting that they decide to title it, in big block letters, "FERTILITY."




> Educational attainment and school enrollment data are needed for use in assessing the socioeconomic condition of school-age children. *Government agencies also require these data for funding allocations* and program planning and implementation. These data are needed to determine the extent of illiteracy rates of citizens in language minorities in order to meet statutory requirements under the Voting Rights Act.


This one is awesome.  You could almost hear the "for the children!" scream right through the website.  The trouble is... why do you need to know whether or not I home school children?  I don't need funding to do that, do I?  How does telling you whether or not I went to school indicate whether or not I am literate?  I was reading before I went to school, not the other way around.  There are some people who graduate and cannot read worth a damn.

----------


## Rancher

The purpose of the census is about getting a snapshot of the demographics of the country.

As far as privacy, why should I offer them any information?  I plead the 5th.  But I also don't care what they know about me *as long as they leave me alone*.  <- Hence... the "Second Amendment."

----------


## cpike

> The purpose of the census is about getting a snapshot of the demographics of the country.
> 
> As far as privacy, why should I offer them any information?  I plead the 5th.  But I also don't care what they know about me *as long as they leave me alone*.  <- Hence... the "Second Amendment."


Just got the form today. All I've filled out so far is the # of people. What do you people recommend? Should I just write that I'm invoking the 5th Amendment on the form, or do I have to be in a court. Is there other questions I should selectively fill out. They have all this information already anyways.

----------


## Anti Federalist

I can't search it right now, but back in 2003/04 the Census Dept. turned over names of Arab citizens to DHS.

Somebody post this please.

----------


## amy31416

> I can't search it right now, but back in 2003/04 the Census Dept. turned over names of Arab citizens to DHS.
> 
> Somebody post this please.


http://epic.org/privacy/census/foia/

----------


## Bruno

> I can't search it right now, but back in 2003/04 the Census Dept. turned over names of Arab citizens to DHS.
> 
> Somebody post this please.


As they did during WWII to help round up the Japanese-Americans

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...ensus+japanese

----------


## Anti Federalist

> http://epic.org/privacy/census/foia/


Thank you, thank you.

----------


## Dan Warner

The purpose of the census is for redistricting so you have adaquate representation.  This is a cruel joke however since there is no place on the census form that asks if you are a citizen.  I submit therefore that this is an excercise in futility at best, and a huge opportunity for the govt to spy on you at worst.  I firmly believe that this census will be used by the Obummer administration to redraw the lines and stack the deck against conservatives by loading in the huge numbers of illegals in this country.

For the record, I WILL NOT provide my unlisted phone number.   I WILL NOT provide any information regarding other adults in my home, I am not a government agent.  I WILL NOT tell them ANYTHING except how many adults of voting age live in my house.

I WILL claim that I was sexually harassed and groped by any census worker who is stupid enough to set foot on my property.  I have also clearly posted signs that give notice of a $5000 doorbell or door knocking fee, to be paid in cash immediately upon answering of the door.

Let the fun and games begin!  Lets start a 'stupid census taker' channel on YouTube!  I intend to answer my door in some kind of bizarre costume and act like I am a huge fat retarded kid that likes to wipe boogers on other people!  YAY!

Enjoy!  YouTube - how to complete a census

----------


## ImpeachKingGeorgeII

I don't see anywhere on the census form that specifically indicates the date it must be returned ....

----------


## ctiger2

We got our Census forms this week. I'm disappointed. It basically asks for how many people live in the house, their name & what race they are. That's it. I was expecting many more personal questions.

----------


## MelissaWV

> We got our Census forms this week. I'm disappointed. It basically asks for how many people live in the house, their name & what race they are. That's it. I was expecting many more personal questions.


An additional form, the ACS, asks a whole bunch more questions but it is not sent to everyone.

----------


## ToyBoat

> An additional form, the ACS, asks a whole bunch more questions but it is not sent to everyone.


Why wouldn't everyone get the same forms to fill out?

----------


## MelissaWV

> Why wouldn't everyone get the same forms to fill out?


You do get the same basic form.  There's also the ACS, which is an additional survey, and that's only sent to some "representative" households.  There's information on it on the Census.gov website (there's even a handy-dandy FAQ... it's worth a read just for the laughter).

----------


## phill4paul

> You do get the same basic form.  There's also the ACS, which is an additional survey, and that's only sent to some "representative" households.  There's information on it on the Census.gov website (there's even a handy-dandy FAQ... it's worth a read just for the laughter).


  Thanks for that. It is quite a laugh.

https://ask.census.gov/cgi-bin/askce...ch_text=ACS#02

  I liked these....

  I've never seen anything this intrusive. Why do you ask such detailed questions?

*The ACS questionnaire asks very detailed questions because we are required to collect specific information for federal and state government programs.* 

Will the Census Bureau give information about me to other federal agencies?

*No. Title 13 also restricts the Census Bureau from sharing information about an individual, household, or place of residence with any agency, public or private*

  LOLZ.

----------


## MelissaWV

> Thanks for that. It is quite a laugh.
> 
> https://ask.census.gov/cgi-bin/askce...ch_text=ACS#02
> 
>   I liked these....
> 
>   I've never seen anything this intrusive. Why do you ask such detailed questions?
> 
> *The ACS questionnaire asks very detailed questions because we are required to collect specific information for federal and state government programs.* 
> ...


My favorite one is still the one where the question is something along the lines of "what if I'm too sick or old to fill it out?" and the response is something akin to "We're sorry you're not feeling well, but you still have to fill it out."  That, right there, is Government in a nutshell.

----------


## bravebulwark

looking back I may have phrased my original post poorly

(BTW, i am no fan of the personal questions on the census)

my intent was to address the (IMO) false assertion many anti long form census people have

they take pride and caution about their personal details with the govt (rightfully so) but are very loose with the same information in the rest of their lives (stores, online shopping, etc)

if you are a person who keeps your data private from the govt as well as companies that means you do not:

- have a bank account
- buy anything online
- use store discount cards
- have any credit cards
- buy everything in cash
- etc, etc

every transaction you make has a history that is (possibly) logged and tracked by private companies unless you never identify yourself and always use cash

so unless you meet all the criteria above, you ARE agreeing to the release of some of your private data and history of actions by engaging with others

why do you protect nearly obvious data from the govt yet let that same data float around the world otherwise

(example:  you have a satellite dish in your yard, you have a monthly bill online, and the land cable system has no open account with you yet you would not answer this question if it were on the census)

the only acceptable reason to me to resist these census questions is:

*it's none of the govt's $^@%! business*

which is good enough reason for me

but are there OTHER reasons you do not answer long form census questions?

----------


## bravebulwark

> No.  They should be strictly prevented on pain of a life sentence in prison, hard time for any government official caught with any such data.
> 
> I'd put an end to that as well.
> 
> The same argument, backed by the force of a sufficiently motivated body of citizens.
> 
> A ridiculous assumption, given that the past 8 thousand years of documented human history has yet to produce a single example of this ever having occurred.
> 
> But granting this absurdity, the answer isn't "no", but rather "hell no" because "noble things" have resulted in more death and destruction of people than all the dark conspiracies of history put together.  People are what they are and they are not likely to change any time before the sun goes <poof> and the galaxy collapses.  With that in mind, it becomes clear that the ever changeable nature of people and their opinions of what constitutes "the greater good" (BLECH!) renders them unsuitable to wield great and centralized power.  Keep the role of government *proper*.  That means absolute minimal scope and authority.
> ...


i want to apologize to the forum as i did not make a good first attempt at this thread.

i was (poorly) trying to make the "noble things" argument to remove the 'govt is evil' replies that i knew would come first.  

my assumption was an attempt to move past the simple argument and toward additional debate

obviously, the "govt is evil" argument is all that is required but were there any other reasons?  

as a thought experiment, if the govt was only 'pure' then would any one object to offering the data and for what reason?

some would say it doesn't have the legal authority and thats valid but is there any other reason?

thank you for your intent on this reply however i found your delivery a little unsettling

while poorly executed, my thought experiment was not founded on a ridiculous assumption but a necessary one to advance the discussion beyond a "GOVT BAD!" response

i do not require "setting straight" on my understanding of the proper relationship between the individual and the state

i would like to caution against "get it thru your skull" rebuttals in these forums that are far too frequent especially now as the dis-satisfaction with our current system is at an all time high.

we want to grow our ranks not drive new people away.

thanks for your feedback so far

----------

