no third solution

Blogging about liberty, anarchy, economics and politics

I Responded to the Census Today

March 16th, 2010

The answer was “2”.

That is all.

The public announcement commercials I hear on the radio say that they use the census data to determine our “fair share” of funding. One commercial says something like,

If a town had 100 students, they’d need about 5 school teachers.  If next year they had a lot more students, but nobody filled out the census, they’d still have only 5 teachers.

Don’t you think that the townsfolk (i.e., the people impacted most by changing demography) would realize their town’s population was booming, and plan accordingly? Why should the people living in the neighboring town (or State, for that matter) pay to subsidize their growth?

You know what’s fair? Not having to give all that money away to the bureaucrats in the first place. If we didn’t give it to them, they wouldn’t need to worry about whether we got our “fair share” or not. If they didn’t have all this stolen money with which to bribe us, they wouldn’t be able to bribe us. Simply, our “fair share” is whatever we earns we keeps.

Comments

12 Comments

RSS
  • George Donnelly says on: March 16, 2010 at 9:42 am

     

    There goes David Z, provoking the state’s agents. You’re getting up in their faces and letting them know you won’t cooperate. That’s an escalation.

    Why don’t you just ignore their paper and get along with your life? I thought this resistance stuff was supposed to be done quietly, without generating any attention for oneself?

  • Don says on: March 16, 2010 at 11:27 am

     

    The paperwork came in the mail yesterday, addressed to: “Resident” and it went straight into the burn pile, no one by that name lives here and if he did its nobody’s business but mine. Period.

    The constitution fails with its very first word, “We”, nobody gets to speak for me. Everything after that is bullshit.

  • David Z says on: March 16, 2010 at 12:16 pm

     

    I considered that ignoring it was more likely to bring agents to my front door, than was providing an answer only to the question about “How many people live in this house.”

    Perhaps I’m mistaken.

  • Don says on: March 16, 2010 at 10:18 pm

     

    Yes, I believe you are mistaken, for 2 reasons.
    First, if you didn’t fill out the paperwork completely they will surely show up knowing that someone was there to fill it out partially. Second, they will probably show up here too, but they have no proof their inept postal service delivered the document, plus maybe nobody lives here.

    We know our friends vehicles and if an unknown vehicle shows up we just don’t answer the doors. There are 22 houses on our 2 mile long road and 3/4 of them are not lived in full time. People in the big city own them and only come here on special occasions. As far as the census drones go we are one of those 3/4.

    Muff, across the road, has 5 wild-assed Heelers and CoonHounds ( http://www.hoosiertreedogs.org/asp/modules/userpages/showme2.asp?subid=263 ) he keeps caged except for hunting and maybe I’ll get him to turn them loose when the drones come by.

    People are real private around here and don’t take to no revenoor’s skalkin’ about. That’s what shotguns is for.

    Last night the proposed new sheriff came by campaignin’. A fella I never seen before. We got to talkin and I brought him in the shop to take a look at some of the woodworkin’ stuff I’ve been doing and he was greatly impressed. He’s a 28 year veteran of the state police and I’m a long haired ex-hippy and we both know what each other is all about. When he was leaving he said he knows it gets lonely out here in the hills and the next time he’s in the area he’ll stop in and chat. I told him, “I don’t get lonely, I always have plenty of stuff goin on to occupy me but if you wanna stop by and chat do it because you want to not because you think I’m lonely.” His hair moved when I said that, so we shook hands and he took off. I’d rather have him as a friend than an enemy, but I’ll never kiss his ass and he knows it.

  • Moriarty says on: March 17, 2010 at 11:59 pm

     

    Mine also went straight into the trash.

    I’m a adoptive parent. My daughter was born in Taiwan. If anyone ever wants to know how to get on my bad side, it’s simple. All you need to do is ask me to differentiate my children on the basis of race.

    Had I been in a particularly good mood, I might have considered telling the Census Bureau how many people live here, though I recognize no obligation to do so. As it is, they started the discussion by deeply offending me and I ended it right there.

    If any Census workers show up here, I’ll meet them at the gate. I will point out that they’re trespassing and politely demand that they leave immediately. One word past that point and they get arrested per state law.

    They can fine me. I won’t pay it. They can show up with a US Marshal and arrest me. That’s all right too. I’ll sit in jail while 2500 local citizens are denied access to their physician because he wouldn’t cooperate in the racial profiling of his family.

    We’ll see how that plays.

  • JC Hewitt says on: March 18, 2010 at 3:57 am

     

    I’m fairly certain they’re way too incompetent to do anything interesting with the information.

    Having interned with a Senator for about a year total (I was young and impressionable, forgive me), I learned the lesson that government never accomplishes shit.

  • Dan Z says on: March 18, 2010 at 11:21 am

     

    JC Hewitt,

    Census info has already been used for illicit government purposes in the past. Census info was the basis information used for internment camps and was also info used to identify “threats” during the cold war. Census info has been released to the department of homeland security etc as recently as 2004 regarding the arab population of the US. The fact is the only numbers they need for funding is how many people live there, anything else is invasive and doesnt need to be known.

  • Kyle says on: March 18, 2010 at 4:55 pm

     

    Moriarty, I am offended by the same thing, but my son is bi-racial.

    You could theoretically single my wife out as she was foreign-born, although why we need to delineate her by race and specific nation of origin (as is required by the Census) escapes me. She’s a US citizen and one person. That’s all that matters.

    My son, for some reason, is “check all that apply,” and then you have to say “white” and then check another box and then check another box and write in a specific sub-ethnicity.

    This is highly offensive to me. Weren’t we supposed to be post-racial? Are we divvying up LOOT by race now?

  • John says on: March 18, 2010 at 10:12 pm

     

    Ditto to your post, David. Thanks for obviating my need to write a similar post. I wrote “2,” glanced at a couple other questions, and folded it up and put it in its envelope. Good thing postage is paid for, or there’d be no way it was getting mailed back.

  • Don says on: March 19, 2010 at 9:19 am

     

    @ David: Initially I was going to object to your use of the word *give* in the last paragraph. But after pondering it for a spell I have to agree. Employees, who continue to surrender their funds to the state by way of theft by their employers, are indeed giving their money away and in fact perpetuating the state by doing so. These employees are making a conscious choice to allow this and it’s the height of hypocrisy for them to then chastise this method.

    You have 2 roads to trod, one is paved but inundated with violent thugs that kill and steal, the other road is pothole ridden but largely thug free, which do you choose?

  • Joe R. says on: April 1, 2010 at 4:31 pm

     

    I, too, am intrigued by this calculus that determines one person’s “fair” share of someone else’s money.

no third solution

Blogging about liberty, anarchy, economics and politics