Tories scrapping long form census

[Argus]

All I need to know is people that use the information are very upset about the change. I'll go with what they say.

Yeah, that's the Smallc, we know.

Never question.

Never think.

The experts know what's good for me.

They know what I should think.

So I don't have to.

[Smallc]

Unlike you, who assumes that the experts are wrong because....you somehow know better....always.

[charter.rights]

Yeah, that's the Smallc, we know.

Never question.

Never think.

The experts know what's good for me.

They know what I should think.

So I don't have to.

Sounds like a Conservative cabinet minister.....is that you Stockwell?

Edited July 24, 2010 by charter.rights

[Bonam]

Just because you say so Smallc doesn't make it true.

In this case, however, it is true. When people are given census forms to fill out voluntarily, the people who choose to fill them out are fundamentally different than those who choose not to. Specifically, they have the attribute of wanting to volunteer to fill out said form. Why? Maybe they have more free time? Maybe the ones that don't want to fear giving information to the government? There are a ton of reasons, those are just two, but the result is that the sample is not representative, you only get representation from those people who want to fill out a census form for whatever reason, and you get none from those who do not.

That being said, I don't think it's a big deal. Most people have much more information about themselves floating around the web than a census form could dream of asking for. Companies already data mine this information, as could the government if it needed to collect stats. Perhaps it already does.

[Jack Weber]

Sounds like a Conservative cabinet minister.....is that you Stockwell?

No...Stock is far too common...

Argie is the ghost of John Abbott!

Edited July 24, 2010 by Jack Weber

[bebe]

I want a specific example, please. Not broad categories you might have heard somewhere.

Why not take a look:

* Aboriginal peoples

* Agriculture

* Business, consumer and property services

* Business performance and ownership

* Children and youth

* Construction

* Crime and justice

* Culture and leisure

* Economic accounts

* Education, training and learning

* Energy

* Environment

* Ethnic diversity and immigration

* Families, households and housing

* Government

* Health

* Income, pensions, spending and wealth

* Information and communications technology

* International trade

* Labour

* Languages

* Manufacturing

* Population and demography

* Prices and price indexes

* Reference

* Retail and wholesale

* Science and technology

* Seniors

* Society and community

* Statistical methods

* Transportation

* Travel and tourism

Here's a gem:

In an ironic twist, the Fraser Institute – one of the education system’s fiercest critics and the only public-policy think tank to back the government’s decision to make the long form voluntary – relied on census data in preparing its latest “report card” on Canada’s public schools.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/why-the-census-matters-just-about-everywhere/article1650524/

[Jack Weber]

The government is coming for your books,your guns,and,your brain Argus!!!!!

The Census is the thin edge of the wedge!!!

Hurry!!!!Build your anti-socialist bunker!!!

Be afraid...Be very afraid!!!!

Better yet...Get in touch with Mr.Falange and help him foment the necessary civil war to stop the socialist taitors!!!

[CANADIEN]

there is a few not too flattering things I think about our current federal government. Inredibly dumb was not one of them. I stand corrected.

No person, no company, no organization with even minimal common sense would ever argue that key information is not needed when making important decisions. Yet the Harper government has made a decision that will make important information on this country and its population so unreliable that that it might as well not be collected. Information that is needed when making important public policy decisions.

Similarly, an important source of info about our country and its population will not be available to researchers, today and tomorrow, who study us as a country and a society.

And all that based on a handful of complaints and paranoia from people who think that their freedom is threatened because a bunch of statisticians may see for a few seconds their name on the same page as data about how many rooms they have in their houme.

An intelligent government would have said "there are some issues with the long form census and they need to be addressed" and it would have consulted stakerholders - the public being asked to fill the census, the people and organizations who use the data, and its own statisticians. It would have considered what information is being asked and which one is actually needed. It would have considred what should be the appropriate penalty for those who don`t fill the form (jail? frankly). it woould have considered whetther or not there are better ways to collect the date (such as centralized databases0 and what would be the impact of implementing them.

They did not do any of this, and they will not do any of it. And on top of everything, the waste of paper and time that the long form census will become is gonna cost us more.

Edited July 24, 2010 by CANADIEN

[bebe]

I thought this was particularly well said:

“I find it a little disturbing that the Industry Minister doesn’t seem to understand that knowledge is essential in the knowledge economy.”

[capricorn]

Bebe, that quote is from David Foot. Mr. Foot is a prolific writer. He has made millions writing books and articles for publications by accessing StatsCan data, information that is gathered, categorized and analyzed at the expense of the taxpayer. It's very much in Mr. Foot's interest, and writers/researchers like him, that the flow of data collected by StatsCan continues unabated. His bibliography is quite impressive.

http://www.footwork.com/publications.asp#books

[Smallc]

And? Does that mean that his point is incorrect? There is absolutely nothing to support the making voluntary of the long form census....except for the paranoia of a few on the fringes.

[August1991]

No, I'm talking about the reality that a certain type of people will do something whether or not they have to, and another type have to be forced to do something. Without a mandatory census, that second group will not provide proportionate information.

And Smallc, there is this astonishingly glib belief that "forcing" 20% of Canadians to fill out a paper form will somehow provide more accurate information than other, more discrete and less costly methods to obtain the information.

Presented with a laptop computer, you argue that an abacus is better - because we know how to use it.

As to the belief that a paper census ensures privacy, that argument begs the whole question.

Edited July 24, 2010 by August1991

[Smallc]

Forcing people to fill out the form WILL provide better information. Sure, there will be problems with people who don't fill it our correctly, but there will be far fewer people who won't bother to fill it out at all. This idea is ridiculous. Everyone who knows anything on the subject says so.

[August1991]

No person, no company, no organization with even minimal common sense would ever argue that key information is not needed when making important decisions. Yet the Harper government has made a decision that will make important information on this country and its population so unreliable that that it might as well not be collected. Information that is needed when making important public policy decisions.

Are you aware of any successful organization in the 21st century that obtains key information by mailing out long printed forms every 5 years to millions of people?

The absurdity of this system is as breath-taking as the belief that it provides accurate information.

Forcing people to fill out the form WILL provide better information.

So, do you also favour fining people who don't vote in elections?

For a democracy, which is more important: a completed census form or a completed ballot?

Edited July 24, 2010 by August1991

[Argus]

Unlike you, who assumes that the experts are wrong because....you somehow know better....always.

No, I don't always know better. I sit here like yoda and let someone try to convince me. And I ask them pointed questions. And when they can't answer them I smile and shake my head.

[Argus]

In this case, however, it is true. When people are given census forms to fill out voluntarily, the people who choose to fill them out are fundamentally different than those who choose not to.

But lots of people refuse to fill them out anyway, and we haven't prosecuted anyone in forever. So the affect is the same regardless.

[Argus]

Why not take a look:

* Aboriginal peoples

* Agriculture

* Business, consumer and property services

* Business performance and ownership

* Children and youth

* Construction

* Crime and justice

* Culture and leisure

* Economic accounts

* Education, training and learning

* Energy

* Environment

* Ethnic diversity and immigration

* Families, households and housing

* Government

* Health

* Income, pensions, spending and wealth

* Information and communications technology

* International trade

* Labour

* Languages

And how will any of those suffer?

Specifics, please

Edited July 24, 2010 by Argus

[Argus]

And? Does that mean that his point is incorrect? There is absolutely nothing to support the making voluntary of the long form census....except for the paranoia of a few on the fringes.

And there is absolutely nothing to be lost by decriminalizing it. If there were, you and the other defenders of the mandatory long form would have thought of it by now.

[Smallc]

I don't need to. The people who use the thing have already listed some of the problems that will happen. You simply dismiss them.

Edited July 24, 2010 by Smallc

[Argus]

I don't need to. The people who use the thing have already listed some of the problems that will happen. You simply dismiss them.

No one has presented any specific situation that I have seen, which would be adversely impacted by going to a voluntary questionnaire.

I have a feeling that if Harper had instead proposed criminalizing what was a voluntary long form questionnaire most of the same people would be up in arms and calling him a fascist for his intrusion into people's lives.

They'd also be dismissing the value of criminalizing the census.

[Smallc]

Yes, I'm sure Don Drummond would have said exactly that. Whatever.

[bebe]

And how will any of those suffer?

Specifics, please

1) What's your industry/interest?

2) Inform yourself.

And here's an interesting summary:

Why you should care about the sudden demise of the mandatory long census form

Edited July 24, 2010 by bebe

[bebe]

But lots of people refuse to fill them out anyway, and we haven't prosecuted anyone in forever. So the affect is the same regardless.

My understanding is that people have been prosecuted and fines levied, but no one has been jailed. I'd be ok with removing the threat of jail and replacing it with community service ... in an agency that relies on census data, for example.

Edited July 24, 2010 by bebe

[bebe]

And Smallc, there is this astonishingly glib belief that "forcing" 20% of Canadians to fill out a paper form will somehow provide more accurate information than other, more discrete and less costly methods to obtain the information.

Actually, the proposed voluntary survey is much more costly for much less valid data.

I predict that these groups won't be as likely to fill out a voluntary survey:

- younger adults and older adults

- more recent immigrants

- private sector employers and employees

- Type A personalities (too busy and impatient)

- Libertarians and Reform/Alliance/Conservatives

- other groups we can't easily identify

Consequently, these types of people will not be well-represented in demographic statistics about Canadians that are used for planning, funding, etc.

In other words, it won't be a valid sample of all Canadians as some groups will be selectively absent.

Of course ... in some cases that can be a good thing! (jk)

Edited July 24, 2010 by bebe

[bebe]

Bebe, that quote is from David Foot. Mr. Foot is a prolific writer. He has made millions writing books and articles for publications by accessing StatsCan data, information that is gathered, categorized and analyzed at the expense of the taxpayer. It's very much in Mr. Foot's interest, and writers/researchers like him, that the flow of data collected by StatsCan continues unabated. His bibliography is quite impressive.

http://www.footwork.com/publications.asp#books

"millions"? really?

David K. Foot is a professor of economics at the University of Toronto, and co-author of the Boom, Bust & Echo books.

Who's going to buy this car?

Some StatsCan products - like basic demographic info from the census - are available free, it's true.

Others, tailored to particular uses, are very costly. (StatsCan does recoup some costs)

It depends what you are talking about.