Long Form Census

[waldo]

No one lies in a StatsCan form. Everybody in Canada always tells the truth.</sarcasm>

per Canadian law, per section 31 of the Statistics Act:

False or unlawful information

31 Every person who, without lawful excuse,

• A - refuses or neglects to answer, or willfully answers falsely, any question requisite for obtaining any information sought in respect of the objects of this Act or pertinent thereto that has been asked of him by any person employed or deemed to be employed under this Act, or

• B - refuses or neglects to furnish any information or to fill in to the best of his knowledge and belief any schedule or form that the person has been required to fill in, and to return the same when and as required of him pursuant to this Act, or knowingly gives false or misleading information or practices any other deception there-under

is, for every refusal or neglect, or false answer or deception, guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months or to both.

be the rebel... go ahead and lie on your response to the census form!

.

[BubberMiley]

Somehow I don't think strategic voting is the same as illegally misrepresenting yourself on a census form. Perhaps a comparison to Leftists, Laurier or Pearson would be apt in this situation.

[Smallc]

There absolutely was, I got one.

There absolutely was not. There was a voluntary household survey that 1/3 of people got.

[jacee]

I ALWAYS get the long one. I have never filled it out before, and I have no intention of filling it out now. I'm sure not going to log in to their website and punch in their code either.

Hint: If you fill it out, you won't get it again. ?

.

[segnosaur]

It's strictly principle. I don't recognize the government's right to compel me to answer personal questions. None of their business. Doubly so when the basic information such as what province I live in is firmly established in several govt databases

Keep in mind that while you may be in multiple government databases, usually such databases are not connected, and when they draw out certain information, they may only be drawing from one source (the census). In fact, many of the government databases are actually forbidden from "sharing" information.

For example, if they are trying to determine whether you need a new school in the area, they may use information in your census form to determine how many children in your house may need school in a few years. They won't necessarily cross-reference census data with (for example) the Revenue Canada databases, or your provincial health databases just to catch anyone they might have missed from the census.

One thing I am considering doing, is leaving the whole form blank, EXCEPT for where it asks for my province. Manitoba still gets counted, but my personal info is left out.

Here's my suggestion... fill out the entire thing honestly... then, if there is a 'comments' section at the end, put "Everything here is a lie"... see if whomever is filling out the form takes your comment seriously or not.

[jacee]

It's strictly principle. I don't recognize the government's right to compel me to answer personal questions. None of their business. Doubly so when the basic information such as what province I live in is firmly established in several govt databases -- they do NOT need my answers.

Statistics Canada doesn't have access to other government databases. And I would think you wouldn't want government trading your info around.

I suppose if I didn't always get the long form, it's possible i might not feel so strongly

You'll get the long form until you fill it out.

I know one guy who did his online, and just copied and pasted the questions back into the answer blanks for every question. Pretty clever, wish I had thought of that. I know another who writes factual statements that don't really answer the question: Q - "How many people reside at this residence?" A - "Not thirty-eight".

That just flags you as 'non-compliant' and puts you in line to do the long form again next time.

.

[segnosaur]

We've come a long way from the First World War, when it was not uncommon for people to be willing to make the ultimate sacrifice for their country. Now it's too much to ask of someone to fill out a form.

Interesting... So what you're saying is that we as a society have no reason to complain at all about anything the government does, as long as it does not involve sending us to war.

If they want to double our taxes? Hey, in WW1 people had to put up with more than just taxes!

Health care wait times getting longer? Hey, in WW1 people had more to worry about than health care wait times!

[segnosaur]

Last time I got the long for it took my closer to half an hour.

You willing to pay for my time to fill it out?

Sometimes the state requires our time....

taxes... census... filling out permits... jail time....

Usually when the government requires me to spend time doing something, the reasons are pretty clear... Taxes are necessary to provide basic infrastructure and social services, jail time is often given if someone is engaging in activity that is considered harmful to others.

When it comes to the census, not one person has given me an example of why the long form is needed, or what benefit it provides to the average citizen. I've asked that question both on this forum and others, and it usually comes down to one of 2 answers:

1) "experts" say they need it, ignoring the possibility that those experts could just be engaged in busy work

2) They will give some example (like "need it for schools"), but they never seem to justify why things like the Short form census, in combination with things like city zoning bylaws, don't provide adequate information.

I'm not saying that a valid example about why the long form is needed isn't out there... it just seems strange that nobody seems to be able to justify it.

A half hour out of your life isn't a great loss.

Thank you for telling me what is and isn't a loss. Nice of you to set my priorities for me.

[segnosaur]

I gave it a little thought - thanks.

Perhaps the time it takes to fill out the form does not depend on the length of the form - but it depends on the I.Q. of the person trying to fill out the form. What may take me 3 minutes may take you "closer to half an hour".

Well, if its anyone who knows about IQs, its the person who goes into a thread discussing the Long form and brags about how easy it is to answer the short form census.

Just out of curiosity, why did you think your experience with answering the short form was really relevant when discussing the long form census?

And do you honestly think that the only thing preventing a 70+ question census form from being filled out as quickly as a 10 question census form is the intelligence of the person answering?

[dre]

No one lies in a StatsCan form. Everybody in Canada always tells the truth.</sarcasm>

Why continue with this stupid red herring? EVERY collection of data has noise in it - that does not mean the data isn't useful, you just need to try to understand the noise in your dataset and account for it.

You are unwittingly attacking the entire concept of collecting and analyzing data... based on the fact that no data collection method is perfect.

Do you realize how infantile that is? How utterly silly it is?

[Big Guy]

Well, if its anyone who knows about IQs, its the person who goes into a thread discussing the Long form and brags about how easy it is to answer the short form census.

Just out of curiosity, why did you think your experience with answering the short form was really relevant when discussing the long form census?

And do you honestly think that the only thing preventing a 70+ question census form from being filled out as quickly as a 10 question census form is the intelligence of the person answering?

You were rude and I answered in kind. I do think that there is a directly proportional relationship between intelligence and the time it takes completing a task where intelligence is a component. "Brag" is your interpretation and based on your attitude. I assume that those creating this form, and then setting up the formulas for statistical analysis, take into account folks with your attitude.

I also believe that it is statistically probable that those folks who refuse to fill out the form (because of the taxing length of time to complete) will spend as much or more time criticizing the form. I cannot give you the exact statistics because of the number of people who refused to fill out my questionnaire.

[jacee]

Keep in mind that while you may be in multiple government databases, usually such databases are not connected, and when they draw out certain information, they may only be drawing from one source (the census). In fact, many of the government databases are actually forbidden from "sharing" information.

For example, if they are trying to determine whether you need a new school in the area, they may use information in your census form to determine how many children in your house may need school in a few years. They won't necessarily cross-reference census data with (for example) the Revenue Canada databases, or your provincial health databases just to catch anyone they might have missed from the census.

Yup. Your personal information is used by a particular government department only for the purpose for which it was collected, and cannot legally be shared with other departments without your explicit consent. (watch what you're signing). Disturbing exceptions apply under C51 Anti-terror Act now, if you belong to a First Nation, an environmental group, anti-abortion, white supremacist ... a mosque, for example, or anyone else CSIS and the RCMP want to harass.

Here's my suggestion... fill out the entire thing honestly... then, if there is a 'comments' section at the end, put "Everything here is a lie"... see if whomever is filling out the form takes your comment seriously or not.

Lying on the census is a crime. Admitting it to them in writing is just stupid. Expect to be charged.

.

[segnosaur]

Here's my suggestion... fill out the entire thing honestly... then, if there is a 'comments' section at the end, put "Everything here is a lie"... see if whomever is filling out the form takes your comment seriously or not.

Lying on the census is a crime. Admitting it to them in writing is just stupid. Expect to be charged.

.

Except of course I specifically said to fill out the form honestly. The only thing that would be a lie is the statement "Everything here is a lie", which of course could refer to just the statement itself, and it would be a lie that its a lie.

I always found the whole legality of this rather strange. On one hand, you have people claiming "Its no big deal. Nobody ever went to jail for it. You don't get punished". Then you read all the possible repercussions... jail time, hundreds of dollars in fines, etc. Kind of like people supporting the census want to have it both ways.

[eyeball]

It occurs to me to wonder if conservative resistance to providing statistical information to the government is responsible for our society being more liberal?

If so, thanks for shooting yourselves in the foot. Feel free to aim higher.

[TimG]

It occurs to me to wonder if conservative resistance to providing statistical information to the government is responsible for our society being more liberal?

Statistics are neutral but statistics are often abused to provide psuedo-scientific justifications for ideology. That is why many people on the left get upset when people start using race related crime or IQ stats to draw conclusions which they don't like. The trouble with "liberals" is they don't have the self-awareness necessary to recognize when they abuse statistics in the same way to support their ideology. If some conservatives dislike the collection of statistics it is because the data is so frequently abused by liberals who like to pretend they are 'making science based policy' when all they are really doing is mining data until they find stats to support their preferred policy choices. Edited May 5, 2016 by TimG

[Bryan]

There absolutely was not. There was a voluntary household survey that 1/3 of people got.

Yes, the long form portion of the census was voluntary. Your position was that it didn't exist, which is false.

[Bryan]

Keep in mind that while you may be in multiple government databases, usually such databases are not connected, and when they draw out certain information, they may only be drawing from one source (the census). In fact, many of the government databases are actually forbidden from "sharing" information.

Not my problem. They should fix that.

[eyeball]

Statistics are neutral

Even with so many conservatives lying and not contributing any information at all?

[Moonlight Graham]

There absolutely was, I got one.

It was voluntary if you got one, not required.

[Bryan]

Even with so many conservatives lying and not contributing any information at all?

Balanced out by the lying/not contributing liberals, socialists, and undecideds.

[Bryan]

It was voluntary if you got one, not required.

Right. But it was still there for everyone who thought it was important to fill out.

[segnosaur]

Keep in mind that while you may be in multiple government databases, usually such databases are not connected, and when they draw out certain information, they may only be drawing from one source (the census). In fact, many of the government databases are actually forbidden from "sharing" information.

Not my problem. They should fix that.

As other poster have pointed out, that sort of cross-government communication might result in a potential security risk. (I for one would rather not have the chance of someone in stats Canada accidentally having access to my tax returns.)

Yes, the long form portion of the census was voluntary. Your position was that it didn't exist, which is false.

Actually, the last "census" was correctly labeled a "survey". A census implies that responses are mandatory (even if the government does not always enforce that). Since the last long form was voluntary, it probably shouldn't be called a 'census'.

[cybercoma]

Statistics Canada doesn't have access to other government databases. And I would think you wouldn't want government trading your info around.

You'll get the long form until you fill it out.

That just flags you as 'non-compliant' and puts you in line to do the long form again next time.

.

Not to mention provincial and federal governments are separate entities, but whatever. Ignorance is bliss.

[eyeball]

Balanced out by the lying/not contributing liberals, socialists, and undecideds.

You have statistics that suggest this?

I'm betting most conservatives who like to brag about what a bunch of rebellious scofflaws they are in public actually shut their mouths in private and comply with authoritah like the good little right-wingers they are.

How much you want to bet Stephen Harper obediently fills out his?

[Smallc]

Yes, the long form portion of the census was voluntary. Your position was that it didn't exist, which is false.

There was no long form census.