Beyond The Commons

Beyond The Commons

Aaron Wherry covers all the goings-on in and around Parliament Hill. Follow Aaron on Twitter: @aaronwherry

'This issue need not provoke an all-or-nothing allegiance'

by Aaron Wherry on Wednesday, July 21, 2010 8:49am - 0 Comments

In response to last week’s call, the National Citizens Coalition, Stephen Harper’s old haunt, sends along the following from NCC president Peter Coleman.

The long-form census is an antiquated and flawed system that needs to be reformed. While Minister Clement’s actions have stirred up debate, at least he is working to remedy many of the faults in the census system that have received much less fanfare. Great Britain is eliminating its census entirely, stemming from a desire to save money as well as the recognition that governments are able to collect data in more modern ways that avoid extreme redundancy.

It is curious that most of the groups/organizations clamouring to protect the long census rely upon that census data in some form or another. It is nice to receive free statistics at the expense of taxpayers, but our government should not be compelling this cooperation with the threat of jail time nor should we be bankrolling the whole endeavour. If organizations and special interest groups want data, they should pay for it.

In your initial comments, Mr. Wherry, you ask for city planners or statisticians to defend the move to a short census  -  they won’t. This isn’t the point here, though. Such people will always stand up for better, more accurate, more expensive statistics. This debate is really about whether our government should be administering such a system.

It should also be pointed out that the long form census as it stood did not provide true statistical accuracy to begin with. Perhaps put off by the intrusive nature of many questions, or perhaps recognizing the farce that the census has become, upwards of 20,000 Canadians indicated “Jedi” as their religion in the 2001 census.

This issue need not provoke an all-or-nothing allegiance to either Minister Clement or the long form census. It is more important to open the discussion about overcoming the flaws of the census, and Minister Clement’s reforms certainly provide a starting point.

It is necessary to look at all aspects of this debate before succumbing to the knee-jerk reaction to protect a long census that violates privacy and provides little return to the average citizen. As Pierre Trudeau famously said, “the state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation.”

Bookmark and Share
  • http://intensedebate.com/people/StephenGordon StephenGordon

    For the umpteenth time THOSE DATA ARE NOT CHEAP!

    And they are most certainly NOT FREE.

    Jeebus.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/robert_mccl6309 Robert McClelland

      Pfft! Don't trouble the NCC with facts or reality, Stephen. Those things are for liberal elitists.

    • bergkamp

      "For the umpteenth time THOSE DATA ARE NOT CHEAP! "

      Are the more or less expensive than commissioning your own data? If it is cheaper to buy from StatsCan than it is to commission your own polling/studies/data, than cheap is correct term.

      And what do academics care about cost when it is taxpayers who pay for all this nonsense, and have to suffer invasion of privacy, all so we can learn there are 20,000 Jedi in Canada. I am aware that Clement's plan is not going to reduce costs either but that is separate issue from academics and the like complaining about expenses.

      "And they are most certainly NOT FREE."

      I am looking at 2006 census data now and it did not cost me anything, except taxes of course.
      http://www12.statcan.ca/census-recensement/2006/r…

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/MostlyCivil MostlyCivil

        Congrats. You've parsed a commentors' post without addressing the crucial flaw in the NCC document.

        The NCC says it's "free'.
        "It is nice to receive free statistics at the expense of taxpayers"
        "If organizations and special interest groups want data, they should pay for it."

        There's lots of free data, yes. But the complex stuff, the stuff businesses and researchers want actually costs money.

        You say it's "cheap". That's a value judgement, and your rationale says since each individual user doesn't pay the full cost, it's cheap. Your logic is if gas went up to $300 per litre tomorrow, it would be cheap, because it's still cheaper than building your own refinery?

        But back to the point. Either you're wrong, or the NCC is wrong. Any thoughts?

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/bergkamp bergkamp

          "Your logic is if gas went up to $300 per litre tomorrow, it would be cheap, because it's still cheaper than building your own refinery?"

          Moffatt used example of BMW 7 Series yesterday in similar example as you. If BMW dealership charges $100,000 for 7 series and StatsCan offers the same car for $50,000 than it is accurate to say StatsCan deal is cheap if you are in the market for a 7 Series.

          No one has suggested that academics, economists or other social scientists build their own car or conduct their own surveys.

          • Holly Stick

            Actually, I'm pretty sure some Conservatives supporting this stupid decision by Stephen Harper have indeed suggested that academics, economists and other social scientists should have to conduct their own surveys. Since the Conservatives do not want peace, order or good government anyway.

        • Charles H.

          He's also managed to mislead by conflating the aggregate data, available freely, with the more granular data — which is what's actually useful to the majority of groups using the census data and therefore paid for.

      • Gayle

        Lord knows I am not an economist, but I would suggest that it is far more reasonable for one entity to gather the information and sell it to the many, many other agencies that use it, than it would be for each and every other agency to collect that information on their own.

        So, sure, having the government collect the census data is more efficient, and therefore cheaper, than having thousands of agencies collect the same date individually. However, those agencies do have to pay for that data, and it is not cheap. Seems to me StatsCan does get to recover much of its costs.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Scott_Tribe Scott_Tribe

      Just look at it as more writing material for a teachable moment :)

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/bergkamp bergkamp

        I agree. Students should learn not to take their Professors ideas/arguments at face value and should always make sure their profs are presenting more than one side of argument or agenda.

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/Scott_Tribe Scott_Tribe

          No, I meant it as a way of showing how idiotic and ignorant the NCC is in presenting a false argument.

        • Gayle

          I don't know what university you went to, but clearly my experience was different from yours.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/StephenGordon StephenGordon

        I just put up a post with the title "The economics of census data". Bottom line: markets fail.
        http://bit.ly/aHFhCo

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

          Somehow markets don't fail when it comes to pollsters. Yet your entire post seems to apply to them as well.

          The inefficiency takes the form of this duplication of efforts. It's more efficient to simply have one database

          Straight out of marxism 101. You could make that argument about any good or service. Yet we all know that markets are more efficient when allowing for duplication of efforts, for that is the only way to breed competition and innovation.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/Scott_Tribe Scott_Tribe

            Stephen Gordon is now advocating Marxist theory? Wow.

            What's your degree in statistics, out of curiousity, scf?

          • s_c_f

            I've got two actually. I have a graduate one from U of T and one from Queen's.

            What's yours?

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

            BTW, the simple idea that production of something can be made more efficient by eliminating competition and having just a single producer, that is a small element of marxist theory. No, Gordon obviously does not in general advocate anything close to marxist theory. This is just an exception.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

            Of course that "when allowing for duplication of efforts" is key there isn't it? That's like saying myself and my spouse should each purchase our own stove so that when one fails we will have the most efficient one left, and, allowing for the duplication of efforts, have purchased wisely.

            Never mind that it cost twice as much for no additional benefit for several years. No no.. that's not "allowing for the duplication"

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

            Not a good analogy. We're talking about duplication of efforts. In other words: the producer, not the consumer.

          • RayK

            This is textbook undergraduate (market) economics at pretty much any university in the developed world.

            Market economics isn't a synonym for "laissez faire" no matter how much money the right may invest in convincing people that it is. Information is a non-rival, non-excludable good. Private markets don't efficiently allocate resources to the production of non-rival, non-excludable goods–period, end of sentence. That just the way it is.

          • s_c_f

            In that case, all software, which is in essence nothing more than information provided to computer hardware, should not be produced by private markets. Same goes with books. Same goes with TV news. Same goes with newspapers. All of these are markets in which information is the product.

            Also, recorded music, which is in essence digital or analog sound-wave information provided to electronic hardware.

            Also note that news is a non-rival, non-excludable good. So is music. So is software.

            Oh well, I guess that's the way it is. Nationalize them all.

          • Guest

            There are already private polling firms, providing "competition and innovation." Why do you think researchers and social scientists use Statscan and not private firms? It all comes down to the validity of the results. Basic statistics shows that the private firms' results are much less reliable than official statistics. Why?

            Removing the mandatory part takes away a huge part of the reliability of the numbers and introduces bias into the data. This happens with all telephone, online, and mail surveys, including polling numbers reported in the press. Without mandatory responses, only people who choose to participate are represented. Can you see why this would corrupt the data?

        • Gary

          Quick!
          Warn Great Britian of their folly in eliminating the census entirely or they will be sorry because YOU said so!

          • Marion

            I'm sure there are people over there doing just that.

            They are going to get their info from several agencies, including credit bureaus and the Royal Mail…

  • http://accidentaldeliberations.blogspot.com The Jurist

    So the NCC's criticism is based on complaining repeatedly about the cost/benefit calculation of collecting data through the census. And their response is to approve of Clement's plan to spend $30 million more while reducing the quality of the data.

    Sometimes I wonder whether the Cons make moves like this just to test who'll take their side even when there's no rational basis for doing so. The NCC has obviously made its choice.

    • http://notquiteunhinged.blogspot.com Catelli

      Seconded. The logical inconsistency of that letter shows the intellectual rigor the NCC provides to all of its analyses. How does someone write something like that and not have their brain explode? Must be another case of GIGO.

      This issue need not provoke an all-or-nothing allegiance to either Minister Clement or the long form census. It is more important to open the discussion about overcoming the flaws of the census, Fine, agreed. Lets fix the flaws. and Minister Clement’s reforms certainly provide a starting point. You lost me and you are nucking futs to make this claim.

    • Olaf

      A test of loyalty is just as plausible as any of the other reasons I've heard so far.

      • Dave

        So it's a $30-million conservative cultural hazing?

    • Mike T.

      When the purge finally comes, we're gonna be very sorry we spoke out in favour of a more accurate census.

  • bergkamp

    " …. upwards of 20,000 Canadians indicated “Jedi” as their religion in the 2001 census"

    If this is true that's awesome. Some Canadians still refuse to bend to government's learned helplessness agenda and it's nice to know they are out there.

    Others claim StatsCan numbers are sacrosanct and not to be trifled with but I wonder how reliable they are if people are so clearly taking the piss when they fill out the form.

    Also, if StatsCan numbers are going to allow government to plan better, I wonder what municipalities/provs/feds are going to do for the Jedis – Iggy has been talking recently about sending people abroad for work experience, maybe we can send the Jedi's to Coruscant for a period of time.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/hollinm hollinm

      bergkamp……..we should all ask ourselves how good are the statistics when only 20% of the country get the long form and when most people, lie, mislead or do not answer the questions (take your pick).

      No wonder we waste money if social programs, healthcare funding etc. is based on a survey of only 20% of the population. Revise the short form to include only essential questions and send it to everybody in the country.

      It these statisticians want information do their own surveys but to subject Canadians to a possible jail term because they refuse to divulge their income or who looks after the kids give me a break.

      • pdpd

        Statistically, getting 20% of a population to respond to a form is awesome. That's a very, very, very large sample. If you have a problem with a 20% sample, you don't have a problem with this survey. You have a problem with quantitative research.

        Do you really think you know more about stats than the people at StatsCan?

        • http://scottdiatribe.canflag.com/ Scott_Tribe

          Conservatives arent known for liking facts.They base their reasoning on their ideology.

          • CAPS

            Or as it is also known, truthiness.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/bergkamp bergkamp

        " …. we should all ask ourselves how good are the statistics when only 20% of the country get the long form and when most people, lie, mislead or do not answer the questions (take your pick)."

        Spot on. You have got to wonder what people are writing on their long forms when they are so brazen as to write Jedi for religion. Liberals and progressives put tremendous faith in government and its numbers but it is all based on the idea that people don't lie.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/charlesh Charles H.

        "No wonder we waste money if social programs, healthcare funding etc. is based on a survey of only 20% of the population."

        Ladies and gentlemen, somebody who never took a statistics class! Give hollinm a round of applause and a basic intro to stats textbook, please.

        (Are you one of those people who also complains about polls because they didn't poll "enough" people?)

      • Loraine Lamontagne

        We should ask ourselves how good the statistics will be when 30% of the country gets a National Household Survey where they can voluntarily lie, mislead or do not answer the questions (take your pick).

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/TJCook TJCook

        "…most people, lie, mislead or do not answer the questions"

        I don't think that's true at all. Can you back up that assertion?

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/hollinm hollinm

          TJCook……..does the discussion around the Jedi for religion ring a bell?

          • Marion

            So 21,000 people out of 6,006,450 gave an answer which may or may not be accurate. 'That's 0.34%.

            Also: I challenge you to argue that believing in the Force is more questionable than being a Scientologist (1500 respondents, but 8 "churches" in Canada).

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/lgarvin lgarvin

            Oh boy.

            You're aware that the long form is only a sample right? Meaning that 21,000 out of roughly 1.2 million people answered Jedi. I'm no statistician mind you, so I'll let you figure the percentages.

          • Marion

            Yes. Actually it was 21000 out of roughly 5.7 million.

            I took that all into account (including the 95% respondency rate), when I made my calcualtions. (See number adjusted for 2001 in my post below).

          • Marion

            Actually, I must correct that. I was using the population count for the 2006 Census. Using 2001 numbers gives you 0.368%

            Sorry about that….

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/TJCook TJCook

            Like Marion said: 0.34%.

            0.34% isn't "most" of anything, now is it?

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/TJCook TJCook

            Come to think of it, if I walked through the Engineering and IT departments at work, I could probably find 21,000 people nerdy enough to seriously identify with the Jedi religion.

            Who's to say they're any less serious than the Catholics? It's certainly no less weird.

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/Jenn_ Jenn_

          If only there were statistics for that!

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

          Well, if you look at his sample size of 1, it's actually 100%

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

      And going to a voluntary form will reduce the Jedi numbers, how, exactly?

  • Andrew (not P or C)

    About the Jedi Knights. I think it is likeliest that they are atheists or agnostics that are mocking religion (in the vein of Flying Spaghetti Monsterism/Pastafarianism) than people who are rebelling against the census.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/charlesh Charles H.

      And they amount to less than 1% of respondents, if the numbers of 160,000 people who refused to answer and a 95% response rate are to be believed.

      (I know, I know: the Jedi numbers and the other numbers are from different years. Anyone got the response rate and number of refusals from the 2001 census?)

      • wilson

        'More than 160,000 Canadian refused to fill it out,
        a five-fold increase over 1981'

        not what you asked for, bu a definite trend, 5 x increase from 6 census' ago

    • McC

      'Flying Spaghetti Monsterism/Pastafarianism'
      I had not heard of this (these?) faith(s), but you have piqued my curiousity!

      • Charles H.

        https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Fl… for a quick summary. It's a joke way of saying that you're an atheist.

        • Marion

          What about worshipers of Cthulu?

          • Charles H.

            They're just hedging their bets. They wish to make certain that should the eldritch one actually exist (Ia! Ia!) that they do not suffer the ignominy of being eaten last.

            It's like Pascal's Wager, only with more gibbering.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Jenn_ Jenn_

      I think they may be non-religious, and also like my son (I can very well believe he answers Jedi every time the question comes up) You know, Star Wars fans! Speak with the Yoda voice, have all kinds of lines from the movies at hand for various situations, that kind of thing. An entire subculture, it is.

  • wascally wabbit

    I love this. The Party and its sycophants – who opposes same sex marriage and promotes so-called “family values” – quoting Trudeau – out of context – (he was commenting on the idea of government and society as a whole having no business knowing what your sexual oritentation was – but he certainly wasn’t concerned about anonymous questions like “how many bedrooms do you have in your home” (which by the way is not a question on the current long census form as I understand it).

    These neocons are so detached from the facts that they should go live with Alice – in Wonderland!

    • Lord Kitchener's Own

      he was commenting on the idea of government and society as a whole having no business knowing what your sexual orientation was

      Actually, he wasn't even doing that. He wasn't really commenting on people's right to keep their sexual orientation private (though I'm sure he'd have perhaps agreed that that should be so) he was commenting on people's right not to have their sexual orientation be a violation of the criminal code. He wasn't really saying "it's none of the state's business who consenting adults sleep with" (though again, I'm sure he'd have probably agreed with that as well), he was actually saying "there shouldn't be anything in the criminal code that can cause someone to go to jail for engaging in sexual activities with another consenting adult".

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/doug_rogers doug_rogers

      "The state has no place counting the bedrooms of the nation!"

      Tony Clement 2010

  • Chris B

    If you are going to state the following:

    "It is necessary to look at all aspects of this debate before succumbing to the knee-jerk reaction to protect a long census that violates privacy and provides little return to the average citizen."

    Isn't it incumbent on you to prove that there is little return to the average citizen? Or does merely stating it make it so?

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/A_logician A_logician

      The return to the average citizen must come from the provincial or municipal levels of government, since the leaders of the federal government seem to have no use for data. They already have all the answers.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

    It is more important to open the discussion about overcoming the flaws of the census, and Minister Clement’s reforms certainly provide a starting point.

    Great. Now that the discussion has been opened, we can ditch Minister Clement’s reforms, keep the mandatory long form, and consult with actual statisticians and experts about ways to "overcome the flaws of the census".

    • wilson

      How about we consult with the Boss,
      the Canadian taxpayer.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

        Wouldn't the Canadian taxpayer prefer to spend less money on the census?

        • Loraine Lamontagne

          Obviously not Canadian taxpayers who continue to support the orgy of spending that has been going on for the past four and a half years!

          • wilson

            Which is far less than the Coalition of Losers would have spent appeasing their special interest groups.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/John_Edgar John_Edgar

            Just a thought, if your best defense is "we are not nearly as bad as the other guys" you probably aren't helping your cause very much.

          • wilson

            As long as the majority of voters feel the same way, Harper will be PM for a long time.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/John_Edgar John_Edgar

            Well that's great if your goal is for Harper to be PM. If your goal is to have a good government that benefits Canadians then being not quite as bad as the other guys is not much of a plan.

        • wilson

          The 2006 census cost was just short of $600,000.
          How about all these 'organizations' that can't make a decision without the census, pay their fair share.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/Scott_Tribe Scott_Tribe

            Um. did you bother to read Professor Gordon's comments? Those orgs pay for those stats.. They arent getting it for free , nor cheaply.

            You conservative supporters keep droning out your talking points, and when presented with evidence that you're completely wrong, you keep droning the points and try to pretend you didnt even see the rebuttal.

          • Out There

            You conservative supporters keep droning out your talking points, and when presented with evidence that you're completely wrong, you keep droning the points and try to pretend you didnt even see the rebuttal.

            This is standard Conservative procedure: yell your version of reality loudly enough to drown out all the other voices. This takes advantage of the tendency of us humans to believe something if it is repeated to us often enough.

            As Flanagan or somebody once said – it doesn't have to be true, it just has to sound plausible.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/PolJunkie PolJunkie

            Except it doesn't even sound plausible. More like laughable if you ask me.

          • wilson

            Well then what's the beef about the costs increasing, if the Cdn taxpayer isn't picking up the tab?

            Gawd, take a position and stand on it.

          • Out There

            The complaint isn't about the costs increasing (though that is not a good thing) – the complaint is that making the long form voluntary skews the data and makes it unreliable.

          • Marion

            You don't pay municipal and provincial taxes?

          • ZestyMordant

            The voluntary "census" would not only cost more, but given the unreliability of the results I think it's safe to assume that revenues would also go down as fewer people are willing to buy detailed but unreliable data.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/Halo_Override Halo_Override

            Reading first would eat up valuable typing time.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/tedbetts tedbetts

        Surely if that is the concern this must be the one time you will allow some criticism of the Conservatives as they did not consult with anyone according to Clement but merely asserted their own will on us.

      • Lord Kitchener's Own

        Consulting the Boss BEFORE a major change is slipped in without any consultation or debate???

        What a novel concept!!!

        • wilson

          And when Bernier and Clement said they had 'thousands' of complaints, and when 160,000 Canadians refused to fill out the 2006 census, and when 20,000 Jedi Knights protested,
          the Liberal elites ignore (or laugh at) these facts, organizations don't vote.

          • CAPS

            First of all, Mad Max Bernier was the Minister of Industry at the time he allegedly received these "thousands" of e-mails. If there had been such a groundswell then shouldn't he have done something about it at the time?

            Secondly, if there was any concerted write-in campaign about the last census then it was probably about having Lockheed Martin be the contractor for conducting the census and worries that they or the U.S. government would have access to the data.

          • wilson

            Well I would say that when HALF of Canadians agree with yah, it's a ground swell.

          • http://scottdiatribe.canflag.com/ Scott_Tribe

            Max is also on record as saying this:

            "It was evidently part of an organized campaign, as my Parliament colleagues and I often sometimes receive vast numbers of messages on controversial issues. They are one way among others to gauge the level of public support or opposition to a decision. These messages were obviously not filed for future use by my staff and were deleted"

            Get that? Those emails were deleted by Max and staff because they felt it was part of an organized astro-turf campaign. Yet he's turning around now and trying to claim those emails showed Canadians hated the longform census being mandatory?

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/doug_rogers doug_rogers

        If the Census has been made voluntary under the principle that it is coercive and an invasion of privacy, when will the income tax be made voluntary?

  • Lord Kitchener's Own

    It is necessary to look at all aspects of this debate….

    Oh, so NOW it's necessary to look at all aspects of this debate. 'Cause I rather thought the whole plan was to slip this major change into the Canada Gazette on the day before the Canada Day long weekend so as to avoid anyone even noticing, let alone debating, that the change had been made at all.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/TJCook TJCook

      If they wanted to avoid scrutiny and accountability, they should have just crammed it into the omnibus budget bill.

      • Lord Kitchener's Own

        Don't underestimate your federal government.

        They have ALL KINDS of ways of avoiding scrutiny and accountability. They just like to mix it up a bit to keep things interesting.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/tedbetts tedbetts

      Exactly.

    • knick

      Despite all the recent discussion about the termination of the collection of national demographic data that is essential for planning purposes for the private and public sectors, it seems that the general population of this country is oblivious to the Harper agenda of dismantling every aspect of our longstanding social contract with these seemingly inconsequential incremental steps. We really won't recognize this country when he's done.

  • wilson

    Now we have a second poll, that validates the first one, G&M

    Canadians are evenly divided — 49 per cent in favour and 51 per cent against — on whether the Conservatives' move is "good" or "bad,"

    (majority of Quebecers and young people agree with the government)
    Read more: http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/canada/consen…

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/tedbetts tedbetts

      Several interesting things about that poll:

      - the vast majority who have actually had to complete the long form all support making it mandatory
      - over 2/3s of Canadians thought the invasion of privacy was not a big deal
      - the poll seems to be asking about the abolition of the long form, not making it useless by making it voluntary; which also begs the question on whether participants in the poll even know or understand what the Conservatives' "move" actually is
      - it is an online poll

      • wilson

        The majority of Quebecers and young Canadians don't want to fill out the long form, regardless of how you try to twist the poll Ted.
        Now it seems to me that is right smack dab in the territory Liberals want to target.

        And those who are a-ok with the long form census, will continue to fill it out, even if it is voluntary.

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/tedbetts tedbetts

          Where have I twisted anything Wilson.

          Are you actually trying to claim that what I wrote is not 100% accurate? Please indicate which statement.

          Or are you just twisting the poll and my commentary, Wilson?

    • http://scottdiatribe.canflag.com/ Scott_Tribe

      If thats a starting point on public opinion, and its from an online pollster in Ipsos-Reid, I'll take those #'s as the starting point.

      You forgot to mention wilson that 2/3 of those polled think the mandatory longform is a reasonable intrusion on privacy.. so the poll is very contradictory. Once its pointed out that the COns are trying to do this to gut social programs they hate, I believe public opinion will turn to opposing this move quite decisively.

      • wilson

        Then participation in the 2011 census should be good, eh.
        That's a big leap there Scott,
        making a census form voluntary to cutting social programs. Especially when those social programs are administered by the Provinces.

        ' I believe public opinion will turn to opposing this move quite decisively'
        and I believe the opposite

        Businesses don't rely on the data, because it is historical and irrelevant by the time the stats are out there,
        and it takes YEARS for the census police to get all the forms in.

        • Andrew (not PorC)

          It doesn't matter if participation is 'good' (say the 65% that support the long form being mandatory). The data will be garbage–we have no valid way of correcting for sampling bias.

          You're insane if you think businesses don't use census data in making decisions. I can assure you that the major firm I work for uses it extensively in its decision-making.

    • John D

      I would like to meet the type of person who believes that the strictly-regulated census is an invasion into their privacy, but is willing to give their political views to a private polling firm. Fascinating…

    • Anon ABC

      Hey Wilson: resorting to public opinion polls now, are we? But, but, your glorious leader is on record saying: "This party will not take its position based on public opinion polls. We will not take a stand based on focus groups. We will not take a stand based on phone-in shows or householder surveys or any other vagaries of pubic opinion". Did he misspeak, again?

      • wilson

        The decision was made BEFORE this poll,
        unless you are saying the Harper govt DID consult Canadians first.
        Can't have it both ways.

        • Anon ABC

          But, but , I thought that Maxime had told of "thousands of e-mails" he had received in 2006 objecting to the census and dear Tony had told about support he received from all those real Canadians supporting his stand. Now those were from BEFORE this poll you cited, were they not? Do those not count as taking a stand based on public opinion, or are you saying that Maxime and Tony, naughty boys, kept the information from dear Leader?

  • John D

    The Jedi thing has nothing to do with statistical accuracy or intrusiveness. People didn't write that as an FU to the long-form. They wrote it as an FU to organized religion, indicating that they find it silly.

    So the number of Jedis is noting but a statistically accurate representation of the number of Canadians who view religion as being silly enough to call themselves Jedis.

    • wilson

      And what about the other 160,000 Canadians that refused to fill in the 2006 long form?
      And why were only 62 of those who refused, taken to court?

      Why wasn't the fine/jail law is not applied on all 160,000?

    • McC

      Like Moose, the plural of Jedi is Jedi. More proof that no one has their facts right in this debate! ;-)

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/WDM WDM

    The NCC is quoting Trudeau. Well I think that pretty much puts a wrap on things.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/charlesh Charles H.

      Well, they are quoting Trudeau without showing any understanding of what the quote means, so I suppose it's not quite the apocalypse yet.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/MostlyCivil MostlyCivil

    "As Pierre Trudeau famously said, “the state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation."

    Peter Coleman is fortunate that Pierre is dead. He'd be in for a well deserved slapping for misappropriation. Equating a basic human rights battle with this?

    Pah.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/TJCook TJCook

    What I find remarkable about this is how unremarkable it is that the same stupid Jedi talking point is being parroted by these ostensibly independent organizations. It's not even a substantive argument, it's pure talking point.

    They're just shamelessly repeating what the Conservative party says and not even trying to sound (much less actually be) original. And the lag between the beginning of the uproar and the sudden influx of support looks obviously like the Conservatives coordinated a response from their allies when the issue didn't fade out on its own.

    We're all just used to shameless manipulation of public opinion by people and organizations unwilling or unable to think for themselves.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/tedbetts tedbetts

    Is there a single word in that statement that does not directly mirror PMO talking points with the same degree deep analysis?

    Seriously: Jedi knight references, "complaints about privacy", attack on the special interest groups that use the data (like municipal and provincial government and policy makers?), intrusive, coercive.

    It is nothing more than a regurgitation of PMO talking points that makes a heck of a lot more unsupported assertions than solid points: like "long-form census is an antiquated and flawed system" – it's more than just a coercion, the whole "system" is flawed!!; "many of the faults"… which are? ; etc.

    • wilson

      and half of Canadians agree with 'Harper's talking points'.

      • http://scottdiatribe.canflag.com/ Scott_Tribe

        In the first (online) poll done on the issue. We'll see what other polls say.. and it doesnt end the discussion.. it's merely a starting point for the battle for data integrity and facts, against ideology and feigned concern over privacy (trying to disguise Tea Party paranoia and a backdoor attempt at crippling programs far rightwingers hate, but cant openly kill).

  • http://scottdiatribe.canflag.com/ Scott_Tribe

    I think Dan Gardner of the Ottawa Citizen nails the reasons why the Conservatives are doing this to the mandatory longform. It isnt to do with privacy.. It's their way of trying to backdoor kill programs they hate:

    Hard-core conservatives have long seen the census as the foundation of left-wing social engineering. And not without some justification. Programs like employment equity couldn't function without census data. Stephen Harper would love to scrap such programs but he wouldn't dare under current circumstances. And so, as he did with the gun registry, he is making an administrative change that he hopes will cripple the program. And slowly strengthen the case for doing away with it entirely.

    This point is bang on I think. It's a point that supporters of the mandatory longform Census should hammer over and over. More people then not will oppose the government doing this if seen in this vein.

    • Olaf

      That may be the case, it's as good a theory as I've heard (except the Jurist's above). However, all I've been hearing is people saying "long form census data is vital to this" and "essential for that", and then they stop talking. No one ever explains how exactly the organizations use the data, or why optimal statistical accuracy is vital to the decision making process, which assumedly means these organizations can't properly function without them.

      • wilson

        And the complete data is not available for years!
        And how truthful is it when the census police have to drag answers out of Canadians…… (Jedi Knights)

        • Andrew (not PorC)

          For the umpteenth time, the Jedi responses are not evidence of people rebelling against the coercion of the census–it's in all likelihood mocking organized religion.

  • Geiseric

    He makes it sound like private interests are StatsCan's primary clients. The initiative to squeeze a few dollars in revenue on the side out of what is primarily an internal public service has come to define it.

    This is a typical and predicted outcome.

    Here's a thought. Stop selling the data. The revenue it generates is a joke in itself anyways. Its busy work.

  • tobyornotoby

    Perhaps Peter Coleman can explain how Minister Clement's "reforms" will reduce the Jedi-type responses. If that's the problem we're addressing, how does a voluntary long form reduce that?

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Ricard_S_Argent Richard_S_Argent

    Well at least Coleman and the NCC didn't draw any parallels to Mao…so I guess we're making some progress here.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Scott_Tribe Scott_Tribe

    One other thing, I asked Aaron this at his Twitter account, and i'll ask it here; did you get back to the NCC and point out to them that their assertion that orgs are getting this info for free and are basically freeloading is totally inaccurate?

    • bergkamp

      "…. their assertion that orgs are getting this info for free and are basically freeloading is totally inaccurate?"

      Please click on link I provided and have a look at 2006 census data and let me know how much you paid to do so. I think you will find it costs zero $$$ to look at census data so I think it is wise of Wherry, and others, to not write NCC and point out how info isn't free.

      I think it is delightful how you are asserting that conservatives don't like facts while claiming StatsCan does not provide free info.
      http://www12.statcan.ca/census-recensement/2006/r…

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/Scott_Tribe Scott_Tribe

        I'll repeat what Charles H said above about your last attempt at linking with this:

        "He's also managed to mislead by conflating the aggregate data, available freely, with the more granular data — which is what's actually useful to the majority of groups using the statistics data and therefore paid for

        • Charles H.

          Minimum of $128 if you just want the standard data broken down into a smaller (standardized) region or subset of regions.
          Minimum of $305 for a standard data-set in a custom region or a semi-custom data-set in a standard region.
          And finally, it starts at $1115 for a custom data-set in a custom region.

          If I'm reading StatsCan's descriptions and prices correctly, that is: http://www12.statcan.ca/census-recensement/2006/r…

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/Scott_Tribe Scott_Tribe

        Since we're swapping links, read Prof Gordon's new blogpost, "The Economics of Census Data"

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/Scott_Tribe Scott_Tribe

          Key point: "In 2009, some 20% of its $500m budget came from selling access to its data. Private-sector clients are not the only people who pay for StatsCan data: government departments and agencies at all levels must pay for access as well. (A significant chunk of the Parliamentary Budget Office's budget goes to Statistics Canada.)"

          That isnt exactly anyone freeloading off of stats bergkamp

          • bergkamp

            "That isnt exactly anyone freeloading off of stats …. "

            It is freeloading if orgs are paying less for stats than they would if they commissioned their own studies/polls/data. Taxpayers are subsidizing private companies, academics, government departments etc. because they are not paying market rates.

          • http://scottdiatribe.canflag.com/ Scott_Tribe

            The NCC didnt say that,bergkamp, they said orgs should be made to pay for stats — well, they ARE. They certainly arent getting them for free. The NNC certainly should be called out.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

            You can speak of this without being a hypocrite when you commission your own military, bergkamp.

  • wilson

    The Employment Equity & Census is VOLUNTARY,
    and thusly must be unreliable, eh

    That's where Libs and their media are hooped on this issue…

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/BGLong BGLong

    I am patiently awaiting input from the Jedi Knight faction with their take on all this.
    I realize that the reaction has been (rightly) overwhelmingly negative but I think that
    such a significant number of citizens (?) have something of value to offer … unless,
    of course, there is a substantial coincidence with the NCC membership list.

    To add to my confusion, a minority of commenters seem to live in a universe that
    is quite unlike the one in which I live. So maybe the self-identified Jedi Knight issue
    is already covered.

  • pdpd

    The whole Jedi answer thing is a total red herring. Every quantitative researcher has to clean data for similar issues (i.e. people taking 0.1 seconds to choose an answer, and all the answers being the same multiple choice option, etc.)

    Every study is going to have some unhelpful responses. In tiny amounts, as here, it isn't a problem, but rather frankly to be expected. You can't poll 20% of Canadians without eventually discovering a few smart-alecs.

  • knick

    I wonder how Harper will manage to arrange that the majority of those 'voluntary' census long-forms will go to the party faithful.

  • http://intensedebate.com/profiles/oemissions oemissions

    CON DUMBS!!!!

  • MrBowie

    Anybody with a stats background find this article ironic?
    http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/canada/consen…

    hmm…. using a poll to try to get information on how canadians feel about the census. But the poll itself has a self-selection bias!

    It's like inspecting a microscope with reading glasses to see if there are any bacteria on it.

  • Anon 001

    Minister Clement's reforms? He is eliminating the long-form census. How intellectually bankrupt does a think-tank have to be if they're reduced to repeating PMO talking points?

  • http://phantomobserver.com PhantomObserver

    But he's *not* eliminating the long-form census — he's just making it voluntary.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Scott_Tribe Scott_Tribe

    Well, compare the 2 main orgs who have come out and said this: The NCC, and the Fraser Institute. That answers your question doesnt it? :)

  • Anon 001

    By making it voluntary, he is making the data unusable and expensive. So, yes, he is effectively eliminating it.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Scott_Tribe Scott_Tribe

    Oh, and I almost forgot, the Cdn Taxpayers Federation hates the mandatory longform census as well, despite the voluntary one costing more and being less accurate.

    Again, the answer to your question.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Stewart_Smith Stewart_Smith

    That is not really fair to the Fraser Institute. Although I disagree with a considerable amount of their conclusions, they are usually consistent in their arguments. I actually believe they provide an important source of thoughtful analysis admittedly from a conservative bias. I think decision makers should pay attention to the Fraser Institute, understand what they are proposing and (on rare occasions) adopt some of their proposals.

    The NCC is a laughingstock. It has a hard time issuing a single press release without contradicting itself, and seems to have as its main priority the maintenance of its funding. The correct approach to the NCC would be to laugh at them, but the organization lacks enough personality to be a source of amusement.

  • Lord Kitchener's Own

    Perhaps put off by the intrusive nature of many questions, or perhaps recognizing the farce that the census has become, upwards of 20,000 Canadians indicated “Jedi” as their religion in the 2001 census.

    Has it seriously not occurred to any conservatives who keep throwing out this talking point that people who put Jedi aren't mocking/complaining about the census, they're mocking/complaining about organized religion. They're not saying "this question about religion is intrusive" they're saying "this question about religion is stupid, because organized religion is stupid".

    I really think most people who put "Jedi" as they're religion aren't trying to say "this is such a personal question, I refuse to answer it", they're saying "this is an idiotic question… you may as well be asking me how many imaginary friends I have living with me". I really don't think that in most cases it's a shot across the bow of the census, I think it's actually a shot across the bow of religion.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Ricard_S_Argent Richard_S_Argent

    shhh…don't go stepping on their talking point!

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/lgarvin lgarvin

    Which avoids the issue: why is the government compiling statistics on the religious beliefs of the public? Who is served by it? What public policy is informed by it?

  • Gary

    Of course you can provide links to your THEORY?
    Thats quite the pretzel logic you are trying to parse against the more logical reason of being intrusive.
    Try again!

  • wilson

    When 160,000 Canadians refused to fill in the 2006 long form, and were ignored, it took on voluntary status.
    So this just formalizes the the Canadians is not going to sic the census police on yah.
    Curious tho, why 62 persons were dragged all the way into court and the other 159, 938 weren't ,eh.

  • Olaf

    Who is served by it?

    Mostly just Mark Steyn, I think.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/tedbetts tedbetts

    Which raises the issue: isn't it really just some of the questions that dumb and not making the long form itself mandatory?

  • wilson

    Religious groups knowing where to canvas for $$$$…?

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/PolJunkie PolJunkie

    Is this a serious question?

  • http://notquiteunhinged.blogspot.com Catelli

    For the last time. Making it voluntary does not IMPROVE it. It makes it WORSE. This is an argument in favour of scrapping the long-form. And we are also spending MORE money for LESS accurate data.

    I have yet to see a justification for making the data less accurate. If it is an invasion of privacy, scrap it. Don't make it worse.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Ricard_S_Argent Richard_S_Argent

    "62 persons were dragged all the way into court"

    That's not what Clement said.

  • Gayle

    Why is that curious?

    Some of those people may not have been able to fill out the census. Perhaps they were illiterate or disabled in some fashion. Perhaps they were out of the country.

    Perhaps, once approached by the authorities and reminded of the legal nature of their obligation, they complied.

    Perhaps your comments would carry more weight if you actually knew what you were talking about. But then, you do not care about the facts – you are here to spread propoganda.

  • Anon 001

    My understanding is that the long form is sent out to roughly 2.7 million households, or 20% of all private households in Canada.

    Even if I were to believe your assertions, extracted from that source of virgin facts, Sun Media, that means that 6% of the people who received the forms refused to return it.

    That is statistically better than the 30% plus who would refuse to return it if it were voluntary.

    Do you get why that is so significant?

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Jenn_ Jenn_

    Yes, that is curious. Jail time is, of course, completely silly. But I'm good with the idea of a small fine. Your country has asked something of you. It may be an annoyance but, like jury duty, it doesn't happen very often.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/lgarvin lgarvin

    There are no questions on the long form that provide information vital to the operations of government, or that are not easily and more accurately obtained elsewhere. All the income data is used by third parties (business etc), all the education data is available -quicker and more accurately – from educational institutions. If city planners are using the long-form census data to plan roads, how come I see all these college kids counting cars at major interesections all over the city every summer? Is that just a make-work project?

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/tedbetts tedbetts

    I don't know how to respond to this comment. There is just no truth to it.

    "no questions on the long form that provide information vital to the operations of government"?
    "easily and more accurately obtained elsewhere"?
    "quicker an dmore accurately"?
    "college kids counting cars"?

    I think the most effect tactic to counter what you have written is to just let people read it.

  • Lord Kitchener's Own

    Find me an educational institution that will tell you how many students they have, and will correlate and aggregate that data with where they all live, what their income is, whether they're a new immigrant or not, etc… and I'll be impressed.

  • Marion

    Sorry, but the educational data is available from what educational institutions?

    All they would know is that I took some French courses. And a bit of accounting.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/lgarvin lgarvin

    "I don't know how to respond to this comment."

    Then you shouldn't have bothered.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/PolJunkie PolJunkie

    I'd laugh it off were it not for the fact that the people in charge of running this country also believe this nonsense.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/lgarvin lgarvin

    I'm not trying to impress you, I'm asking you to prove your need for the aggregated and correlated data. Do you need to prove the correlation of higher income with higher education? Why do you need to track the activities of "new immigrants"? If they're naturalized citizens then it's not legitimate, IMO, to track them separately from… what? … old stock(?) Canadians.

  • hollinm

    Lord Kitchener's Own….nobody is suggesting getting rid of the long form census. Its the criminal part that is the issue. Right?
    However, the way the media is torquing their headlines do any of us know? Is it the long form that is being eliminated or is it the criminal charge associated with not completing it?

    Does somebody have the answer? Because when we are arguing about the value of the statistics then we are missing the point i.e. voluntary or mandatory.

  • wilson

    There should be a cost savings in not having to hire 10's of thousands of census police.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Jenn_ Jenn_

    This is where I went wrong, too. There would be, if we HAD tens of thousands of census police. Apparently, we don't.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Scott_Tribe Scott_Tribe

    Yes, wilson, we just bump into census police at every turn, dont we?

    Really, you're getting ridiculous. I'm starting to wonder if you're not really someone being a conservative parody to show how many silly arguments a conservative Tea Party type can come up with to justify a stupid decision.

  • Dave

    10's of thousands of census police?

    Really?

    And only if you conveniently ignore the additional costs, massive ones, of keying the crap data from a larger, but voluntary, survey.

  • Mike T.

    The FI's methodologies tend to be so blatantly atrocious (see "TAx Freedom Day") that they undermine it's credibility. Not just in a political sense, but in a practical one.

    In fact, not having accurate data available would serve the Fraser Institute quite well.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/PolJunkie PolJunkie

    "This debate is really about whether our government should be administering such a system."

    Is that right? I thought the debate was in fact over the need for a long form.

  • s_c_f

    Flashback: Wherry insinuates almost nobody supports the government decision:
    http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/07/16/when-a-conserv…

    Reality arrives (reality is an elusive concept for some journalists, apparently): The country is split right down the middle.
    http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/canada/consen…

    Wherry, and most of the rest of the media (not all though), are obviously biased and out of touch.

    So, Wherry asked, "when a Conservative loses the Post, what's left"? The answer, according to the poll, is half of Canada's population, including 60% of the people in Quebec.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/PolJunkie PolJunkie

    "It is nice to receive free statistics at the expense of taxpayers, but our government should not be compelling this cooperation with the threat of jail time nor should we be bankrolling the whole endeavour. If organizations and special interest groups want data, they should pay for it."

    Huh? Since when? Last I checked, one had to pay to obtain that particular set of data.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/ZestyMordant ZestyMordant

    "Do you need to prove the correlation of higher income with higher education"

    This is very helpful for individuals' career planning. I used this information when considering what I wanted to study in University.

    I assume that banks would use this data to calculate the future potential income when offereing student loans. This would justify a medical student being approved for higher student loans than an arts student. But banks are just left-wing special interest groups, so who cares.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

    Certainly it is, because we're getting more new immigrants and they are a significant group with specialized needs different from average Canadians. By seeing what services they use (and don't use) we can more effectively plan these services in tandem with our immigration policies.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/lgarvin lgarvin

    Yours or mine?

    I was certainly being serious.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/lgarvin lgarvin

    My question was rhetorical, Zesty. I think it is fairly firmly established that more education – in the aggregate – equates to more wealth… and vice versa.

    To your second point, the government ought not to be concerned with helping banks to project future earnings of loan applicants… not the role of government.

  • PolJunkie

    I just have to ask. How do you propose this government go about formulating sound policies if it doesn't have the data needed to properly diagnose the needs of its citizens?

    Or is it that you don't think that policies should be developped based on this information?

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/lgarvin lgarvin

    It's not all about you, Marion :-)

    The point is that all schools track this data and – by a happy coincidence – all public educational institutions are supported by government. If the government needs information about educational levels – in the aggregate – then they can (and I believe they already do) get that information directly from the horse's mouth. Like I said, quicker and more accurate.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Scott_Tribe Scott_Tribe

    only one poll so far. An online one at that.

    The battle for reason over passion is just starting.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/ZestyMordant ZestyMordant

    "I think it is fairly firmly established that more education – in the aggregate – equates to more wealth… and vice versa."

    Is it? How would you know? Did you pay to gather that data yourself? Are you a special interest group?

    As to the second point, the government better be concerned with helping banks project future earnings of loan applicants. If there was no evidence that medical students earned more after graduation than others, how many students would get loans to go to medical school (which are very, very expensive)? Very quickly you'd find that only the very rich could afford to become doctors.

  • lgarvin

    The CJC and the Evangelicals are certainly opposed to any change to the long-form. It seems that advocacy agencies of all kinds are united in opposition to the move. Which might be the real motive for Mr. Harper who doesn't much care for advocacy groups.

  • lgarvin

    I think the government already has the data it needs without the long-form census. I won't comment on the soundness of the policy formulation that results from it, however. As I've argued previously, I don't think this government (or very many others) is guided by the data in any case.

    One other thing, and then I have to take off for a bit…

    The "needs of the citizens" are made plain to their government by the citizens not by any bureaucracy, no matter how well intentioned.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/PolJunkie PolJunkie

    "I think the government already has the data it needs without the long-form census."

    It got the data from the previous long form. And don't you think that this information should be updated every 5 years, especially in light of our changing population (more immigrants, aging boomers, etc.)?

    I'll ask you again. Do you not think that a govt should investigate the needs/status of its population in order to formulate proper policies? A simple yes or no would do.

  • Andrew (not PorC)

    So, the government doesn't need to know where people work, or how they get there, in transportation planning? Or would it be better for them to build highways on hunches?

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

    No, we're not missing the point, because voluntary statistics include significant sampling bias, the precise amount of which cannot be known without comparison to an involuntary survey. Well, the census, short and long form, are the involuntary survey that most voluntary surveys in Canada are compared to.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

    Can they tell you where those people live? How much they're making now? How often they use health care services? No? Then perhaps you need to know what you're talking about first.

  • Andrew (not PorC)

    You clearly have no idea what data universities compile about their students. All they get are address, SIN, whether the student is a Canadian resident, gender, and perhaps language preference. They might also be gathering data about which high school their students came from. Almost all of that is equivalently available on the short form census (you know, the one the government will send you to jail for not completing).

    And you also realise that university students constitute a tiny, highly biased sample of Canadian society, right?

  • s_c_f

    You mean the battle for liberty and privacy vs bureaucracy and coercion.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Halo_Override Halo_Override

    The invisible hand of the market will guide the roadmakers. Or maybe God.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Halo_Override Halo_Override

    Donnie, you're out of your element.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Halo_Override Halo_Override

    They can't hear you.

    "JEDI KNIGHTS, HOW MANY BATHROOMS, LA LA LA"

  • Gary

    Donnie????

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/lgarvin lgarvin

    "I'll ask you again."

    And I'll tell you again; There are no questions on the long form that provide information vital to the operations of government, or that are not easily and more accurately obtained elsewhere.

    I sat down at my computer this evening looking for a solid rebuttal to address and instead I get this condescending scolding, demanding " a simple yes or no" to some Utopian strawman.

    Governments in this dimension do not project and anticipate the needs of their citizens, they decide with varying levels of honesty and intelligence, how to allocate already scarce resources. Which means they respond to the loudest demands and always long after the need was first identified Tell me, where was the last hospital, or highway or helicopter delivered when it was not already long overdue?

    The data provided by the long-form may be useful to government, in some circumstances, but I think the onus is on the government to prove the need. So far, I haven't seen one specific usage of that data that meets the criteria of being vital to government operations. But I remain open to suggestions.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/lgarvin lgarvin

    That's a cheap shot that ought to be beneath you. I'm an atheist, for one thing. And a realist about how government actually works. "Roadmakers" follow demand, they don't anticipate it.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/lgarvin lgarvin

    "Can they tell you where those people live?"

    No, & why should they?

    How much they're making now?

    Second verse, same as the first. As a general rule, we know that Doctors make more than high school graduates. And that's all we need to know at the government level.

    How often they use health care services?

    No, but we already know that higher-education —-> higher incomes —–> better health. Can you tell me what specific, detailed data might be required to make better public health care policy? Do you suppose that better data will lead to more health-care services in poorer neighbourhoods and less health-care services in wealthy neighbourhoods? I don't. If poor people in this country want better government services, they need to get organized and start voting. Votes drive policy, not data.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/lgarvin lgarvin

    "You clearly have no idea what data universities compile about their students…"

    Boy, today I'm sure learning a lot about how much I don't know. All the information you're talking about is extraneous to what I was talking about. I was talking about much simpler stuff like; how many people graduated high school this year, how many got a diploma, how many got a degree?
    Simple stuff like that.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Halo_Override Halo_Override

    Roadmakers follow the marks. But who decides where the roads should go? How much traffic should they be designed to support?

    Do you think they don't have to make estimates and predictions about the future? About population, employment growth, demographic shifts? Is that not realistic?

    Not quite sure if my slight against religion or capitalism was the more offensive of the two; next time I'll say 'dowsing rods'.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/lgarvin lgarvin

    Do you think they don't have to make estimates and predictions about the future? About population, employment growth, demographic shifts? Is that not realistic?

    I think people try to make predictions and projections about the future but most of that is wasted effort in my experience. The construction of infrastructure is always galloping to try to catch up to current demand. At the level of city planning, attempts are made to control and direct growth but the information city planners act on is not derived from the long form census and – I suspect – even the short form data is not current enough for their purposes.

    Not quite sure if my slight against religion or capitalism was the more offensive of the two;

    Your "slight" was a lazy assumption about my beliefs and my politics. No big deal, I just don't want you to think the insult was missed since you took the trouble to post it.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Halo_Override Halo_Override

    That original "slight" part wasn't actually directed at you, it was in reference to the party in power in particular. I'm sorry I didn't make it clear, it wasn't my intent to insult you personally. Still think you're wrong, though.

  • Thwim

    We know that *currently* higher-education —-> higher incomes —–> better health.

    Do you assume that nothing can change? That's the whole point, what we know now is what we know now.. we keep taking the census data to verify that it remains accurate.

    Oh, and incidentally, it would be good to know where these people are living because different classes of neighborhoods tend to require different types of services.

From Macleans