i wonder why the Democrats felt such a ned to make a big deal of the citizenship question on the census. it,s not as if it was something new. i don't buy that it would skew apportionment of funds. BFD. so LA is skimped on flood control funds or wild fire prevention funds? Yeah, sure, that's what they are worried about. i call bull****.

this kind of ties in with what Tanq is getting at - the Dems, collectively and individually, champion policies that would encourage and/or facilitate open borders, then look innicent as they say "Me? No, I don't favor open borders."

Somebody in the DNC realized that border jumpers are exactly the type of future voter (or parents of future voters) they want - uneducated, unskilled, and dependable straight tickets democrats.

they cannot win elections, so they need to change the electorate.

JMHO.

Not meant to be targeted at 93, rather at his leadership amd the rank and file who accept unquestioningly the dictates ofmthe leadership

whites pay more

Interesting pricing structure.

whites pay more

Interesting pricing structure.

(07-08-2019 12:04 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  whites pay more

Interesting pricing structure.

Also seems to be a blatant violation of Michigan public accommodation laws.

(07-08-2019 07:49 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-08-2019 12:04 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  whites pay more

Interesting pricing structure.

Also seems to be a blatant violation of Michigan public accommodation laws.

According to the article, the organizers also made this statement:
"WE'VE SEEN TOO MANY TIMES ORGASMIC EVENTS HAPPENING IN DETROIT AND OTHER POC POPULATED CITIES..."
I'm not sure anyone knows what to make of that.

(07-08-2019 07:49 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-08-2019 12:04 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  whites pay more

Interesting pricing structure.

Also seems to be a blatant violation of Michigan public accommodation laws.

It will be interesting to see how they enforce the distinction at the gate. Surely not by racial profiling!

(07-08-2019 09:13 AM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(07-08-2019 07:49 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-08-2019 12:04 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  whites pay more

Interesting pricing structure.

Also seems to be a blatant violation of Michigan public accommodation laws.

According to the article, the organizers also made this statement:
"WE'VE SEEN TOO MANY TIMES ORGASMIC EVENTS HAPPENING IN DETROIT AND OTHER POC POPULATED CITIES..."
I'm not sure anyone knows what to make of that.

I'm glad that I'm not the only one who noticed that little nugget. Makes me wonder what else is happening at this music festival...

And I appreciate that they're trying to keep the concert affordable for those who don't have a lot of disposable income. Just, ehgads, not sure how they thought this was the way to do that!

(07-08-2019 09:30 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-08-2019 09:13 AM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(07-08-2019 07:49 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-08-2019 12:04 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  whites pay more

Interesting pricing structure.

Also seems to be a blatant violation of Michigan public accommodation laws.

According to the article, the organizers also made this statement:
"WE'VE SEEN TOO MANY TIMES ORGASMIC EVENTS HAPPENING IN DETROIT AND OTHER POC POPULATED CITIES..."
I'm not sure anyone knows what to make of that.

I'm glad that I'm not the only one who noticed that little nugget. Makes me wonder what else is happening at this music festival...

And I appreciate that they're trying to keep the concert affordable for those who don't have a lot of disposable income. Just, ehgads, not sure how they thought this was the way to do that!

To the honest, my hunch is that the pricing thing is, at root, more a marketing ploy than anything else: done precisely in the hope that it would generate notoriety, which is publicity.

Which might explain the wording of the other announcement as well. :)
(To be fair, I tend to think it's an auto-correct failure -- the word "organic" sort of makes sense in context, and someone could well have mistyped it in a way that got auto-corrected to the other word. Another plausible explanation is that the person typing it didn't actually know the difference between the two words, but that's too depressing to contemplate.)

(07-08-2019 09:26 AM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(07-08-2019 07:49 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-08-2019 12:04 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  whites pay more

Interesting pricing structure.

Also seems to be a blatant violation of Michigan public accommodation laws.

It will be interesting to see how they enforce the distinction at the gate. Surely not by racial profiling!

Yes, I wondered what would happen if somebody like me showed up wanting the POC discount, but did not obviously fit their stereotype of what a Hispanic person should look like.

Also, side questions: Why is "person of color" OK, but not "colored person"? Is a white person a person of no color"?

I can envision a black man saying, "You can't call me a Negro, you racist POS. Now excuse me while I fill out this application to the United Negro College Fund."

(07-08-2019 09:30 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  .

And I appreciate that they're trying to keep the concert affordable for those who don't have a lot of disposable income. Just, ehgads, not sure how they thought this was the way to do that!

I wonder how they will tell who are the poor whites and who are the wealthy blacks.

Maybe they just should have asked for a tax return.

Oh, wait a minute...

The whole thing reminds me of of the requirements to enter the Ladies' Event at the World Series of Poker. Turns out that because of Federal anti-discrimination laws, you cannot exclude men. But you can make them pay 10X ($10,000) what the women pay ($1000).

Still seems discriminatory to me.

(07-08-2019 11:38 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  The whole thing reminds me of of the requirements to enter the Ladies' Event at the World Series of Poker. Turns out that because of Federal anti-discrimination laws, you cannot exclude men. But you can make them pay 10X ($10,000) what the women pay ($1000).

Still seems discriminatory to me.

Unintended consequences. A lot of that going around.

(07-06-2019 03:39 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-06-2019 02:57 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-06-2019 11:05 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Re: the 'citizens' question, directed to '93:

What do you think the mission and job of the census is?

I think the mission is to determine how many people are living in America? Where do they live and what is the demographic make-up of the various regions of our country?

Obviously both sides want the census to serve their political purposes. The Democrats are no more or less guilty than the Republicans when it comes to this.

An accurate Census is vitally important beyond the gerrymandering in which both sides partake.

The distribution of state and federal funding is reliant on accurate Census data. If you have millions of people unwilling to provide accurate data for the Census it is a real problem.

You leave off the information gathering function of the census. Funny that.

As you leave off the question about this being kind of a basic piece of information. Funny that.

Care to answer if you feel or dont feel that citizenship isnt a basic piece of information? Third time asked might be the charm.

I mean, they have already asked:

Is this house, apartment, or mobile home: owned with mortgage, owned without mortgage, rented, occupied without rent?

What is the highest degree or level of school this each person has completed?

Does any person have an issue with learning, remembering, or concentrating?

What kind of work was this person doing?

What time did this person usually leave home to go to work last week?

Wages, salary, commissions, bonuses, or tips from all jobs?

What were the real estate taxes on this property last year?

And, here is some real funny ones from 2000 itself:

What state or country was this person from?
Is this person a citizen of the United States?
If the person was not born in the United States, when did he come to live in the United States?

Not only do they ask these questions, there is a requirement at law to answer them.

So given the issue with the informational aspect of the census, the fact that I have been asked literally almost everything else about the household, that they have *already* deemed it appropriate to ask about the citizenship, *and* that they require that answering their questions is required by law, perhaps that background might be able to help you answer that question you seemingly so studiously avoid.

So, unambiguously for all of us here:

"Seems to be kind of one of those 'basic questions', does it not?" Especially since everything else in the friggin universe is asked, *and* an answer is required by law.

Please help clear this up for us.

Quick response as just getting back from holiday weekend.

These questions that you reference are not found on today's census. It seems that you are referencing questions that might by found on the American Community Survey (not the census). As I understand it, today's census is pretty limited.

This is from the Population Reference Bureau website:

"Census Bureau research strongly suggests that “adding a citizenship question to the 2020 Census would lead to lower self-response rates in households potentially containing noncitizens, resulting in higher fieldwork costs and a lower-quality population count.” [3] Estimates indicate that the addition of a citizenship question to the 2020 Census may put almost one in 10 U.S. households—more than 14 percent of the population, and nearly 45 million people—at greater risk of being missed in the Census. [4] Undercount risk is particularly high among young children (under age 5) because nearly one in five of them lives in a household with at least one noncitizen. [5]"


https://www.prb.org/why-are-they-asking-...questions/

(07-08-2019 11:27 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-08-2019 09:26 AM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(07-08-2019 07:49 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-08-2019 12:04 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  whites pay more

Interesting pricing structure.

Also seems to be a blatant violation of Michigan public accommodation laws.

It will be interesting to see how they enforce the distinction at the gate. Surely not by racial profiling!

Yes, I wondered what would happen if somebody like me showed up wanting the POC discount, but did not obviously fit their stereotype of what a Hispanic person should look like.

Also, side questions: Why is "person of color" OK, but not "colored person"? Is a white person a person of no color"?

I can envision a black man saying, "You can't call me a Negro, you racist POS. Now excuse me while I fill out this application to the United Negro College Fund."

Yeah... I think a black man would be within his rights to take offense at you using the term "negro" while being OK with the United Negro College Fund.

Is it really that confusing?

Given the epic s*** sandwich that black people have been forced to eat in America over the past 200+ years, I am OK with them dictating to me what names/descriptions they are comfortable with.

(07-08-2019 01:02 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-06-2019 03:39 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-06-2019 02:57 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-06-2019 11:05 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Re: the 'citizens' question, directed to '93:

What do you think the mission and job of the census is?

I think the mission is to determine how many people are living in America? Where do they live and what is the demographic make-up of the various regions of our country?

Obviously both sides want the census to serve their political purposes. The Democrats are no more or less guilty than the Republicans when it comes to this.

An accurate Census is vitally important beyond the gerrymandering in which both sides partake.

The distribution of state and federal funding is reliant on accurate Census data. If you have millions of people unwilling to provide accurate data for the Census it is a real problem.

You leave off the information gathering function of the census. Funny that.

As you leave off the question about this being kind of a basic piece of information. Funny that.

Care to answer if you feel or dont feel that citizenship isnt a basic piece of information? Third time asked might be the charm.

I mean, they have already asked:

Is this house, apartment, or mobile home: owned with mortgage, owned without mortgage, rented, occupied without rent?

What is the highest degree or level of school this each person has completed?

Does any person have an issue with learning, remembering, or concentrating?

What kind of work was this person doing?

What time did this person usually leave home to go to work last week?

Wages, salary, commissions, bonuses, or tips from all jobs?

What were the real estate taxes on this property last year?

And, here is some real funny ones from 2000 itself:

What state or country was this person from?
Is this person a citizen of the United States?
If the person was not born in the United States, when did he come to live in the United States?

Not only do they ask these questions, there is a requirement at law to answer them.

So given the issue with the informational aspect of the census, the fact that I have been asked literally almost everything else about the household, that they have *already* deemed it appropriate to ask about the citizenship, *and* that they require that answering their questions is required by law, perhaps that background might be able to help you answer that question you seemingly so studiously avoid.

So, unambiguously for all of us here:

"Seems to be kind of one of those 'basic questions', does it not?" Especially since everything else in the friggin universe is asked, *and* an answer is required by law.

Please help clear this up for us.

Quick response as just getting back from holiday weekend.

These questions that you reference are not found on today's census. It seems that you are referencing questions that might by found on the American Community Survey (not the census). As I understand it, today's census is pretty limited.

This is from the Population Reference Bureau website:

"Census Bureau research strongly suggests that “adding a citizenship question to the 2020 Census would lead to lower self-response rates in households potentially containing noncitizens, resulting in higher fieldwork costs and a lower-quality population count.” [3] Estimates indicate that the addition of a citizenship question to the 2020 Census may put almost one in 10 U.S. households—more than 14 percent of the population, and nearly 45 million people—at greater risk of being missed in the Census. [4] Undercount risk is particularly high among young children (under age 5) because nearly one in five of them lives in a household with at least one noncitizen. [5]"


https://www.prb.org/why-are-they-asking-...questions/

The 10 questions asked in the 2010 census:

How many people were living or staying in this house, apartment, or mobile home on April 1, 2010?
Were there any additional people staying here April 1, 2010 that you did not include in Question 1?
Is this house, apartment, or mobile home: owned with mortgage, owned without mortgage, rented, occupied without rent?
What is your telephone number?
Please provide information for each person living here. Start with a person here who owns or rents this house, apartment, or mobile home. If the owner or renter lives somewhere else, start with any adult living here. This will be Person 1. What is Person 1's name?
What is Person 1's sex?
What is Person 1's age and Date of Birth?
Is Person 1 of Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin?
What is Person 1's race?
Does Person 1 sometimes live or stay somewhere else?

https://www.census.gov/history/www/throu.../2010.html

Quote: LONDON — The British ambassador to the United States described the White House as “uniquely dysfunctional,” told his counterparts back home that President Trump was “inept” and “insecure,” and warned that his administration could collapse in “disgrace.”

In a cache of leaked diplomatic cables dating from 2017 to the present, Sir Kim Darroch worried Trump might be in debt to “dodgy Russians.” He also said that Trump could wreck the world trade system and that his administration might go to war with Iran.

In one cable, the ambassador wrote: “We don’t really believe this Administration is going to become substantially more normal; less dysfunctional; less unpredictable; less faction riven; less diplomatically clumsy and inept.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/eur...234e15a819

(07-08-2019 01:55 PM)At Ease Wrote:  

Quote: LONDON — The British ambassador to the United States described the White House as “uniquely dysfunctional,” told his counterparts back home that President Trump was “inept” and “insecure,” and warned that his administration could collapse in “disgrace.”

In a cache of leaked diplomatic cables dating from 2017 to the present, Sir Kim Darroch worried Trump might be in debt to “dodgy Russians.” He also said that Trump could wreck the world trade system and that his administration might go to war with Iran.

In one cable, the ambassador wrote: “We don’t really believe this Administration is going to become substantially more normal; less dysfunctional; less unpredictable; less faction riven; less diplomatically clumsy and inept.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/eur...234e15a819

do you ever have any opinions of your own?

(07-08-2019 01:11 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-08-2019 01:02 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-06-2019 03:39 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-06-2019 02:57 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-06-2019 11:05 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Re: the 'citizens' question, directed to '93:

What do you think the mission and job of the census is?

I think the mission is to determine how many people are living in America? Where do they live and what is the demographic make-up of the various regions of our country?

Obviously both sides want the census to serve their political purposes. The Democrats are no more or less guilty than the Republicans when it comes to this.

An accurate Census is vitally important beyond the gerrymandering in which both sides partake.

The distribution of state and federal funding is reliant on accurate Census data. If you have millions of people unwilling to provide accurate data for the Census it is a real problem.

You leave off the information gathering function of the census. Funny that.

As you leave off the question about this being kind of a basic piece of information. Funny that.

Care to answer if you feel or dont feel that citizenship isnt a basic piece of information? Third time asked might be the charm.

I mean, they have already asked:

Is this house, apartment, or mobile home: owned with mortgage, owned without mortgage, rented, occupied without rent?

What is the highest degree or level of school this each person has completed?

Does any person have an issue with learning, remembering, or concentrating?

What kind of work was this person doing?

What time did this person usually leave home to go to work last week?

Wages, salary, commissions, bonuses, or tips from all jobs?

What were the real estate taxes on this property last year?

And, here is some real funny ones from 2000 itself:

What state or country was this person from?
Is this person a citizen of the United States?
If the person was not born in the United States, when did he come to live in the United States?

Not only do they ask these questions, there is a requirement at law to answer them.

So given the issue with the informational aspect of the census, the fact that I have been asked literally almost everything else about the household, that they have *already* deemed it appropriate to ask about the citizenship, *and* that they require that answering their questions is required by law, perhaps that background might be able to help you answer that question you seemingly so studiously avoid.

So, unambiguously for all of us here:

"Seems to be kind of one of those 'basic questions', does it not?" Especially since everything else in the friggin universe is asked, *and* an answer is required by law.

Please help clear this up for us.

Quick response as just getting back from holiday weekend.

These questions that you reference are not found on today's census. It seems that you are referencing questions that might by found on the American Community Survey (not the census). As I understand it, today's census is pretty limited.

This is from the Population Reference Bureau website:

"Census Bureau research strongly suggests that “adding a citizenship question to the 2020 Census would lead to lower self-response rates in households potentially containing noncitizens, resulting in higher fieldwork costs and a lower-quality population count.” [3] Estimates indicate that the addition of a citizenship question to the 2020 Census may put almost one in 10 U.S. households—more than 14 percent of the population, and nearly 45 million people—at greater risk of being missed in the Census. [4] Undercount risk is particularly high among young children (under age 5) because nearly one in five of them lives in a household with at least one noncitizen. [5]"


https://www.prb.org/why-are-they-asking-...questions/

The 10 questions asked in the 2010 census:

How many people were living or staying in this house, apartment, or mobile home on April 1, 2010?
Were there any additional people staying here April 1, 2010 that you did not include in Question 1?
Is this house, apartment, or mobile home: owned with mortgage, owned without mortgage, rented, occupied without rent?
What is your telephone number?
Please provide information for each person living here. Start with a person here who owns or rents this house, apartment, or mobile home. If the owner or renter lives somewhere else, start with any adult living here. This will be Person 1. What is Person 1's name?
What is Person 1's sex?
What is Person 1's age and Date of Birth?
Is Person 1 of Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin?
What is Person 1's race?
Does Person 1 sometimes live or stay somewhere else?

https://www.census.gov/history/www/throu.../2010.html

https://www.npr.org/2018/03/27/597436512...s-question

Read the whole article. Citizenship was asked before.

(07-08-2019 03:49 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-08-2019 01:11 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-08-2019 01:02 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-06-2019 03:39 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-06-2019 02:57 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  I think the mission is to determine how many people are living in America? Where do they live and what is the demographic make-up of the various regions of our country?

Obviously both sides want the census to serve their political purposes. The Democrats are no more or less guilty than the Republicans when it comes to this.

An accurate Census is vitally important beyond the gerrymandering in which both sides partake.

The distribution of state and federal funding is reliant on accurate Census data. If you have millions of people unwilling to provide accurate data for the Census it is a real problem.

You leave off the information gathering function of the census. Funny that.

As you leave off the question about this being kind of a basic piece of information. Funny that.

Care to answer if you feel or dont feel that citizenship isnt a basic piece of information? Third time asked might be the charm.

I mean, they have already asked:

Is this house, apartment, or mobile home: owned with mortgage, owned without mortgage, rented, occupied without rent?

What is the highest degree or level of school this each person has completed?

Does any person have an issue with learning, remembering, or concentrating?

What kind of work was this person doing?

What time did this person usually leave home to go to work last week?

Wages, salary, commissions, bonuses, or tips from all jobs?

What were the real estate taxes on this property last year?

And, here is some real funny ones from 2000 itself:

What state or country was this person from?
Is this person a citizen of the United States?
If the person was not born in the United States, when did he come to live in the United States?

Not only do they ask these questions, there is a requirement at law to answer them.

So given the issue with the informational aspect of the census, the fact that I have been asked literally almost everything else about the household, that they have *already* deemed it appropriate to ask about the citizenship, *and* that they require that answering their questions is required by law, perhaps that background might be able to help you answer that question you seemingly so studiously avoid.

So, unambiguously for all of us here:

"Seems to be kind of one of those 'basic questions', does it not?" Especially since everything else in the friggin universe is asked, *and* an answer is required by law.

Please help clear this up for us.

Quick response as just getting back from holiday weekend.

These questions that you reference are not found on today's census. It seems that you are referencing questions that might by found on the American Community Survey (not the census). As I understand it, today's census is pretty limited.

This is from the Population Reference Bureau website:

"Census Bureau research strongly suggests that “adding a citizenship question to the 2020 Census would lead to lower self-response rates in households potentially containing noncitizens, resulting in higher fieldwork costs and a lower-quality population count.” [3] Estimates indicate that the addition of a citizenship question to the 2020 Census may put almost one in 10 U.S. households—more than 14 percent of the population, and nearly 45 million people—at greater risk of being missed in the Census. [4] Undercount risk is particularly high among young children (under age 5) because nearly one in five of them lives in a household with at least one noncitizen. [5]"


https://www.prb.org/why-are-they-asking-...questions/

The 10 questions asked in the 2010 census:

How many people were living or staying in this house, apartment, or mobile home on April 1, 2010?
Were there any additional people staying here April 1, 2010 that you did not include in Question 1?
Is this house, apartment, or mobile home: owned with mortgage, owned without mortgage, rented, occupied without rent?
What is your telephone number?
Please provide information for each person living here. Start with a person here who owns or rents this house, apartment, or mobile home. If the owner or renter lives somewhere else, start with any adult living here. This will be Person 1. What is Person 1's name?
What is Person 1's sex?
What is Person 1's age and Date of Birth?
Is Person 1 of Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin?
What is Person 1's race?
Does Person 1 sometimes live or stay somewhere else?

https://www.census.gov/history/www/throu.../2010.html

https://www.npr.org/2018/03/27/597436512...s-question

Read the whole article. Citizenship was asked before.

Huh - weird response to me posting what the 2010 questions were on the census, after 93 posted about the American Community Survey, which is now, where the more detailed questions are asked.

I never refuted that a citizenship question has been asked, historically. As you can see in the NPR article, a citizenship question was last asked of every household (e.g. the short-form, 2010 style census I referenced) in 1950. It's been included in the long-form questionnaire (which has gone away, but is basically the American Community Survey) that is not sent to every citizen, and is conducted yearly (not every 10 years).

(07-08-2019 01:09 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-08-2019 11:27 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-08-2019 09:26 AM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(07-08-2019 07:49 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-08-2019 12:04 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  whites pay more

Interesting pricing structure.

Also seems to be a blatant violation of Michigan public accommodation laws.

It will be interesting to see how they enforce the distinction at the gate. Surely not by racial profiling!

Yes, I wondered what would happen if somebody like me showed up wanting the POC discount, but did not obviously fit their stereotype of what a Hispanic person should look like.

Also, side questions: Why is "person of color" OK, but not "colored person"? Is a white person a person of no color"?

I can envision a black man saying, "You can't call me a Negro, you racist POS. Now excuse me while I fill out this application to the United Negro College Fund."

Yeah... I think a black man would be within his rights to take offense at you using the term "negro" while being OK with the United Negro College Fund.

Is it really that confusing?

Given the epic s*** sandwich that black people have been forced to eat in America over the past 200+ years, I am OK with them dictating to me what names/descriptions they are comfortable with.

i think I have just been virtue attacked. maybe thatis OK, since I am a deplorable and therefore a bad person. I must learn to speak and think purwly, as you do. Send me to a re-education camp.

Yes it is confusing, that a given word may or maynot be OK to use, depending on the grandparents of the speaker.

I have both white and Hispanic gramdparents. which words are OK for me to use? which am I not allowed to use? explain rightthinking to me, big brother.


93, I saw the world that you hate so much. you didn't. And remember, I am a POC and don't have to take this **** from you.