Is it against the law not to participate in the census?

Your video, TYT - Census Worker Found Lynched, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

One of my friend's fathers once chased a census worker down the road while brandishing a katana. Not a lie. The father WAS insane, but yeah, still! It happens, I suppose? Maybe Census workers are the expendable unlucky henchmen of the US government?

Your video, Rachel Maddow - Hanging Of A US Census Wroker In Kentucky, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

>> ^qualm:
What are the odds that the murderers are Ron Paul enthusiasts?


They may well be, but this comment is just mean, pointless trolling.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'rachel maddow, census, kentucky, fed, hang, hanging, government' to 'rachel maddow, census, worker, kentucky, fed, hang, hanging, government' - edited by SlipperyPete

>> ^Fade:
When you place a frog into boiling water it dies...guess what he is trying to imply about america here? I'll give you a minute to think about it.

A minute, huh? How generous.

Off the top of my head, is he trying to tell people that the US Government policies are equivalent to a quick and painful death, and that US citizens should rise up and hang any census worker that happens to wonder how many kids they have?

Rachel Maddow has some more details here:
http://www.videosift.com/video/Rachel-Maddow-Hanging-Of-A-US-Census-Wroker-In-Kentucky

the population in 1930 was under 100 million. without the cdc ,fda ,government provided highway systems ,etc we can not support our present population. this is true if you like it or not.

The Sixteenth Amendment (Amendment XVI) to the United States Constitution allows the Congress to levy an income tax without apportioning it among the states or basing it on Census results. This amendment overruled Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. (1895), which limited the Congress's authority to levy an income tax.
so, your wrong. now say it,say i was wrong.

without taxes on income..capital gains..inheritance. within a few generations the wealth of the country would be in the hands of a very few. its also regressive in nature. meaning the more you make the less you pay in taxes. because a family of 4 making 40.000 a year consumes all its income, see? so they are taxed on 100% of their income. but a family of 4 making 250.000 a year saves maybe 25 % ,and if interest and capital gains were not taxed they would save even more. becuase the income is tax free and the gains are tax free and i can pass it on to my heirs tax free. woo hoo !!!!so they would live off of 65% of their income ,save the rest,tax free, earn gains,tax free, pass it on,tax free untill they were living off the interest. these fair tax ideas etc, ideas are all republican psychobabble joe the plumber bullshit . you must tax income. that is the only FAIR way to do it. its a rich people method for tricking teabagger dipshits. thats why the fair tax people hired joe the plumber to go to tea partys and promote the fair tax.

republicans always say this stupid ass crap that people should make their own choices, oh..unless they want an abortion. then ill make that choice. oh, unless you gay and wanna get married, then ill make that choice. unless you wanna choose a public health option,uh,then no. republicans are always for choice. as long as you choose what they want you to choose.

Okay, a founder-off then. Here's what Hamilton has to say:

A Question has been made concerning the Constitutional right of the Government of the United States to apply this species of encouragement, but there is certainly no good foundation for such a question. The National Legislature has express authority "To lay and Collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the Common defence and general welfare" with no other qualifications than that "all duties, imposts and excises, shall be uniform throughout the United states, that no capitation or other direct tax shall be laid unless in proportion to numbers ascertained by a census or enumeration taken on the principles prescribed in the Constitution, and that "no tax or duty shall be laid on articles exported from any state." These three qualifications excepted, the power to raise money is plenary, and indefinite; and the objects to which it may be appropriated are no less comprehensive, than the payment of the public debts and the providing for the common defence and "general Welfare." The terms "general Welfare" were doubtless intended to signify more than was expressed or imported in those which Preceded; otherwise numerous exigencies incident to the affairs of a Nation would have been left without a provision. The phrase is as comprehensive as any that could have been used; because it was not fit that the constitutional authority of the Union, to appropriate its revenues shou'd have been restricted within narrower limits than the "General Welfare" and because this necessarily embraces a vast variety of particulars, which are susceptible neither of specification nor of definition.

It is therefore of necessity left to the discretion of the National Legislature, to pronounce, upon the objects, which concern the general Welfare, and for which under that description, an appropriation of money is requisite and proper. And there seems to be no room for a doubt that whatever concerns the general Interests of learning of Agriculture of Manufactures and of Commerce are within the sphere of the national Councils as far as regards an application of Money.

The only qualification of the generallity of the Phrase in question, which seems to be admissible, is this--That the object to which an appropriation of money is to be made be General and not local; its operation extending in fact, or by possibility, throughout the Union, and not being confined to a particular spot.

Alexander Hamilton

In any case, the limits of "government" laid out in the Constitution weren't supposed to be a proclamation that no government shall intrude, merely that state governments were to be the sole arbiter of those matters.

To take Madison's side is not to say that no government shall mandate things like a universal health care program, it's to declare that the national government has to rely on state governments in order to do it if they want to.

To push states' rights in such a way is just silly, unless you seriously think we need to go back to some sort of highly Federated system where we're supposed to identify with our State more than the nation called the United States. Actually, we'd have to go back to thinking of the phrase "United States" as being plural -- call it these United States.

It also means you really have to declare that the Civil Rights Act should be repealed, since obviously that's a matter for the states to decide on...

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/hlthins/hlthin08/p60no236_table7.pdf

Number of AMERICAN Citizen uninsured: ~35M, about 11%

Number of non-citizen uninsured: (doesn't necessarily mean illegal, includes visa and green card holders: ~10M

10 percent of your fellow citizens are fucked when it comes to healthcare. Now, what do you propose to do about that? Nothing, right? Let the market handle it, let 'em pull themselves up by the bootstraps.

Actually, the Constitution does allow the federal government to "rob one group of people ... to pay off others...."

The Constitution allows for no such thing, though since it's now ignored, the robbery goes on all the time. The federal mafia collects taxes from the States, which in effect makes them slave-states with no real sovereignty, and then the States, in order to recoup their losses, must fight for "pork", which is their money being spent on garbage the federal mafia wants, not necessarily what they want. Career politicians live or die depending on how much pork they can bring to their home states. I recall one dickweed senator, angry at Texas, saying, "Texas gets back 80 cents of every dollar they send to DC!" Somehow to the dickweed, 80 cents recouped from shipping the money out of state is worth more than a dollar kept. Madness.

There is legitimate taxation (with representation) for the feds to provide for the common defense and a few other things, but the massive robbing of Peter to pay Paul was never the Founders' intent.

The 16th Amendment grants Congress the "power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration." Furthermore, there is nothing in the Consitution which circumscribes how Congress may spend those revenues, except as it may infringe on the rights of the States or the People (10th Amendment). In fact, Congress is explicitly granted the power to "provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States." (Article I, Section . If the good health of its citizens is not considered part of the general welfare of the United States, what can be?

If the Founding Fathers intended the phrase "promote the general welfare" to mean a bottomless Treasury providing for any and every whim of the people, they wouldn't have taken pains to listing specific powers in Article I, Section 8.

You might have a constitutional argument against a single payer system by claiming it infringes the rights of the People to rip each other off, but you definitely do not have one against a government sponsored health insurance plan designed to compete with private insurance.

It is the height of naivety to believe any government claiming it only wants to "stop here" with power granb. The Obamessiah has already been caught admitting he wants socialized medicine in statements which he then modified or covered up depending on the audience at hand.

The destruction of liberty has been incremental over the past century. We're just about finished and this socialized medicine will be the near-death blow for a once-free society.

Stop pretending the federal mafia knows what's best for everyone. Let people suffer the consequences of their actions. Restore the balance of power between the federal dorks and State dorks. Disallow the federal mafia from using taxation as a weapon to punish whatever behavior the health and safety nanny-state prigs dislike at the moment. Accept freedom has inherent risks or move away to safety-helmet Europe whose civilization is d(r)ying out, and wait for the Muslims to take over.

>> ^quantumushroom:
I don't need to look much beyond the Constitution, which says nothing about 'free' healthcare for all or robbing one group of people who worked hard to pay off others who didn't.

The Constitution limits government power and says any powers not expressly given to the federal mafia is given to the States.

Actually, the Constitution does allow the federal government to "rob one group of people ... to pay off others...."

The 16th Amendment grants Congress the "power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration." Furthermore, there is nothing in the Consitution which circumscribes how Congress may spend those revenues, except as it may infringe on the rights of the States or the People (10th Amendment). In fact, Congress is explicitly granted the power to "provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States." (Article I, Section . If the good health of its citizens is not considered part of the general welfare of the United States, what can be?

You might have a constitutional argument against a single payer system by claiming it infringes the rights of the People to rip each other off, but you definitely do not have one against a government sponsored health insurance plan designed to compete with private insurance.

Idiot Winston. You don't even know what a growth rate is or how to calculate it

READ:

Ideally, GROWTH RATES would be close to 0%.

0% Perfectly sustains the population at a GIVEN MOMENT. NOT A GIVEN SIZE.

I specifically state that growth rate has NOTHING to do with Ideal Size.

Ideal SIZE is a function of the carrying capacity.

You are one dumb son of a bitch, if you didn't know.


Also, Population may be cyclical, but if you look at data collected over time, you see that it is also quite hard, if not impossible, to reliably predict future numbers. Malthus proved why.

So we deal with reality instead. The Reality of RATES OF PRODUCTION AND CAPACITY over RATES of CONSUMPTION. This utilizes data akin to the census. We need to know What is Using What, How Fast, and thus, simply put, decide what we CAN DO about it.

I really do not like you. You've said before you're not QM's alt.... but that seems unlikely. We haven't even gotten into Logistic Growth, and already you display the same lack of familiarity with basic mathematical concepts....you just use outdated perspectives to inform your already outdated opinion... which is a minor accomplishment in itself, so congrats on being Really Worthless and using those feelings of inadequacy for Evil instead of Good.

Go volunteer at the animal shelter -- the dogs don't care who walks them, and you'll be accomplishing something within your means.

Ideal population growth is as close to 0% as you can.

It's not complicated : Birth Rates - Death rates should = 0%~

That says nothing about a current ideal size, just the fact that sustainable growth is an oxymoron, and if we're only dying so fast, we should only ideally be born so fast. The ideal size is calculated from a carrying capacity, which can be calculated when resources are finite and growth rates/consumption rates are known (which is why the census is important data, republicans).

Carrying capacity can change as we find new improved ways to stretch our finite resources, and it's best if processes are implemented in a timely manner with forethought. This requires science and basic day to day efforts.

The idea is simple but it is obviously very difficult to realize in reality... the problem can also turn into one of underpopulation.

balance is the key. education keeps you too busy to make babies. go to school.