• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

2020 US Census will NOT have a citizenship question.

TheGreatYosh

Gold Member
Jul 19, 2018
1,389
1,111
520
It's not democracy that's the problem, it's the corrupt (and very influential) forces within. The propaganda state of the major news providers and, to a lesser extent, entertainment is what's damaging. There wouldn't be so many mentally unhinged people acting like Trump is a genocidal dictator in the making if there weren't so many educators, intelligence "experts," pundits and journalists fueling that ridiculous belief. More needs to be done to fight against it and it seems everyone is scared to make the first move because of the fragile state of that democracy. How do you go about it without being painted as the villain?

Looking back, Trump's wish to have libel laws revisited made perfect sense considering how far the country has allowed things to go.

Google was meeting with Canadian news publishers and journalists at their HQ a couple of nights ago to talk about their "Google News Initiative," but right before the meeting began, without any prior warning, they told everyone that it was all off the record. I already saw the local news (Montreal) mention earlier this year how BuzzFeed Canada was working to protect Canadians against disinformation leading up to the election this fall. Based on how things played out down south, how else am I to interpret that other than them wanting to turn things up here into the same clown show?
The American founding fathers all knew democracy is trash. Our country is dying because of democracy. All of the things you mentioned seeped in because of it. Our country would still be going strong if only property owning men could vote.
 

merlinevo

Member
Apr 28, 2019
272
532
300
The American founding fathers all knew democracy is trash. Our country is dying because of democracy. All of the things you mentioned seeped in because of it. Our country would still be going strong if only property owning men could vote.
I would argue that only people who pay more in taxes than they take out in welfare benefits should be able to vote. The poor and non productive will always vote to increase taxes on the working class and will never vote in the best long term interest of the nation, things such as reducing the national debt, promoting an education system that seperate students by their abilities, or accepting the fact that chronically poor communities are permanently damaged and need to be torn down. I still have not heard a coherent arugment why letting the poor, mentally unfit, non productive folks would somehow make the democratic process better. It just adds variance and noise into a process that requires rationalization and utilitarian objective.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheGreatYosh
Oct 26, 2018
3,639
2,842
440
I would argue that only people who pay more in taxes than they take out in welfare benefits should be able to vote. The poor and non productive will always vote to increase taxes on the working class and will never vote in the best long term interest of the nation, things such as reducing the national debt, promoting an education system that seperate students by their abilities, or accepting the fact that chronically poor communities are permanently damaged and need to be torn down. I still have not heard a coherent arugment why letting the poor, mentally unfit, non productive folks would somehow make the democratic process better. It just adds variance and noise into a process that requires rationalization and utilitarian objective.
Good point.

Although people at the bottom don't contribute as much to society as the avg joe with a decent job, how about to ensure resources do get allocated to help poorer people/unskilled, that anyone who is not fit for voting gets their non-vote count tallied up.

No matter which party wins, that number of unfit people's votes are added up and there are laws that say the new leader must allocate resources based on that count to things like better schools or job hunting training or something. Cut back on free money and substitute some of that with more free services to build someone's skills.

And if that person say they don't want to take part, then skip em and their cash dole out is cut in half.
 
Last edited:

Dontero

Member
Apr 19, 2018
1,604
1,394
455
wut ? You can't ask people if they are citizents ?

I mean what is the point of census then ? The whole purpose of it is to get idea on who lives in your nation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eiknarf

eclipze

Member
Mar 30, 2007
312
55
990
wut ? You can't ask people if they are citizents ?

I mean what is the point of census then ? The whole purpose of it is to get idea on who lives in your nation.
The founding fathers made it explicitly clear that the census was the total count of persons within the US, not just citizens. If you have an issue with that, there’s an amendment process that is available to address it.
 

Sub_Level

wants to fuck an Asian grill.
Apr 9, 2009
28,160
3,251
1,210
wut ? You can't ask people if they are citizents ?

I mean what is the point of census then ? The whole purpose of it is to get idea on who lives in your nation.
The US census is used to allocate House seats. Each state has 2 senators so they can be equal in that chamber, but the House is proportional to population lest a person in Wyoming would have far more influence than a person in Texas. An undue amount of influence.

The American founding fathers all knew democracy is trash. Our country is dying because of democracy. All of the things you mentioned seeped in because of it. Our country would still be going strong if only property owning men could vote.
Our country is going strong and democracy is not trash. You're overreacting to something that will determine a handful of House seats at best, and can always be changed for the 2030 census.
 
Last edited:
  • LOL
Reactions: TheGreatYosh

#Phonepunk#

Member
Sep 4, 2018
4,814
5,783
570
The founding fathers made it explicitly clear that the census was the total count of persons within the US, not just citizens. If you have an issue with that, there’s an amendment process that is available to address it.
lol no they didn't.
The first federal decennial census that clearly identifies any Native Americans is the 1860 census. The instructions to the 1860 census enumerators defined who was to be counted and who was not:

Indians not taxed are not to be enumerated. The families of Indians who have renounced tribal rule, and who under state or territory laws exercise the rights of citizens, are to be enumerated.

nearly one hundred years after the founding of the USA they were still not counting Native Americans unless they were taxed or official US citizens. it has always been about gov't representation. it's never been some sceintific study to verify all human life forms.
 
Last edited:

eclipze

Member
Mar 30, 2007
312
55
990
lol no they didn't.

nearly one hundred years after the founding of the USA they were still not counting Native Americans unless they were taxed or official US citizens. it has always been about gov't representation. it's never been some sceintific study to verify all human life forms.
Haha, Native Americans on tribal lands? Cmon man, you’re smarter than that.
 

TheGreatYosh

Gold Member
Jul 19, 2018
1,389
1,111
520
The US census is used to allocate House seats. Each state has 2 senators so they can be equal in that chamber, but the House is proportional to population lest a person in Wyoming would have far more influence than a person in Texas. An undue amount of influence.



Our country is going strong and democracy is not trash. You're overreacting to something that will determine a handful of House seats at best, and can always be changed for the 2030 census.
My view on democracy is not even a reaction to this. 2030! You have to be trolling. We are in a dead cat bounce already.
 
Aug 29, 2018
1,191
1,542
390
34
Bartow, Florida, USA
The founding fathers made it explicitly clear that the census was the total count of persons within the US, not just citizens. If you have an issue with that, there’s an amendment process that is available to address it.
The only Founding Fathers (using the term loosely) who wanted non-citizens counted for congressional apportionment were the forebearers of the Democratic Party who wanted their state's slaves counted.