I figured from the source that it would be a misleading article but I read it anyway. Yup, it's a misleading article. Apparently the 2020 census is "flawed" because (as always) they only plan on counting real people instead of also counting hypothetical people who no one sees or talks to or even confirms the existance of, even though modeling tells us that these "people" could possibly maybe be there. I get that physically counting people gets harder when there are more of them, but its not unreasonable to prefer this method of counting to bs magic math models, and it sure as hell isnt racist.
I hope your daily 2 minutes hate was therapeutic though.
No. Just, no. When the Census Bureau is being told to go back to a grossly ineffective and patently archaic system of counting actual heads, and is being simultaneously deprived of funds required to do so, this is contrary to any rational modern-day scientific data Gathering. Please do not delude yourself, or attempt diluting anyone else at least, that this is anything more than bare naked partisan politics at its ugliest and with a racist undertone to boot. Counting 325 million people by head is an inane idea. This is not a difference of varying scientific methods, but a rational scientific method against political know-nothings.
In marketing or other similar research no business would rely on this Model T version of population Counting. And yet we expect the federal government to engage in the important business of head Counting for apportionment and other funding formula with it?
www.oyez.org/cases/1998/98-404
I side with the Supreme Court. The constitution says to count the people, not to imagine how many people we'd like there to be. You can continue to unfairly impute any policy you dont like to "teh stoopit racists" but it doesn't make it so. You can pretend that the method we have always used is an abomination, but pretending is all you are doing. Frankly, claiming that its hackery to want the government to physically count people instead of just throwing out a number that sounds right is itself hackery. There is nothing inherently racist or partisan about preferring a slow but time tested method over an untested experimental one.
Feel free to respond with the usual insults and vitriol to "bolster" your reply.
But the Constitution doesn't Define how to count individuals, does it? Of course not. Meijer logic NE census would require an in-person eyeballing of any person to be counted, and even mail or Internet versions are simply unconstitutional. Again, please quit deluding yourself this is anything to do with science and not 110% politics. Statistical sampling is every bit, or actually more accurate, then such unreliable methods as relying on internet and door mailed responses. That is statistically verifiable.
Just because you want to live in some fantasy world where this is a debate among staticians, you are still ill suited for the high horse you have set yourself upon
