In the comment stream, some used various pejorative terms to describe my last post: infantile, tin-foil hat etc. Others said that it was perfectly ok for the government to impose the long form census since safeguards are in place to protect the information and StatsCan has a good track record in that regard. Besides the government really needs this information in order to do a good job, and some argued, to realize how bad FATCA is.
I am hoping for a little more actual dialogue on the nature of the privacy invasion. You see, I am unsatisfied in this post 9-11, post Edward Snowden revelations, era, that the government make assurances that private information be kept private for the anonymous usages of StatsCan. My issue is whether the government fails to uphold one the deepest principles of English common law since the Magna Carta–that every person is king of their own castle (i.e., the Castle Doctrine). There are just some lines that government should not step over–and the only allowable reason for stepping over those lines is if the government suspects that a crime has been committed. But never ever may a government force people to divulge information that belongs to their private and personal life: e.g., how many hours you spend playing with your children. It is completely inappropriate for government to ask these kinds of questions.
And if the government will throw you in jail for refusing to answer these kinds of questions, how much more will they be willing to violate your Charter rights by sending your banking information to the IRS? I am not impressed with our young handsome PM’s first act. I called him King, but the fact is that in the English-speaking world, the Younger Trudeau is insisting on the power that kings have been barred from exercising for centuries by the Castle Doctrine. Thus, it is a violation of natural law, and so naturally there are many people who become extremely irate over the violation of their personal jurisdiction–as elder Trudeau said, the government has no business in our bedrooms–but the government doesn’t belong in our kitchens, our living rooms nor in our children’s rooms either.
The government insists that it needs accurate information. But truly, if the government is justified in forcing people to fill out 40-page questionnaires revealing certain details of their private lives, would it not be better to collect the information just by installing cameras into their bedrooms, living rooms, kitchens, and children’s bedrooms? In this way, direct surveillance would permit for a better picture of Canadian households and provide the necessary and most accurate information for StatsCan. Be assured however that your private information will be only for the eyes of bureaucrats who need the information.
Mark Levin on the TPP and Constitution:
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/11/09/mark-levin-destroy-the-constitution-tpp-deal-will-allow-obama-to-take-us-to-fast-track-to-hell/
From the article:
“As a citizen, I’m tired of the government, I’m tired of phony experts, I’m tired of professors telling me how to make widgets, where to send widgets, what to charge for widgets, who can buy widgets,” Levin said. “We don’t need two million words to do that. This is another Obama legacy item… Anything that man touches should be opposed because he is not to be trusted.”
Hear! Hear!
Also:
“Ultimately, Levin said that the “pro-American position is to support capitalism, to support the Constitution, to support the individual and to support sovereignty.”
And that applies to us in Canada. It should be the Pro-Canada position. To support the Charter of Rights, capitalism and most importantly the individual and our sovereignty!!
The US is finding out most painfully what trusting the government means.
They voted in 2010 to stop Obama. They voted in 2014 to stop Obama. They found their votes put both houses in Republican control, yet their elected representatives promised to stop Obama to get elected but did not do so WHEN elected!
The reason Trudeau and the Liberals were elected is for that VERY reason. Lack of trust in the government and with good reason as the Conservative government elected did NOT do what they were elected to do!
One can appreciate the apprehension that the new government may soon be off track and with good reason as the early signs are already rearing into view.
And can ANYONE deny that anything that Obama has done, especially considering FATCA and the unilateral coercion of the entire world, cannot be trusted.
@Beentheredonethat
Fast forward 40 years, the situation is far, far worse. If information is recorded by any means anywhere someone can get it and use it in any way they wish, and you will not know it until it’s too late.
ABSOLUTELY right!
@WhiteKat. I refer to @Beentheredonethat.
@Beentheredonethat:
Welcome. Have not seen your posts before. And I certainly do like this one as well as the Avatar.
Have always loved John Wayne.
@FuriousAC,
No need to be rude. We can agree to disagree OK.
@WhiteKat
I do not see anything I have said to be ‘rude’.
What IS rude is what governments around the world including our own are attempting to do to individual citizens within and without their borders.
And doing it “without wants or warrants” !!
FuriousAC re: ” @WhiteKat. I refer to @Beentheredonethat.”
following KGIII comment:
“WhteKat is your name Petros”
Why the need to tell me who you were referencing in your comment? Sounded like a passive aggressive, shutup to me.
That’s OK. I got my big girl panties on today.
@WhiteKat
“That’s OK. I got my big girl panties on today.”
THAT’S good to know!
Not so sensitive when you were ripping @Petros a new one!
@Furious, actually I felt bad that Petros felt bad and did not sleep well last night thinking about it. This morning I apologized publicly here at Brock for anything I may have said that insulted him. Please show me where TODAY I have ‘ripped Petros a new one’. I think we have been debating quite politely.
@Furious, Methinks you are just pissed that not every agrees with you and that the opposing side actually has good arguments.
@WhiteKat:
Actually it is quite the opposite.
You may have been looking in the mirror when you posted.
@Furious, insults diminish the strength of your arguments.
@FuriousAC….still waiting for you to point out a comment I made today that was “RIPPING PETROS A NEW ONE!”
@WhiteKat:
The only thing that upsets me is the lack of understanding of what we all face that is abundantly exhibited by some of the posts that have engaged in name calling and personal attacks instead of argument rebuttal.
And this discussion and the unmitigated attack on @Petros and his very valid arguments that parallel what we are fighting for here, with our very lives , which clearly demonstrates that there is a fundamental lack of understanding of exactly what we face as individuals and nations.
Perhaps that is the reason there is a lack of funds at this point, because people lack that fundamental understanding.
So many times we have heard and read: ‘Oh, this is not possible!’ ‘The US would not do that!’ ‘They are only after tax cheats.’ So on and so forth.
We all know that is not so and many have found that out to their chagrin and financial ruin.
This is not a debating society where points are given for slamming this or that argument with a perceived ‘winner’ of the discussion.
This is real life and the reason most are posting here is because they recognize that and have determined to fight it to it’s rightful conclusion: The END of it. The complete destruction of FATCA and anything like it, including TPP.
Anytime arguments are abandoned for name calling and personal attacks which some have engaged here against @Petros it indicates a failure to completely comprehend the argument itself.
I wish you no ill, @WhiteKat, nor anyone ill and if you felt bad about how you made @Petros feel that is up to you to do what you will about it. I applaud you for that .
There were others as well and it is something that I have seldom , if ever, seen here.
Recognizing the problem is paramount to solving it. Attacking the person pointing out the problem is no way to solve it.
For United we win, Divided , we fall.
@FuriousAC…still waiting….
Furious, Actually, while you are pouring through the comments I made today where I was ‘ripping Petros a new one’, why don’t you also find the ones from yesterday.
@Furious, and then when you have your lists compiled (one for each day), I’ll do the same for you insulting me, and then we can see who did a better job ‘ripping new ones’.
Every Totalaterian government starts off by collecting information for statistical reason only. They now can see how many citizens have guns, money, children, wives and whatever else they want to know in order to collect whatever it is that threatens their goal of power over the citizen.
Lenin and Stalin only had to kill 80 million people to get control. Hitler killed far fewer at about 18 million, Pol Pot killed 50 million. They collected all the guns first and promised they would protect them so they had no need for weapons, so they were in no danger when they started the killing.
The EPA, IRS.and several other alphabet soup departments, are arming themselves at an alarming rate. What will guns do to make the environment better, the answer is nothing. If they start enforcing rules by force then we must stay armed and ready to act.
@Whitekat, sorry to hear you lost sleep. My only hope in pointing out my awareness of the disparaging terms was to show the lack of engagement with the ideas. At least you have mostly engaged with the post, and that is appreciated.
My son once brought home a first grade assignment about thermometers. One challenge: Count how many thermometers there are in your home, and enter the number here.
The paper might never have gotten past the teacher’s desk, and any number would do, but I wrote, “This assignment is an invasion of our family’s privacy. The government does not need to know how many thermometers we have in our home.”
In fact, the teacher _IS_ the government.
Also do check out
http://tomalciere.com/guidance.html
As a user of census data from a number of countries at different times for social-science, law and genealogy purposes, I am forced to say it would be a pity if the giving census data were not obligatory.
That said, we are well aware that there is falsification, and statisticians are capable of adjusting for that. The bulk of the answers (notwithstanding denials) seem to be concerned with privacy. Data are supposed to be cleansed and embargoed (typically for 50 years or so).
A country that does not record its history is a country overtaken by myths of the political type. IMHO. But as my connection with Canada is transient, almost peripheral, this does not concern me: even from a scholarly standpoint it concerns future generations.
It occurred to me to look at what other countries for which I sometimes look at census data. The kind of mandatory questionnaires used in Canada, the USA and the UK seem not to be common to civil-law countries where every family is registered with the city hall or the population registry. Here, for example, is what Wikipedia says about Switzerland: “In order to ease the burden on the population, the information is primarily drawn from population registers and supplemented by sample surveys.”
@Duke of Devon
+1
I agree.
This is not directed at anyone in particular. I would just like to point out that the U.S.A. used its census to round up Japanese-Americans for its internment camps during WW2.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/confirmed-the-us-census-b/
I don’t know if Canada used census information to round up its internees during both the not-at-all-great world wars but I don’t want that to happen again. Justin Trudeau wants to talk tough to Vladimir Putin and many think that WW3 is actually being fought today in a proxy kind of way. (Canada’s military is involved.) Would sensitive census questions about the origins of Canadians lead to Russian-Canadians becoming internees someday? Would these same sensitive questions lead to American-Canadians being asset stripped by the U.S.A someday? Statistics Canada would not hand over that information to the U.S.A. I’m sure but data stored anywhere is data ripe for picking by stealth. “Been there done that” (welcome to you) shouldn’t have to remind us of that … it’s obvious if you read outside the boxes of main stream media. There are no Miranda Rights warnings but we should know that any information we provide to anyone can and will be used against us. It’s a big BEWARE when we do this voluntary but it’s a bigger BEWARE when we do this because it has been made mandatory.
https://alethonews.wordpress.com/2010/10/10/canadas-concentration-camps-the-war-measures-act/
It may seem devisive to be discussing all this but a mandatory long form census is a privacy (and safety) issue just as surely as FATCA/FBAR is … IMHO. As long as we just discuss this reasonably and then afterwards get back together to focus on FATCA/FBAR then none’s the harm … again IMHO.
Many good and important issues / questions about the census. My preference is to use my small store of energy for a limited opportunity to engage the new Liberal government Ministers, MPs and Prime Minister regarding what they have said regarding FATCA and what the status of our Canadian litigation will be going forward. Is it true — *A Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian*? (and then, no, should not be indicated as any other on any census form).