# Census 2021



## brogdale (Feb 14, 2021)

The 2021 Census for England, Wales and Northern Ireland will be held on March 21st this year and i thought it might be useful to have a thread to consider this decadal 'snapshot' of the population.

 

The official Governmental website for the Census appears to omit any reference to the corporate interests contracted to undertake key aspects of the data collection, collation and digitisation of the process. Three corporations with large contracts include:

1. *Leidos UK* (Leidos Innovations UK Ltd, Leidos Europe Ltd, Leidos Supply Ltd & Leidos Ltd, a wholly owned subsidiary of *Leidos*, [formerly known as *Science Applications International Corporation* (SAIC)]. Leidos is an American Defense, Aviation, Information Technology (*Lockheed Martin IS&GS*), and Biomedical Research company headquartered in Reston, Virginia, that provides scientific, engineering, systems integration, and technical services. Leidos merged with *Lockheed Martin's* IT sector in August 2016 for Information Systems & Global Solutions business to create the defense industry’s largest IT services provider. 

(in 2011 Lockheed Martin's IT sector was awarded an estimated £150 million contract for the UK census)

2. *The Adecco Group**, *a Swiss Human Resources provider and temporary staffing firm (2nd largest globally) is contracted by ONS to recruit, train and administer the pay for the 30,000 temporary ONS workers who will be working as field staff for the 2021 census.

3. *M&C Saatchi* advertising agency have been contracted to produce an advertising campaign launched under the slogan of 'it's about us' at the start of 2021.

Some here will recall that in 2011 a number of groups called for a boycott of the census based upon the involvement of Lockheed Martin:



> Several groups called for a boycott of the census over the involvement of Lockheed Martin, including the Stop the War Coalition, and the Christian thinktank Ekklesia. The groups were concerned about sharing data with a company involved in surveillance and data processing for the CIA and FBI; and also providing funding to an arms company making nuclear missiles and cluster bombs.The Green Party also objected, and campaigned unsuccessfully to stop Lockheed Martin getting the contract, although no decision was made about whether or not to call for a boycott.



Wonder if they'll be any similar debate about this year's event?

For transparency I feel duty bound to say that I declined to engage with the 2011 Census due, in part, to the Lockheed contract.


----------



## platinumsage (Feb 14, 2021)

I've not heard a peep this time. I remember previous censuses being big news for months.


----------



## Kevbad the Bad (Feb 14, 2021)

platinumsage said:


> I've not heard a peep this time. I remember previous censuses being big news for months.


It's almost as if something else has been dominating the news.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 14, 2021)

platinumsage said:


> I've not heard a peep this time. I remember previous censuses being big news for months.


According to Wiki there are only a few changes to the 2011 questions, but those added look capable of generating some 'debate':


----------



## platinumsage (Feb 14, 2021)

Perhaps whether or not someone is asked to answer a question about their gender or whatever on a government form doesn't seem worth getting excited about when the government has made it illegal to leave your home or meet your family.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 14, 2021)

They were advertising for door knockers around here, and with so little work on due to covid, I almost applied, then thought I don't fancy knocking doors, due to covid.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 14, 2021)

platinumsage said:


> Perhaps whether or not someone is asked to answer a question about their gender or whatever on a government form doesn't seem worth getting excited about when the government has made it illegal to leave your home or meet your family.


We'll see...


----------



## brogdale (Feb 14, 2021)

cupid_stunt said:


> They were advertising for door knockers around here, and with so little work on due to covid, I almost applied, then thought I don't fancy knocking doors, due to covid.


Making the Scottish decision look a good one.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 14, 2021)

brogdale said:


> The 2021 Census for England, Wales and Northern Ireland will be held on March 21st this year and i thought it might be useful to have a thread to consider this decadal 'snapshot' of the population.
> 
> View attachment 254388
> 
> ...


They trialled this in hackney last year or the year before so I successfully trialled refusing to take part


----------



## Lord Camomile (Feb 14, 2021)

brogdale said:


> According to Wiki there are only a few changes to the 2011 questions, but those added look capable of generating some 'debate':
> 
> View attachment 254395


I didn't look into it at the time, but caught some stuff on my Twitter feed that seemed to suggest there's a campaign around that third one from... I think 'gender critical', is their personal preferred term?


----------



## stethoscope (Feb 14, 2021)

Previous (2011) census thread here fwiw @brogdale.

I seem to remember the last one I eventually completed in a half arsed way, but I'd been skinning up for a few days prior with it on the nest of tables and the form was covered in ash


----------



## JTG (Feb 14, 2021)

Lord Camomile said:


> I didn't look into it at the time, but caught some stuff on my Twitter feed that seemed to suggest there's a campaign around that third one from... I think 'gender critical', is their personal preferred term?


'cranks'


----------



## xenon (Feb 14, 2021)

Can you fill it out online?


----------



## brogdale (Feb 14, 2021)

xenon said:


> Can you fill it out online?


Yep.


----------



## xenon (Feb 14, 2021)

I might do it then. I honestly can’t remember if I did it last time.


----------



## rutabowa (Feb 14, 2021)

I got anofficer (ie door knocker) job! should be a nice job for a couple of months.... outside, local.


----------



## chilango (Feb 14, 2021)

Haven't been on the census since 1991


----------



## belboid (Feb 14, 2021)

It is meant to be ALL online - with paper copies available upon request, but that wont be pushed much because they want to do it all online.

Even 'door knockers' will be working a lot from home (!) and doing as much as possible from there, tho I'm not sure of what ratio that will be yet. 

I fear that there is an evil plan afoot for this census to be badly carried out and to fail to reach 90% of the population (it was 96% in 2011) and that the tories, who have always hated the full census, will use that as an excuse to do away with the whole thing, maybe just run a 10% version like the yanks.


----------



## belboid (Feb 14, 2021)

chilango said:


> Haven't been on the census since 1991


Well fecking do it this year! It's not signing your bloody soul away and it is incredibly useful data.


----------



## rutabowa (Feb 14, 2021)

belboid said:


> I fear that there is an evil plan afoot for this census to be badly carried out


NOT ON MY WATCH


----------



## belboid (Feb 14, 2021)

Lord Camomile said:


> I didn't look into it at the time, but caught some stuff on my Twitter feed that seemed to suggest there's a campaign around that third one from... I think 'gender critical', is their personal preferred term?


Yes, they got virtually everything they asked for and are complaining anyway.


----------



## chilango (Feb 14, 2021)

belboid said:


> Well fecking do it this year! It's not signing your bloody soul away and it is incredibly useful data.



I wasn't in the country for 2001 or 2011.

I'm on the Portuguese and Mexican censuses instead!


----------



## belboid (Feb 14, 2021)

chilango said:


> I wasn't in the country for 2001 or 2011.
> 
> I'm on the Portuguese and Mexican censuses instead!


well that's just cheating!


----------



## brogdale (Feb 14, 2021)

belboid said:


> It's not signing your bloody soul away and it is incredibly useful data.


But by completing/returning you are engaging with the state to undertake an exercise that it itself believes is of limited value and can't conduct without sub-contracting to US arms manufacturers.

The neoliberal consolidator state will drop this exercise that costs more than can be recouped in commercial data sales.


----------



## belboid (Feb 14, 2021)

We engage with the state every day. And whilst the government may say it believes the data is of limited value, we all know that their notions of value and ours are somewhat different. The census has been a vital tool in planning for decades and will continue to be so - as long as we still believe in social planning not just leaving everything to the market. 

The involvement of arms manufacturers is obnoxious, but so is much of life and it is far from a good enough reason to refuse to co-operate - especially when non-cooperation will lead, not to an arms manufacturerless census, but a reduction in knowledge and in our ability to plan according to need.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 14, 2021)

belboid said:


> We engage with the state every day. And whilst the government may say it believes the data is of limited value, we all know that their notions of value and ours are somewhat different. The census has been a vital tool in planning for decades and will continue to be so - as long as we still believe in social planning not just leaving everything to the market.
> 
> The involvement of arms manufacturers is obnoxious, but so is much of life and it is far from a good enough reason to refuse to co-operate - especially when non-cooperation will lead, not to an arms manufacturerless census, but a reduction in knowledge and in our ability to plan according to need.


What "we" believe about the value of censal data counts for nothing to the consolidator state. They don't want to plan for public provision of service only for opportunities to transfer taxes on labour into corporate contracts. They don't believe in planning, let alone 'social planning'.


----------



## belboid (Feb 14, 2021)

They might not, but they are not the only ones with access to the data.  And they wont always be the government. The census info is used by a massive range of organisations, it helps draw up pictures of smaller and more marginalised communities, it helps to counter bullshit about the numbers of migrants etc etc, it helps charities provide clear and indisputable evidence of need, it helps councils plan where to build schools, tc etc.

Even within bourgeois government, it is a major factor in the allocation of resources according to population. Returns are already lower in poorer areas and by reducing the population it leads to a reduction in available expenditure.


----------



## StoneRoad (Feb 14, 2021)

I've been an enumerator twice. I don't think I would do it again.

Crap pay for a lot of foot slogging ! neither time did I have much aggro from people in "my" ED . 
However, I did get some problems with the dole office. It was supposed to be totally disregarded, but some of the counter staff didn't seem to know that.


----------



## souljacker (Feb 14, 2021)

belboid said:


> We engage with the state every day. And whilst the government may say it believes the data is of limited value, we all know that their notions of value and ours are somewhat different. The census has been a vital tool in planning for decades and will continue to be so - as long as we still believe in social planning not just leaving everything to the market.
> 
> The involvement of arms manufacturers is obnoxious, but so is much of life and it is far from a good enough reason to refuse to co-operate - especially when non-cooperation will lead, not to an arms manufacturerless census, but a reduction in knowledge and in our ability to plan according to need.



If you don't want to deal with arms manufacturers, you'd need to stop using postal services in the UK (Lockheed Martin manage and run sorting office machines).


----------



## brogdale (Feb 14, 2021)

belboid said:


> They might not, but they are not the only ones with access to the data.  And they wont always be the government. The census info is used by a massive range of organisations, it helps draw up pictures of smaller and more marginalised communities, it helps to counter bullshit about the numbers of migrants etc etc, it helps charities provide clear and indisputable evidence of need, it helps councils plan where to build schools, tc etc.
> 
> Even within bourgeois government, it is a major factor in the allocation of resources according to population. Returns are already lower in poorer areas and by reducing the population it leads to a reduction in available expenditure.


Nah, reduced expenditure in poorer areas is not the result of deficiencies in spatial demographic data sets; it's the inevitable outcome of neoliberal, consolidator state policies.

I'm aware of the reasons that the state offers for the census; it's just that they're unbelievable.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 14, 2021)

souljacker said:


> If you don't want to deal with arms manufacturers, you'd need to stop using postal services in the UK (Lockheed Martin manage and run sorting office machines).


Thanks for the advice, but I'll do what I want, thanks.


----------



## belboid (Feb 14, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Nah, reduced expenditure in poorer areas is not the result of deficiencies in spatial demographic data sets; it's the inevitable outcome of neoliberal, consolidator state policies.
> 
> I'm aware of the reasons that the state offers for the census; it's just that they're unbelievable.


Sorry but you are just posting generic 'the state is bad so everything it does is necessarily bad' tosh. The state decides general parameters - badly - and then uses the data to apply them.  Refusing to take part will simply compound their failures and deliberate strategies.  You are playing into their hands. 

And it is not just 'the state' (which doesn't have an actual consciousness to decide these things) who offer these reasons, they are supported by workers in a vast range of industries.

Danny Dorling says:

Both the 1991 and 2001 census revealed that our admin records were including a million people who were not actually here anymore. The 2011 census found half a million extra people that were not here according to the official estimates. The census corrects and finds faults in admin records. Admin records are not a safe replacement for it.

Censuses have always been used to address the key problems of the day. The 1911 census asked women how many of their babies had died. Infant mortality at the time took up to 1 in 10 of the richest of peoples’ new-born infants. The 1971 census asked for details about housing quality, hot running water and toilets. Slums were still being cleared then and the authorities needed to know what was left that was still in poor condition. The 2011 census asked, for the first time ever, how many bedrooms were in every home. It revealed that there were more bedrooms in central London than people. It showed us that we have enough bedrooms to go round, but that we are increasingly sharing out space badly. In short the 2011 census reveals that the rich have been taking too much of our most limited resource: space.


----------



## belboid (Feb 14, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Thanks for the advice, but I'll do what I want, thanks.


aah, 21st century 'anarchism' encapsulated


----------



## brogdale (Feb 14, 2021)

belboid said:


> aah, 21st century 'anarchism' encapsulated


as opposed to doing what they're told?

Hmmm


----------



## belboid (Feb 14, 2021)

Petty-bourgeois individualism.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Feb 14, 2021)

Am I likely to actually get trouble if I don't do this census? Don't like the idea of giving my info to nosey capitalist organisations.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 14, 2021)

belboid said:


> Sorry but you are just posting generic 'the state is bad so everything it does is necessarily bad' tosh. The state decides general parameters - badly - and then uses the data to apply them.  Refusing to take part will simply compound their failures and deliberate strategies.  You are playing into their hands.
> 
> And it is not just 'the state' (which doesn't have an actual consciousness to decide these things) who offer these reasons, they are supported by workers in a vast range of industries.
> 
> ...


I have a respect for Dorling and appreciate that his work using censal data has real integrity but focussing on how the welfare state used censal data is only of academic interest 35 years beyond the demise of the welfare state.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 14, 2021)

Count Cuckula said:


> Am I likely to actually get trouble if I don't do this census? Don't like the idea of giving my info to nosey capitalist organisations.


No.


----------



## belboid (Feb 14, 2021)

Count Cuckula said:


> Am I likely to actually get trouble if I don't do this census? Don't like the idea of giving my info to nosey capitalist organisations.


I hope you haven’t got a store card or a phone then.  

it’s a legal requirement, up to £1000 fine for non compliance, tho the average last time was about £250.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Feb 14, 2021)

brogdale said:


> No.


Don't think I'll bother then. Nosey bastards.


----------



## belboid (Feb 14, 2021)

brogdale said:


> I have a respect for Dorling and appreciate that his work using censal data has real integrity but focussing on how the welfare state used censal data is only of academic interest 35 years beyond the demise of the welfare state.


Utter drivel, it was used immediately to inform a host of decisions.  

you are just plain wrong about all this.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 14, 2021)

belboid said:


> I hope you haven’t got a store card or a phone then.
> 
> it’s a legal requirement, up to £1000 fine for non compliance, tho the average last time was about £250.


Based on 270 convictions.
Vanishingly small chance.


----------



## belboid (Feb 14, 2021)

Count Cuckula said:


> Don't think I'll bother then. Nosey bastards.


He’s wrong.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 14, 2021)

belboid said:


> Utter drivel, it was used immediately to inform a host of decisions.
> 
> you are just plain wrong about all this.


You'd be able to exemplify if that were true.


----------



## platinumsage (Feb 14, 2021)

Count Cuckula said:


> Am I likely to actually get trouble if I don't do this census? Don't like the idea of giving my info to nosey capitalist organisations.



My mum has never done it and never had trouble other than having to ignore some door knockers. 

It‘s far more risky to avoid the TV license, although that’s not too bad either as I’ve never bought one and never had trouble other than having to ignore some door knockers.


----------



## belboid (Feb 14, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Based on 270 convictions.
> Vanishingly small chance.


That’s cos most people aren’t fucking dicks and complete it.


----------



## belboid (Feb 14, 2021)

brogdale said:


> You'd be able to exemplify if that were true.


I did it’s in the post you quoted. The information about missing peoples was used immediately.


----------



## Santino (Feb 14, 2021)

brogdale said:


> According to Wiki there are only a few changes to the 2011 questions, but those added look capable of generating some 'debate':
> 
> View attachment 254395


This is ambiguous, because I think the guidance will say, in the question about sex, that trans people can put the sex they identify as, regardless of any GRC. I think that might be different.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 14, 2021)

belboid said:


> That’s cos most people aren’t fucking dicks and complete it.


From an estimated 3, 800, 000 failed returns there were a reported 270 convictions.
Vanishingly small.


----------



## belboid (Feb 14, 2021)

Still no ducking excuse.   In most cases there wouldn’t be a prosecution cos they wouldn’t have been able to identify who to prosecute.  Those who explicitly refuse put themselves in the firing line.  

more from DD in the uses the census is immediately put to:








						Local government without the census – it's a frightening vision
					

Government plans to axe the 2021 census will cause havoc for council managers. Danny Dorling imagines an unpalatable future




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## belboid (Feb 14, 2021)

Santino said:


> This is ambiguous, because I think the guidance will say, in the question about sex, that trans people can put the sex they identify as, regardless of any GRC. I think that might be different.


The question is: “What is your sex?
A question about gender identity will follow later on in the questionnaire”

followed by


Is the gender you identify with the same as your sex registered at birth?
This question is voluntary
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
(Enter gender identity)

There is nothing to stop people answering the first one however they like


----------



## brogdale (Feb 14, 2021)

belboid said:


> Still no ducking excuse.   In most cases there wouldn’t be a prosecution cos they wouldn’t have been able to identify who to prosecute.  Those who explicitly refuse put themselves in the firing line.


Exactly; unless you're the sort that would willingly open the door to these Lockheed-Martin employees and blurt out your full name & details, there's no sanction for rejecting the exercise.


----------



## belboid (Feb 14, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Exactly; unless you're the sort that would willingly open the door to these Lockheed-Martin employees and blurt out your full name & details, there's no sanction for rejecting the exercise.


You’ve already said you’re happy for them to have your info.

and they are not Lockheed-martin employees, they are members of the civil service.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Feb 14, 2021)

I'll actually probably do the census if theres a chance of conviction. I live in a building with other residents who I don't trust not to inform door knockers of who I am.

I'm not impressed though, that doing it online is not yet an option.


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 14, 2021)

stethoscope said:


> Previous (2011) census thread here fwiw @brogdale.
> 
> I seem to remember the last one I eventually completed in a half arsed way, but I'd been skinning up for a few days prior with it on the nest of tables and the form was covered in ash


Good reminder about just how disgusting LDs are. Cheers Steph


----------



## belboid (Feb 14, 2021)

Count Cuckula said:


> I'm not impressed though, that that doing it online is not yet an option.


It is. You’ll be getting details in the next couple of weeks.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 14, 2021)

belboid said:


> You’ve already said you’re happy for them to have your info.
> 
> and they are not Lockheed-martin employees, they are members of the civil service.


Have I?

Ah, yes...those "temporary ONS workers" all recruited, trained and paid by Adecco.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 14, 2021)

Count Cuckula said:


> I'll actually probably do the census fi theres a chance of conviction. Plus, I live in a building with other residents who I don't trust not to inform door knockers of who I am.
> 
> I'm not impressed though, that doing it online is not yet an option.


If you don't trust yourself to withhold info if the Adecco goons come a knocking you're best off complying...otherwise, don't do it you don't feel comfortable engaging with the neoliberal state and their military industrial complex pals.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Feb 14, 2021)

belboid said:


> It is. You’ll be getting details in the next couple of weeks.


I can't find it online


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 14, 2021)

I'll complete it online. The census is useful imo.


----------



## rutabowa (Feb 14, 2021)

brogdale said:


> if the Adecco goons come a knocking you're best off complying


hahahahaaa


----------



## belboid (Feb 14, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Have I?
> 
> Ah, yes...those "temporary ONS workers" all recruited, trained and paid by Adecco.


You use postal services don’t you? You said LMs involvement there didn’t stop you, so there seems to be an element of contradiction there.  

and yup, those 30k are recruited by adecco.  So what? I’m sure you think you’re making a point but all you’re doing is admitting you were wrong before.  As you have been on pretty much every point.


----------



## belboid (Feb 14, 2021)

Count Cuckula said:


> I can't find it online


That’s cos it isn’t ‘the next couple of weeks’ yet









						About the census: About Census 2021 - Census 2021
					

All about Census 2021 - the next census in Northern Ireland. Find out about what's new for this census and why it's important to take part.




					census.gov.uk


----------



## brogdale (Feb 14, 2021)

belboid said:


> You use postal services don’t you? You said LMs involvement there didn’t stop you, so there seems to be an element of contradiction there.
> 
> and yup, those 30k are recruited by adecco.  So what? I’m sure you think you’re making a point but all you’re doing is admitting you were wrong before.  As you have been on pretty much every point.


I'm really not clear at all about what point you think you're making about the post?

The point about Adecco is that they are contracted to recruit, train and pay the census workers, unless you claim that's not correct.

Can't quite see why you're personally so invested in this outdated exercise that the state itself is about to disown.


----------



## platinumsage (Feb 14, 2021)

brogdale said:


> If you don't trust yourself to withhold info if the Adecco goons come a knocking you're best off complying...otherwise, don't do it you don't feel comfortable engaging with the neoliberal state and their military industrial complex pals.



I reckon the enumerators will have to contend with a lot more freeman of the land types this time.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 14, 2021)

platinumsage said:


> I reckon the enumerators will have to contest with a lot more freeman of the land types this time.


Are they planning on a nationwide collection of demographic data as well, then?


----------



## belboid (Feb 14, 2021)

brogdale said:


> I'm really not clear at all about what point you think you're making about the post?
> 
> The point about Adecco is that they are contracted to recruit, train and pay the census workers, unless you claim that's not correct.
> 
> Can't quite see why you're personally so invested in this outdated exercise that the state itself is about to disown.



I can’t see why you are supporting the Tory states desire to abolish an important tool that helps society to plan.  Still less why you are using the fact that a right wing state wants to abolish it as a justification for your position.  It’s just bizarre.  

as to adecco - I was pointing out you were wrong about census workers being Lockheed Martin employees. They’re not. Yes they are recruited trained and paid by adecco, but so what? They are civil servants for the period of employment, that’s in the contract.

Sorry, but you’re a mess of contradictions and false arguments here.


----------



## Santino (Feb 14, 2021)

belboid said:


> The question is: “What is your sex?
> A question about gender identity will follow later on in the questionnaire”
> 
> followed by
> ...


Is the guidance on the sex question different from previous years?


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 14, 2021)

You’d think Lateinos & Romiith had got the contract rather than Adecco


----------



## brogdale (Feb 14, 2021)

belboid said:


> I can’t see why you are supporting the Tory states desire to abolish an important tool that helps society to plan.  Still less why you are using the fact that a right wing state wants to abolish it as a justification for your position.  It’s just bizarre.


Saying that successive neoliberal governments have expressed the desire to ditch the census in it's current form does not necessarily equate to support or opposition to that position.

And it's certainly not just tory administrations that have signalled the demise of the exercise:



> "A Treasury Select Committee report in 2008 entitled _Counting the Population_ recommended that:....the Statistics Authority set strategic objectives to ensure that the data gathered throughout the UK can be used to produce annual population statistics that are of a quality that will enable the 2011 Census to be the last census in the UK where the population is counted through the collection of census forms.



And my primary objection to the compulsory return of the census relates not to the state's lack of faith in the collection, but the involvement of the military-industrial complex in the exercise.

No more straw men, eh?


----------



## contadino (Feb 14, 2021)

belboid said:


> The 2011 census asked, for the first time ever, how many bedrooms were in every home. It revealed that there were more bedrooms in central London than people. It showed us that we have enough bedrooms to go round, but that we are increasingly sharing out space badly. In short the 2011 census reveals that the rich have been taking too much of our most limited resource: space.



...and 2012 saw the introduction of the bedroom tax.


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 14, 2021)

brogdale : It's ultra-rare that I differ from your posts and politics here in general  
*
But!!*!

I *do* think you're _completely_ wrong about boycotting the 2021 Census. 

I think it's *hugely* important that all people, all classes, all heritages, all sexes, all genders, all identities about sex/gender (and all cats!  ), get recorded

I'd rather not argue with you 

But to me, belboid 's posts about all this, seem to make plenty of more sense to me!


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Feb 14, 2021)

William of Walworth said:


> I think it's *hugely* important that all people, all classes, all heritages, all sexes, all genders, all identities about sex/gender (and all cats!  ), get recorded



dunno really

from the perspective of an (amateur) historian, census data is a pretty good way (now) of seeing what was going on in the past, and presumably someone will feel similar in 100 years time.

i can see plenty of advantages to the tories if a lot of people on inadequate pay, in inadequate housing, people with disabilities / long term health conditions, unemployed people and so on, just quietly disappear.

i can see 'visibility' arguments for the LGBT questions, but with this government slowly morphing in to the national front, i'm not sure i want to commit anything to paper...


----------



## xenon (Feb 14, 2021)

Anyone know of someone who's been fined for not completing the census?


----------



## brogdale (Feb 14, 2021)

William of Walworth said:


> brogdale : It's ultra-rare that I differ from your posts and politics here in general
> 
> *But!!*!
> 
> ...


That’s OK William of Walworth ...when you’re arguing against something that 94% of the population comply with it’s unlikely that many will agree with you

I genuinely can see the merits of an inclusive census undertaken by a welfare state keen to make evidence led, progressive plans to benefit working people. Unfortunately that’s not where we are in 2021.


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 14, 2021)

brogdale said:


> That’s OK William of Walworth
> I genuinely can see the merits of an inclusive census undertaken by a welfare state keen to make evidence led, progressive plans to benefit working people. *Unfortunately that’s not where we are in 2021.*



I really doubt that I'd be able to sum up our differences of opinion about this so succinctly .....


----------



## xenon (Feb 14, 2021)

just leave it all to Facebook and Google. No need for the system that provides education, healthcare, welfare to know that much about you.


----------



## belboid (Feb 15, 2021)

Santino said:


> Is the guidance on the sex question different from previous years?


the second question is new, so, yeah, the guidance to the first one is as well


----------



## belboid (Feb 15, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Saying that successive neoliberal governments have expressed the desire to ditch the census in it's current form does not necessarily equate to support or opposition to that position.
> 
> And it's certainly not just tory administrations that have signalled the demise of the exercise:
> 
> ...


It's no straw man when you are using the same arguments as the libertarians to oppose the census. I'm sorry, but you are a complete mess of contradictions, you have got most of the key facts wrong, and the basis of your argument keeps changing.  Is it an 'outdated exercise' or is it one where you 'can see the merit'? Why do you object to the military industrial complex here, but not for the post office?  It's just the usual mishmash of reasons for opposing the whole idea with some lefty phrasing.  But this aint spiked-online.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 15, 2021)

belboid said:


> It's no straw man when you are using the same arguments as the libertarians to oppose the census. I'm sorry, but you are a complete mess of contradictions, you have got most of the key facts wrong, and the basis of your argument keeps changing.  Is it an 'outdated exercise' or is it one where you 'can see the merit'? Why do you object to the military industrial complex here, but not for the post office?  It's just the usual mishmash of reasons for opposing the whole idea with some lefty phrasing.  But this aint spiked-online.


I know I’m arguing against something that you obviously feel personally invested in, but that doesn’t mean it’s accurate to cast that position as contradictory.

From the OP I’ve made clear my rejection of compulsory engagement with process involving and enriching a military industrial corporation like Lockheed Martin. The fact that privatised postal services have similarly outsourced their online ‘SmartStamp’ operation to Lockheed could only undermine that position if I was similarly compelled by the state under threat of sanction to use the Royal Mail’s online stamping service or, indeed, thought the contract was a good thing.

If I have got any key facts about Census 2021 wrong I’m sure you’d be happy to say which facts?


----------



## belboid (Feb 15, 2021)

brogdale said:


> If I have got any key facts about Census 2021 wrong I’m sure you’d be happy to say which facts?


I’ve pointed out where you have contradicted yourself.  Start from there. It’s not personal, that’s a very lazy cop out from you.

you got who the employer is wrong, who it’s for wrong and when its data is used absurdly wrong. You do not understand what the census is used for and have given a disparate bunch of false reasons for not getting involved.

using LM as an excuse not to get involved is frankly laughable.  It isn’t a protest, it’s just you not doing something.   Your refusal to cooperate isn’t going to do _anything _at all to stop their involvement - especially if you are only going to advertise that fact here and are just gonna hide away when the ‘adecco goons’ come calling.   All you’ll achieve is depriving your community of resources and helping the tories abolish something that is used every day, for free, by fairly ordinary people.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 15, 2021)

belboid said:


> I’ve pointed out where you have contradicted yourself.  Start from there. It’s not personal, that’s a very lazy cop out from you.
> 
> you got who the employer is wrong, who it’s for wrong and when its data is used absurdly wrong. You do not understand what the census is used for and have given a disparate bunch of false reasons for not getting involved.
> 
> using LM as an excuse not to get involved is frankly laughable.  It isn’t a protest, it’s just you not doing something.   Your refusal to cooperate isn’t going to do _anything _at all to stop their involvement - especially if you are only going to advertise that fact here and are just gonna hide away when the ‘adecco goons’ come calling.   All you’ll achieve is depriving your community of resources and helping the tories abolish something that is used every day, for free, by fairly ordinary people.


The involvement of Lockheed Martin is not an excuse; it's the reason why I am unwilling to co-operate with the state's data collection.
I don't think I have claimed that my decision is a protest...it's just my decision.
As to depriving my community of resources, I'm afraid that is a consequence of the neoliberal consolidator state's determination to outsource to a corporation with whom I'm unwilling to share my personal data.

As it happens I do understand the purpose of collecting censal data and who uses it; I have professional experience of using such data.


----------



## krink (Feb 15, 2021)

remember that time everyone wrote jedi in the religion bit? good times.


----------



## belboid (Feb 15, 2021)

brogdale said:


> The involvement of Lockheed Martin is not an excuse; it's the reason why I am unwilling to co-operate with the state's data collection.


except for the cases where you dont have a problem


> I don't think I have claimed that my decision is a protest...it's just my decision.


so you agree it is entirely pointless?


> As to depriving my community of resources, I'm afraid that is a consequence of the neoliberal consolidator state's determination to outsource to a corporation with whom I'm unwilling to share my personal data.


It may amaze you, but sometimes there can be more than one reason why something happens!  You are compounding failures. And this still isnt spiked-online.



> As it happens I do understand the purpose of collecting censal data and who uses it; I have professional experience of using such data.


which is why it gobsmacks me that you are talking such complete and utter drivel. If you do understand how the data is used, why did you talk so much crap about it? Frankly, you are sounding a bit like a conspiraloon.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 15, 2021)

belboid said:


> Frankly, you are sounding a bit like a conspiraloon.


Thought you might end up here.
So anyone with an objection to the state compelling us to engage with a US military-industrial corporation is a consprialoon?
Sounds like you want to close down the discussion more than anything.


----------



## belboid (Feb 15, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Thought you might end up here.
> So anyone with an objection to the state compelling us to engage with a US military-industrial corporation is a consprialoon?
> Sounds like you want to close down the discussion more than anything.


No, your arguments, or lack thereof, make you sound like one.  You ignore all evidence that contradicts yours, simply repeat yourself over and over, throw in a couple of 'radical' sounding phrases, and dont seem a mile of calling people sheeple.  

If you refusal to take part in a socially valuable exercise isnt part of a campaign then it is just personal indulgence. You seem to accept it wont achieve anything, so whats the point?


----------



## belboid (Feb 15, 2021)

Another useful discovery from the 2001 census - it might seem amazing that this wasn't already known, but while a vague general picture probably was the actual numbers involved weren't.  And those numbers are important.

Informal care provided by 5.9 million For the first time, the 2001 Census made visible the work of 5.9 million people providing care and support to others on an informal basis; 1.2 million of these people provide more than 50 hours of care per week.

Caring is a phenomenon found all over Britain, and is very strongly related to the need for that care. These findings suggest that people in very different circumstances, rich or poor, young or old, working or not, from deprived or affluent areas, all care for their loved ones in response to those people’s needs. Measuring informal care “Informal care is a term which hides a rich variety of human relationships between spouses, between children and parents; between kith and kin, friends and neighbours. Most care without giving thought to the financial cost of caring. It somehow demeans them to reduce their dedication to cash amounts.”1 

The 2001 Census was important in that it was the first to ask about self-reported general health (in addition to a question on limiting long-term illness, which was introduced in 1991) and it also asked about an activity directly related to poor health – the provision of informal care. 

This additional question in 2001 asked: Do you look after, or give any help or support to, family member, friends, neighbours or others because of: • long-term physical or mental ill-health or disability, or • problems related to old age? Possible answers were: No; 1-19 hours a week; 20-49 hours a week; 50+ hours a week. The image above shows British Sign Language for ‘access’ 2 

This question thus opens a window on people’s private lives, revealing the domestic activities and responsibilities of millions of people. Even though the 2001 Census was the first to measure caring, people have always cared for each other in the domestic setting of the home. However, the concept of ‘informal care’ emerged in the 1970s, recognising the continuing role of the provision of unpaid care within the home, in the context of the widening role of the welfare state and the National Health Service (NHS) as providers of formal care in the post-war decades. Britain has what has been described as a “mixed economy of welfare, in which the state, voluntary sector, the family and the market have played different parts at different times”2. Support for carers is high on the policy agenda and the current Labour government has a National Strategy for Carers. 

For this analysis, as with the other reports in this series, the country is divided into counties, unitary authorities and former metropolitan authorities. For each of these areas, data were obtained based on responses to the health and informal care questions described above. Data from both health questions were used; firstly that which asked whether or not a person has a long-term illness, health problem or disability that limits daily activities or work and secondly the self-reported health question which asked the person to rate their health over the previous 12 months as ‘good’, ‘fairly good’ or ‘not good’. For this analysis, the group of people most in need of healthcare has been classified as those who reported a limiting long-term illness as well as rating their health as ‘not good’ over the last 12 months. Many, but not all, of these people may well be in need of some informal care.


----------



## rutabowa (Feb 15, 2021)

I have always found it weird that what is commonly called "history" is mainly just "what leaders and governments do", wars etc.... And what 99.9999% of what ordinary people do day to day just isn't recorded in any way, as though it is not of any interest.


----------



## belboid (Feb 15, 2021)

The39thStep said:


> I'll complete it online. The census is useful imo.


you can do the portugese one which is being held the same day too


----------



## brogdale (Feb 15, 2021)

belboid said:


> No, your arguments, or lack thereof, make you sound like one.  You ignore all evidence that contradicts yours, simply repeat yourself over and over, throw in a couple of 'radical' sounding phrases, and dont seem a mile of calling people sheeple.
> 
> If you refusal to take part in a socially valuable exercise isnt part of a campaign then it is just personal indulgence. You seem to accept it wont achieve anything, so whats the point?


OK, it's good that I'm not being called a conspiraloon.

Regarding my decision not to engage with the 2021 census; I'm not really sure what 'arguments' you're expecting? I've got all the evidence I need to convince me that it is true that Lockheed Martin are contractually involved and I can't see that you, or anyone else for that matter, disputes that.

As far as I'm aware, unlike yourself, I've not called on anyone else to do anything wrt the Census return, and certainly haven't used the phrase 'sheeple'.

My refusal to take part is not intentionally part of any campaign, but I don't accept that it is pointless. The counter-position you appear to articulate is that any one citizen is powerless to resist the compulsion of the state to insist that we divulge personal data to a US military-industrial corporation. I reject that compulsion and hope that if enough like-minded folk do likewise the state will have to rethink its outsourcing strategy.

I hope that the thread gives everyone the opportunity its to express their view on this matter and, as I said to William above, I'm certainly not expecting many to necessarily agree with my position as last time, in 2011, around 94% of households did return their census.


----------



## belboid (Feb 15, 2021)

And yet again you ignore all the things you have got wrong and withdraw to the single narrow claim that LM are involved.  

Anyone can say what they like on this thread. But when they talk bollocks they should be corrected, like on every other thread.

I’m afraid you are utterly deluded if you think individuals not complying with the census will make them rethink their outsourcing strategy.   It failed last time when there was a campaign around it and the government knew that was why they weren’t complying.   Failing to comply but not telling them why will simply push them to abandon the entire process.  Which will weaken w-c communities even more than they plan to already.


----------



## belboid (Feb 15, 2021)

random census facts. 

there has never been a case of data abuse connected to the collation of uk census data.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 15, 2021)

belboid said:


> And yet again you ignore all the things you have got wrong and withdraw to the single narrow claim that LM are involved.
> 
> Anyone can say what they like on this thread. But when they talk bollocks they should be corrected, like on every other thread.
> 
> I’m afraid you are utterly deluded if you think individuals not complying with the census will make them rethink their outsourcing strategy.   It failed last time when there was a campaign around it and the government knew that was why they weren’t complying.   Failing to comply but not telling them why will simply push them to abandon the entire process.  Which will weaken w-c communities even more than they plan to already.


I'm sorry to disappoint, but the '_single narrow_ _claim_' that Lockheed Martin are involved in the UK state's 2021 census, (a pretty strong 'claim', I think?), is the reason why I'm not engaging with the process. I suppose I could make up some other reasons if you really think that would help?

I'm afraid that I can't agree with the notion that the existence of censal data will make any difference to the class-war attacks of the neoliberal, consolidator state against working class communities.

Perhaps time to let this back and forth drop for while; maybe give some space for other posters to make their points, if they wish?


----------



## belboid (Feb 15, 2021)

brogdale said:


> I'm sorry to disappoint, but the '_single narrow_ _claim_' that Lockheed Martin are involved in the UK state's 2021 census, (a pretty strong 'claim', I think?), is the reason why I'm not engaging with the process. I suppose I could make up some other reasons if you really think that would help?


You did make up other claims. I have pointed out how you have been wrong repeatedly. Your replies have simply amounted to 'oh no I'm not.'  You have offered no evidence to support your assertions, which is probably why you are now backing away from them.  And to claim it is any kind of statement against LM is just laughable and completely and utterly pointless. Petty-bourgeois dilettantism.   And adding the words ' neoliberal, consolidator state' doesn't change that to a radical position.


----------



## platinumsage (Feb 15, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Regarding my decision not to engage with the 2021 census; I'm not really sure what 'arguments' you're expecting? I've got all the evidence I need to convince me that it is true that Lockheed Martin are contractually involved and I can't see that you, or anyone else for that matter, disputes that.



How are they involved given they span off their IT division which was taken over by Leidos? 

According to this Leidos are only involved in administering the paper forms.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 15, 2021)

platinumsage said:


> How are they involved given they span off their IT division which was taken over by Leidos?
> 
> According to this Leidos are only involved in administering the paper forms.



According to their Wiki entry, Leidos is the legal successor of the original SAIC, [Science Applications International Corporation an American Defense, Aviation, Information Technology and Biomedical Research company (Lockheed Martin IS&GS)], and retains SAIC's pre-2013 stock price and corporate filing history.


----------



## platinumsage (Feb 15, 2021)

brogdale said:


> According to their Wiki entry, Leidos is the legal successor of the original SAIC, [Science Applications International Corporation an American Defense, Aviation, Information Technology and Biomedical Research company (Lockheed Martin IS&GS)], and retains SAIC's pre-2013 stock price and corporate filing history.



Yes, as I said Lockheed Martin span off their IT division. Leidos aquired it. Lockheed Martin now have no involvement whatsoever.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 15, 2021)

platinumsage said:


> Yes, as I said Lockheed Martin span off their IT division. Leidos aquired it. Lockheed Martin now have no involvement whatsoever.


I really don't know about the actual ownership of Leidos, but I do know that it retains parts of LM's operations and is a US owned military-industrial corporation. So whatever the capitalist badging of the operation, it won't change my objection.

e2a: I did think that Leidos was presently owned by LM which is why I've referred to them throughout the discussion, so far. From now on I'll refer to them as Leidos.


----------



## belboid (Feb 15, 2021)

If anyone is serious about not involving LM and aren't just being lazy, here's a piece from Peace News from last time about how you can return your form but not allow them to profit.  I would highlight the section that says:

*If you don’t send in your form, Lockheed Martin will still get its money and just make a higher profit for less work.*






						How to Fill In Your Census Form without Lockheed Martin Profiting (long version) | Peace News
					






					peacenews.info
				




tl/dr - demand a paper form and cross out any bar codes.  The coding time (which wont actually be carried out by anyone working for LM, or whatever company it is now) will take them an age so will downgrade their profits and push them away from the business while still gathering the data that everyone who understands what 'per capita' means agrees is incredibly useful.

edit: actually, the best way to not let Leidos get your data is to do it on the internet.  Funny old world.


----------



## yield (Feb 15, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> I have always found it weird that what is commonly called "history" is mainly just "what leaders and governments do", wars etc.... And what 99.9999% of what ordinary people do day to day just isn't recorded in any way, as though it is not of any interest.


Thomas Carlyle's Great man theory.

The making of the English working class by E. P. Thompson is good social history.



belboid said:


> random census facts.
> 
> there has never been a case of data abuse connected to the collation of census data.


Give over. 

The internement of the Japanese-Americans or there's <Godwin's Law>

There are lots of beneficial things about modernity. Public goods the universal health care system, welfare state, education, vaccination programmes etc.

Noentheless if you don't have blind faith in the state. It's a mixed bag.


----------



## belboid (Feb 15, 2021)

yield said:


> The internement of the Japanese-Americans or there's <Godwin's Law>
> 
> There are lots of beneficial things about modernity. Public goods the universal health care system, welfare state, education, vaccination programmes etc.
> 
> Noentheless if you don't have blind faith in the state. It's a mixed bag.


ahem, yes, I meant UK census data, as now amended 

There have very clearly been many breaches by authoritarian states and I can understand the nervousness of those who could be targeted - Jewish community leaders say this is the reason for the under-estimation of the number of jewish people in the country.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 15, 2021)

yield said:


> Thomas Carlyle's Great man theory.
> 
> The making of the English working class by E. P. Thompson is good social history.
> 
> ...


There was also this more recent use/abuse of US censal data:



and, of course, thanks to Blair our own spooks have access to censal data in matters relating to 'national security'.


----------



## platinumsage (Feb 15, 2021)

brogdale said:


> I really don't know about the actual ownership of Leidos, but I do know that it retains parts of LM's operations and is a US owned military-industrial corporation. So whatever the capitalist badging of the operation, it won't change my objection.
> 
> e2a: I did think that Leidos was presently owned by LM which is why I've referred to them throughout the discussion, so far.



They're entirely separate. Lockheed Martin does not own any part of Leidos and has no involvement in the 2021 census.

I'm not suggesting it would change your objection but it's nice to get your facts right surely, if you are highlighting this as a reason to boycott the census.

Leidos are only involved in processing the paper forms so the "sharing data with a company involved in surveillance and data processing for the CIA and FBI" part of the 2011 boycot rationale mentioned in your OP doesn't apply to anyone completing the 2021 census online.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 15, 2021)

platinumsage said:


> They're entirely separate. Lockheed Martin does not own any part of Leidos and has no involvement in the 2021 census.
> 
> I'm not suggesting it would change your objection but it's nice to get your facts right surely, if you are highlighting this as a reason to boycott the census.
> 
> Leidos are only involved in processing the paper forms so the "sharing data with a company involved in surveillance and data processing for the CIA and FBI" part of the 2011 boycot rationale mentioned in your OP doesn't apply to anyone completing the 2021 census online.


Wiki says:



& their own website has them working with the FBI as a 'success story':


----------



## platinumsage (Feb 15, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Wiki says:
> 
> View attachment 254557
> 
> ...



Sure but I was referring to people not wanting to share their data with such a company as a reason for boycotting the 2011 census, and stating that this doesn‘t apply to anyone completing the 2021 census online because Leidos have no involvement with that aspect.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 15, 2021)

platinumsage said:


> They're entirely separate. Lockheed Martin does not own any part of Leidos and has no involvement in the 2021 census.
> 
> I'm not suggesting it would change your objection but it's nice to get your facts right surely, if you are highlighting this as a reason to boycott the census.
> 
> Leidos are only involved in processing the paper forms so the "sharing data with a company involved in surveillance and data processing for the CIA and FBI" part of the 2011 boycot rationale mentioned in your OP doesn't apply to anyone completing the 2021 census online.


16 million census forms. these are for the people who cannot complete the census online


----------



## brogdale (Feb 15, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> 16 million census forms. these are for the people who cannot complete the census online


Guess: £22bn?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 15, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Guess: £22bn?


£65.1m


----------



## brogdale (Feb 15, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> £65.1m


per form that's quite impressive.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 15, 2021)

this made me laugh, brogdale Is British public ready to put its trust in government's handling of its personal data?


----------



## platinumsage (Feb 15, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> 16 million census forms. these are for the people who cannot complete the census online



Yes, but as I said that rationale doesn’t apply to anyone who can complete it online.


----------



## belboid (Feb 15, 2021)

__





						Census contracts - Office for National Statistics
					





					www.ons.gov.uk


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 15, 2021)

platinumsage said:


> Yes, but as I said that rationale doesn’t apply to anyone who can complete it online.


i know what you said and repetition doesn't make it a more valuable contribution. in simple terms, you're saying that people who let their information fall into the clutches of leidos have only themselves to blame because they could have done it online. only the people we're talking about haven't the means to do it online. it's clear you don't give a fuck about them.


----------



## belboid (Feb 15, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> i know what you said and repetition doesn't make it a more valuable contribution. in simple terms, you're saying that people who let their information fall into the clutches of leidos have only themselves to blame because they could have done it online. only the people we're talking about haven't the means to do it online. it's clear you don't give a fuck about them.


I imagine far fewer than 16mill will actually be issued - it was meant to be 'online first' originally but is now 'online as far as physically possible' The doorknockers will be there to help people do it online (they'll have a device), same as they did with filling out the forms previously.


----------



## platinumsage (Feb 15, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> i know what you said and repetition doesn't make it a more valuable contribution. in simple terms, you're saying that people who let their information fall into the clutches of leidos have only themselves to blame because they could have done it online. only the people we're talking about haven't the means to do it online. it's clear you don't give a fuck about them.



Your clearly don’t know what I said because I was talking about reasons to withhold information and boycott census. Sure you could boycot the online census due to the fact that people completing the paper version would have their data processed by Leidos, but that’s a different reason than boycotting the census because you are worried about who will process your own data that you input online.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 15, 2021)

belboid said:


> I imagine far fewer than 16mill will actually be issued - it was meant to be 'online first' originally but is now 'online as far as physically possible' The doorknockers will be there to help people do it online (they'll have a device), same as they did with filling out the forms previously.


leaving aside this leidos tangent my feelings about the census are founded not on the private concerns involved with it but the information being gathered for the use of the british state. and that's why i won't be jumping up to fill out this thing online or in paper form


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 15, 2021)

platinumsage said:


> Your clearly don’t know what I said because I was talking about reasons to withhold information and boycott census. Sure you could boycot the online census due to the fact that people completing the paper version would have their data processed by Leidos, but that’s a different reason than boycotting the census because you are worried about who will process your own data that you input online.


it is refreshing to see you adopt an attitude of _mea culpa _and i hope it's one you'll take again in future.


----------



## belboid (Feb 15, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> leaving aside this leidos tangent my feelings about the census are founded not on the private concerns involved with it but the information being gathered for the use of the british state. and that's why i won't be jumping up to fill out this thing online or in paper form


is that particularly different than in other years? Whilst there clearly are questions which could be ill-used, and data sets compiled for community profiling purposes (which can be good or bad, of course), the questions are generally innocuous enough for it to be of much help for anything other than what is openly claimed for it.


----------



## platinumsage (Feb 15, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> leaving aside this leidos tangent my feelings about the census are founded not on the private concerns involved with it but the information being gathered for the use of the british state. and that's why i won't be jumping up to fill out this thing online or in paper form



The “British state” know far more about you than what the census form provides for.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 15, 2021)

platinumsage said:


> The “British state” know far more about you than what the census form provides for.


then what's the point of the census if they already know everything the census form asks and more besides?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 15, 2021)

belboid said:


> is that particularly different than in other years? Whilst there clearly are questions which could be ill-used, and data sets compiled for community profiling purposes (which can be good or bad, of course), the questions are generally innocuous enough for it to be of much help for anything other than what is openly claimed for it.


it's not the questions that have ever exercised me so much as the answers and the use they might be put to.


----------



## tim (Feb 15, 2021)

belboid said:


> well that's just cheating!


I was Scottish in 1971, which was the first time I got recorded. I remember my parents filling the form out in a hotel lounge. My grandfather was with us. It was the first time he'd ever left England.

So perhaps I could claim to be a third generation Scot, and blag one of those Scottish Passports after all.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 15, 2021)

tim said:


> I was Scottish in 1971, which was the first time I got recorded. I remember my parents filling the form out in a hotel lounge. My grandfather was with us. It was the first time he'd ever left England.
> 
> So perhaps I could claim to be a third generation Scot, and blag one of those Scottish Passports after all.


imagine leaving scotland for england just to fill out the census


----------



## tim (Feb 15, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> then what's the point of the census if they already know everything the census form asks and more besides?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 15, 2021)

i rest my case


----------



## tim (Feb 15, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> imagine leaving scotland for england just to fill out the census


We also went to see where Dr Finlay's Bookcase was filmed. We were hoping for a wee bit of full-on Janet, but were disappointed.


----------



## kenny g (Feb 15, 2021)

My wife gets a separate one for her and the children because I am always in two minds about it.


----------



## StoneRoad (Feb 15, 2021)

I'm hoping sometime later this year to finally see some actual returns for the 1921 census ... my father was born in 1919 so these will be the first I'll be able to locate him on. If that works, then I'll have a go for my maternal grandparents ...


----------



## brogdale (Feb 15, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> this made me laugh, brogdale Is British public ready to put its trust in government's handling of its personal data?


kerching says the re-badged man...


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Feb 15, 2021)

StoneRoad said:


> I'm hoping sometime later this year to finally see some actual returns for the 1921 census ... my father was born in 1919 so these will be the first I'll be able to locate him on. If that works, then I'll have a go for my maternal grandparents ...



it's possible he may be visible on the 1939 registration documents (this wasn't exactly a census - the 1941 census got scrapped - but a sort of emergency thing done in the early part of the war, so they could sort out ration books and so on) - people younger than a certain age have been redacted but i'm not sure what date the cut-off is.

may be worth seeing if local library service has online (or branch if it ever opens again) access to 'ancestry' or similar (mine has had it in branch for some time, but during the lockdown has put it online (behind a login)


----------



## brogdale (Feb 15, 2021)

The reality behind this claim by the ONS:



Census data can lawfully be shared with the security services:


----------



## smokedout (Feb 15, 2021)

belboid said:


> The question is: “What is your sex?
> A question about gender identity will follow later on in the questionnaire”
> 
> followed by
> ...



The guidance will say people should put the sex as recorded on their passport, birth certificate or gender recognition certificate.  Only around 6000 people have a gender recognition certificate, and I doubt that many more have changed their passport - my guess is it's probably about 10,000 in total, and to some extent trans men will cancel out trans women.  This represents 0.02% of the adult population.  This will render any results of the census completely meaningless according to gender critical campaigners who are now crowdfunding for a judicial review because they claim it's illegal somehow to ask the question this way and are organising a mass boycott.  This shit is getting exhausting.


----------



## stethoscope (Feb 15, 2021)

smokedout said:


> The guidance will say people should put the sex as recorded on their passport, birth certificate or gender recognition certificate.



I don't recall that is that different to the 2011 census actually - its just the additional question this time also. The hardcore critter crowd have just lost the plot/perspective.


----------



## belboid (Feb 15, 2021)

smokedout said:


> The guidance will say people should put the sex as recorded on their passport, birth certificate or gender recognition certificate.


Actually no, they explicitly say otherwise:


If you are one or more of non-binary, transgender, have variations of sex characteristics, sometimes also known as intersex, the answer you give can be different from what is on your birth certificate.

If you’re not sure how to answer, use the sex registered on your official documents, such as passport or driving licence, or whichever answer best describes your sex.

A later question gives the option to tell us if your gender is different from your sex registered at birth, and, if different, to record your gender.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Feb 15, 2021)

smokedout said:


> The guidance will say people should put the sex as recorded on their passport, birth certificate or gender recognition certificate.  Only around 6000 people have a gender recognition certificate, and I doubt that many more have changed their passport - my guess is it's probably about 10,000 in total, and to some extent trans men will cancel out trans women.  This represents 0.02% of the adult population.  This will render any results of the census completely meaningless according to gender critical campaigners who are now crowdfunding for a judicial review because they claim it's illegal somehow to ask the question this way and are organising a mass boycott.  This shit is getting exhausting.



 (at them not you)


----------



## belboid (Feb 15, 2021)

brogdale said:


> The reality behind this claim by the ONS:
> 
> View attachment 254599
> 
> ...


you should probably quote the relevant bit.

[Prohibitions] does not apply to a disclosure which:

*a)* is required or permitted by any enactment,

*b)* is required by a Community obligation,

*c)* is necessary for the purpose of enabling or assisting the Board to exercise any of its functions,

*d)* has already lawfully been made available to the public,

*e)* is made in pursuance of an order of a court,

*f)* is made for the purposes of a criminal investigation or criminal proceedings (whether or not in the United Kingdom),

*g)* is made, in the interests of national security, to an Intelligence Service,

*h)* is made with the consent of the person to whom it relates, or

*i)* is made to an approved researcher."


g) Has been repealed.  We have left the 'Community' so b is out too. e & f are indeed in place, and dubious as heck, even if the only three things they'll get to know that HMRC and/or DWP might not already know are about your homes heating, travel to work method and how you consider your health to be. You'll note that they are individual, not group based (G excluded) which precludes the kind of trawling exercises and mass datagrabs that the americans carried out.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 16, 2021)

belboid said:


> you should probably quote the relevant bit.
> 
> [Prohibitions] does not apply to a disclosure which:
> 
> ...


Was interested to see that when the national security paragraph g) was repealed it was 'replaced' by Schedule 1 of the Counter-Terrorism Act 2008  a provision to provided unfettered access to a full copy of the Electoral Register whenever any of the national security agencies wants a full copy.

That aside, the 'Register' headline seems to be accurate, then?


----------



## belboid (Feb 16, 2021)

It removes MI5 from your list so you have maintained your accuracy levels. Glad you admitted your mistake tho.  Oh, no you didn’t. Again.  

if you have some desire to get everything completely and utterly wrong you just need to throw in ‘but they collect the same data through other means’ and you’ll have the whole shebang. If you use the word ‘censal’ too you can look like you really really know your stuff and aren’t just scrabbling about pulling any old shit off the internet like a....


----------



## belboid (Feb 16, 2021)

Ohh and the date you were ‘interested to see’comes from the article you linked to.  So the fact you didn’t know it was there rather implies you didn’t even bother reading your link.  You know who else that’s a feature of, don’t you?


----------



## brogdale (Feb 16, 2021)

belboid said:


> Ohh and the date you were ‘interested to see’comes from the article you linked to.  So the fact you didn’t know it was there rather implies you didn’t even bother reading your link.  You know who else that’s a feature of, don’t you?


 
Was attempting to have a discussion about the repeal of g); perhaps that wasn't clear?
And in answer to the last question; no, I don't.


----------



## smokedout (Feb 16, 2021)

belboid said:


> Actually no, they explicitly say otherwise:
> 
> 
> If you are one or more of non-binary, transgender, have variations of sex characteristics, sometimes also known as intersex, the answer you give can be different from what is on your birth certificate.
> ...



That's what it was going to say before gender critical people started to attack them.  The latest guidance was just published a few days ago and says:



> This question is vital for understanding population growth and equality monitoring. Please select either “Female” or “Male”.
> 
> If you are considering how to answer, use the sex recorded on one of your legal documents such as a birth certificate, Gender Recognition Certificate, or passport.
> 
> If you are aged 16 years or over, there is a later voluntary question on gender identity. This asks if the gender you identify with is different from your sex registered at birth. If it is different, you can then record your gender identity.







__





						Census 2021: Final guidance for the question “What is your sex?” - Office for National Statistics
					

How we evaluated the results of our research and testing to finalise the Census 2021 online help guidance for the question “What is your sex?”. Aims to ensure that it is in line with the target concept of sex being sex as recorded on legal and official documents and is publicly acceptable.



					www.ons.gov.uk
				




And they are still furious.  (I suspect because they want everyone to be forced to answer according to their birth sex with no mention of other identities in the census at all - they don't really care about data being inaccurate, they care that the census acknowledges trans people exist)


----------



## davesgcr (Feb 16, 2021)

StoneRoad said:


> I'm hoping sometime later this year to finally see some actual returns for the 1921 census ... my father was born in 1919 so these will be the first I'll be able to locate him on. If that works, then I'll have a go for my maternal grandparents ...



Yes - the 1921 census is eagerly awaited. My grandmother was in well heeled Llandrindod Wells on holiday in 1911 - things were a bit different for her in 1921. I won't bore you.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 16, 2021)

I hope they finally decide to use Annie’s Song as the theme tune.


----------



## belboid (Feb 16, 2021)

smokedout said:


> That's what it was going to say before gender critical people started to attack them.  The latest guidance was just published a few days ago and says:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Hmm, that is replacing para 2 of the bit I quoted ‘if you’re not sure...’ rather than para 1.  So there is nothing to stop anyone putting what they wish really.  

of course the terfs are still furious, they don’t want any recognition of trans people at all.


----------



## belboid (Feb 16, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Was attempting to have a discussion about the repeal of g); perhaps that wasn't clear?
> And in answer to the last question; no, I don't.


Conspiraloons.  The folk whose methodology you are bizarrely following. One of their classics is to post a link to a long piece and to say - often in really big bolded letters - that the link proves them right even though it doesn’t.  

You just posted a link to a piece that says security services don’t have access to the census data and then said - in big bolded letters - that it shows MI5 have access. Twice.

I really have no idea why you are so determined to keep on with your mistakes, you’re not normally so foolish. But you have been shown to be wrong on virtually everything you’ve said. You seem determined and determined not to let any new information alter your opinion.

it’s weird


----------



## brogdale (Feb 16, 2021)

belboid said:


> Conspiraloons.  The folk whose methodology you are bizarrely following. One of their classics is to post a link to a long piece and to say - often in really big bolded letters - that the link proves them right even though it doesn’t.
> 
> You just posted a link to a piece that says security services don’t have access to the census data and then said - in big bolded letters - that it shows MI5 have access. Twice.
> 
> ...


Personally, although I think it's quite interesting that the state says censal data is confidential when it isn't, my decisions not to engage with the process has nothing to do with that.


----------



## belboid (Feb 16, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Personally, although I think it's quite interesting that the state says censal data is confidential when it isn't, my decisions not to engage with the process has nothing to do with that.


no, you said your decisions were to do with the involvement of lockheed martin.  But once you were told that it wasn't them any more and that it was a piece of piss to have nothing the company that took over from them you moved onto to a different subject.  And you were wrong about that too.

You're a census conspiraloon.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 16, 2021)

belboid said:


> no, you said your decisions were to do with the involvement of lockheed martin.  But once you were told that it wasn't them any more and that it was a piece of piss to have nothing the company that took over from them you moved into to a different subject.  And you were wrong about that too.
> 
> You're a census conspiraloon.


 
I'll not engage with a process involving and enriching a US military-industrial corporation. Sad times when that's deemed weird on Urban.


----------



## belboid (Feb 16, 2021)

brogdale said:


> I'll not engage with a process involving and enriching a US military-industrial corporation. Sad times when that's deemed weird on Urban.


If you were consistent about that I could have some respect for the position, but you are not. Every other time it has some direct benefit to you though,so you wont do that. You're laziness will not have any effect on the amount they get, in fact they'll be getting that more money for no work!  Well done you. 

What is sad is when a normally intelligent poster repeatedly posts drivel, refuses to acknowledge their (many) errors of fact and just ploughs on regardless.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 16, 2021)

belboid said:


> If you were consistent about that I could have some respect for the position, but you are not. Every other time it has some direct benefit to you though,so you wont do that. You're laziness will not have any effect on the amount they get, in fact they'll be getting that more money for no work!  Well done you.
> 
> What is sad is when a normally intelligent poster repeatedly posts drivel, refuses to acknowledge their (many) errors of fact and just ploughs on regardless.


Rejecting the neoliberal state's compulsion to engage with their outsourcing partners is not laziness.
That's just shit posting.


----------



## belboid (Feb 16, 2021)

brogdale said:


> That's just shit posting.


that is all you are doing.

Falsehood after falsehood, wilful ignorance and dishonesty. You are, like so many conspiraloons, actually helping those you claim to oppose.

Until you can bring yourself to at least admit some of the errors you have made then you really have nothing worthwhile to say.  But do carry on about those evil 'adecco goons' if you like, that bit was at least hilariously stupid.


----------



## platinumsage (Feb 16, 2021)

brogdale said:


> I'll not engage with a process involving and enriching a US military-industrial corporation. Sad times when that's deemed weird on Urban.



If you’ve been through a UK airport recently or used the NHS you will have engaged with a process involving Leidos’ logistics and border protection products respectively, to name but two examples. I wonder why you have singled out the census as the one thing to boycot?


----------



## brogdale (Feb 16, 2021)

platinumsage said:


> If you’ve been through a UK airport recently or used the NHS you will have engaged with a process involving Leidos’ logistics and border protection products respectively, to name but two examples. I wonder why you have singled out the census as the one thing to boycot?


At heart, that appears to offer quite a defeatist council of despair; why bother to resist one aspect of the neoliberal consolidator state's corporate outsourcing when there are so many other examples?

But I suppose the key difference here is that, under threat of sanction, the state is attempting to compel this engagement with a foreign military-industrial corporation. It is entirely up to me whether or not I choose to use the services of a UK airport and, as it happens, I haven't done so for many years. As for the NHS, I can't really believe that the need to access healthcare that might rely on outsourced services can be seen as an argument for acquiescing to all other such neoliberal outsourcing, let alone one under compulsion.


----------



## belboid (Feb 16, 2021)

brogdale said:


> At heart, that appears to offer quite a defeatist council of despair; why bother to resist one aspect of the neoliberal consolidator state's corporate outsourcing when there are so many other examples?
> 
> But I suppose the key difference here is that, under threat of sanction, the state is attempting to compel this engagement with a foreign military-industrial corporation. It is entirely up to me whether or not I choose to use the services of a UK airport and, as it happens, I haven't done so for many years. As for the NHS, I can't really believe that the need to access healthcare that might rely on outsourced services can be seen as an argument for acquiescing to all other such neoliberal outsourcing, let alone one under compulsion.


How did you make the decision that the only thing you are going to do is the one that requires you to sit on your arse and do nothing?

Was it the fact that it is completely pointless, as you the company have already been paid and you are not partaking in any campaign so its a purely individual bit of moralism?

Was it the fact that by doing so you will also be helping to further reduce resources in working-class areas (as anyone who knows what 'per capita' means already understands)?

Or was it the fact that it just requires you to sit on your arse and simply come up with a bullshit rationalisation to justify yourself?


----------



## belboid (Feb 16, 2021)

One of the great things about the census is that once the information has been compiled, the basic data sets for your local area are then available to all absolutely free. Every day such sets are using by charities, community groups and campaigning organisations to inform their work and to provide indisputable evidence of need.  Of course other data sources are available and are also used, but the census is absolutely key because it is the one that is universal and because it is the bedrock which many other data sources use as their starting point. All others miss some sections of society, usually the poorest and most marginalised, and renders them invisible, not even a part of any problem. Still other sources are comprehensive and well-researched, but you have to pay to access them, leaving them in the hands of the wealthier, the more well-funded and those who can afford to pay professional fundraisers. Census data is available to anyone and requires no specialist knowledge to access or use so that even a tiny group who has only just set itself up make use of it.


----------



## ska invita (Feb 16, 2021)

belboid said:


> Utter drivel, it was used immediately to inform a host of decisions.
> you are just plain wrong about all this.


useful for making points on urban too


----------



## brogdale (Feb 17, 2021)

belboid said:


> How did you make the decision that the only thing you are going to do is the one that requires you to sit on your arse and do nothing?
> 
> Was it the fact that it is completely pointless, as you the company have already been paid and you are not partaking in any campaign so its a purely individual bit of moralism?
> 
> ...


From the OP in this thread I’ve been clear about how/why I have decided not to complete or return a census form. And, yes that decision does obviously involve not doing what the state demands; that kind of follows. I’ve also said, more than once, that I don’t think rejecting the compulsion to engage with a US military corporation is pointless. That is an individual moral decision just as your decision to comply is.

Casting me as responsible for further reducing resources in working class areas does look improbable; neoliberal governments of the last 45 years appear to have been able to do that with or without my census data.


----------



## belboid (Feb 17, 2021)

brogdale said:


> From the OP in this thread I’ve been clear about how/why I have decided not to complete or return a census form. And, yes that decision does obviously involve not doing what the state demands; that kind of follows. I’ve also said, more than once, that I don’t think rejecting the compulsion to engage with a US military corporation is pointless. That is an individual moral decision just as your decision to comply is.
> 
> Casting me as responsible for further reducing resources in working class areas does look improbable; neoliberal governments of the last 45 years appear to have been able to do that with or without my census data.


Pare 1 - your moral position is worth what you put into it.  Which in your case is nothing.

Para 2- dennis nielsen tried that argument too.  being less of a cunt than a massive cunt isn't really something to claim the moral high ground about.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 17, 2021)

belboid said:


> Pare 1 - your moral position is worth what you put into it.  Which in your case is nothing.
> 
> Para 2- dennis nielsen tried that argument too.  being less of a cunt than a massive cunt isn't really something to claim the moral high ground about.


dennis nielsen; wow 

Think I’ll take a little break from this thread for bit.


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 17, 2021)

belboid : A whole lot of your posts have made plenty of good sense about the census, for example #155.
But that last one (concernng Dennis Nielsen) seems to make no sense whatsover .... 

brogdale : Please don't leave the thread, I've disagreed with more of what you've posted than agreed, but everything you posted has made me think , and this thread has included some great discussion about aspects of the census that I wasn't aware of.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 17, 2021)

William of Walworth said:


> belboid : A whole lot of your posts have made plenty of good sense about the census, for example #155.
> But that last one (concernng Dennis Nielsen) seems to make no sense whatsover ....
> 
> brogdale : Please don't leave the thread, I've disagreed with more of what you've posted than agreed, but everything you posted has made me think , and this thread has included some great discussion about aspects of the census that I wasn't aware of.


Were you aware that the PCS had called for a Scottish style year postponement of the E&W census on Covid safety grounds?
Also some pretty robust concerns expressed about the outsourcing.



> A PCS spokesman said: “It is deeply irresponsible to recruit 30,000 people for door-to-door questioning of the public, when there are new, highly infectious variants of the virus emerging.”
> 
> “We have raised serious concerns over safety around the upcoming ONS census and taking into account Scotland has postponed its census, England and Wales must follow suit.”
> 
> It added: “Ministers must also remove Adecco from any rescheduled census work next year as private contractors have no place delivering public services which can be done in-house.”


----------



## brogdale (Feb 18, 2021)

Found a buff OHMS envelope on the door mat this morning and assumed it was about the census but, lo no, it was from the ONS about a separate data collecting exercise regarding employment/unemployment rates.

On the face of it a little odd given that the state, via HMRC & DWP must already have access to such numbers? I assume that the ONS are attempting some sort of sample verification of the data that they already? Also a little odd is the timing coming so close before the census and the fact that AFAIK the census already asks about employment status?

Anyone else had the letter?



Must be keen to get this data if they're offering a £15 "gift voucher"?


----------



## stdP (Feb 18, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Must be keen to get this data if they're offering a £15 "gift voucher"?



IIRC the vouchers are a fairly standard inclusion in ONS surveys, I had one last year. Didn't take them up on the off of the voucher but wished they had a "donate it to charity of your choice" option instead.


----------



## platinumsage (Feb 18, 2021)

isn’t that the Labour Force Survey? It has been going for years and is used for the quarterly employment figures amongst other things.





__





						Labour Force Survey - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## brogdale (Feb 18, 2021)

platinumsage said:


> isn’t that the Labour Force Survey? It has been going for years and is used for the monthly employment figures.


It doesn't say that explicitly in the letter...unless I've missed it.
There is a LMO reference code.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 18, 2021)

Looks like it might be a new type of survey (not unlike the old Labour Force Survey) but done without the face-to-face element to find out about WFH, Furlough etc.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 18, 2021)

Voucher from _Love2Shop _apparently.

e2a: says can be used in, amongst other places, Debenhams, Burtons, Dorothy Perkins, Evans...


----------



## belboid (Feb 18, 2021)

William of Walworth said:


> belboid : A whole lot of your posts have made plenty of good sense about the census, for example #155.
> But that last one (concernng Dennis Nielsen) seems to make no sense whatsover ....


In one interview Nielsen was confronted with the fact that he has a mass murderer.  His reply was that 'aye, I killed a few people, but look at Thatcher, she's killed tens of thousands, she's the real mass murderer.'

Now considering that Thatcher didn't wipe out the entire human race a few times over, the proportions are rather in brogdales benefit, if we're doing a side by side comparison, but the principle - that someone else is much worse so who cares what I do - is the same.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 18, 2021)

belboid said:


> In one interview Nielsen was confronted with the fact that he has a mass murderer.  His reply was that 'aye, I killed a few people, but look at Thatcher, she's killed tens of thousands, she's the real mass murderer.'
> 
> Now considering that Thatcher didn't wipe out the entire human race a few times over, the proportions are rather in brogdales benefit, if we're doing a side by side comparison, but the principle - that someone else is much worse so who cares what I do - is the same.


Give over, pal.


----------



## belboid (Feb 18, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Give over, pal.


after you


----------



## brogdale (Feb 18, 2021)

belboid said:


> after you


As you wish, but I can't believe this is really how you want to be posting on here.


----------



## belboid (Feb 18, 2021)

The two alternatives to a census are no planning at all, or a population register.  Various countries have the latter, particularly in Scandiwegia, where there is a public list of who owns what, earns what, lives with whom etc etc.  Perhaps that is a better system, absolute openness is something that we should strive for.  However it is mindbogglingly unlikely that we would ever agree to bring such a system in as I imagine quite a lot of people would object to such data being publically available. Quite a lot of those people will currently be in government. 

Comparatively the census is cheap, reliable and respects individuals privacy. Long my it continue.


----------



## belboid (Feb 18, 2021)

brogdale said:


> As you wish, but I can't believe this is really how you want to be posting on here.


and I still cannot believe you want to keep posting drivel, ignoring the vast majority of points raised in criticism and sneering at low paid temp workers.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 18, 2021)

belboid said:


> and I still cannot believe you want to keep posting drivel, ignoring the vast majority of points raised in criticism and sneering at low paid temp workers.


I'm just not getting what you think you're going to achieve with such a personalised attack style of posting. I've started a thread about the census and been upfront from the OP that I've decided not to engage with the process. I appreciate that you disagree with that position; fair enough...but do you really think that the name-calling stuff might change minds?

Honestly, I think your posting on this thread has come across as quite strange. For taking a view that you object to I've been called, amongst other things, a pointless, moralistic petty bourgeois individual/dilettante, a fucking dick, a laughable mess of contradictions, deluded, a 'normally intelligent' conspiraloon who is less of a cunt than a massive cunt (like Dennis Nielsen).

And been accused of talking bollocks, crap, writing tosh, complete and utter drivel (repeatedly) playing into the hands of & supporting the Tories, making false libertarian arguments like Spiked online. Being a personally indulgent lazy cop-out offering a mess of contradictions and false reasoning that I don’t understand equating to a pointless, failed nothing position and sounding like a conspiraloon. Engaged in a personal indulgence about which I’m foolish, repeatedly wrong; wrong on virtually everything, offering no evidence with a desire to get everything completely and utterly wrong whilst scrabbling around pulling any old shit off the internet like a conspiraloon. Offering nothing worthwhile but falsehood after falsehood in a wilfully ignorant and dishonest manner that helps those that I claim to oppose whilst sitting on my arse, doing nothing but bullshit rationalisation that helps to reduce resources in working class areas whilst claiming the moral high ground.

Impressive in it's own way, but not really the way to persuade others of the integrity of your position?

Or maybe I'm just taking an old-fashioned view of how discussions take place. Who knows?

I genuinely thought that posters might like the opportunity to talk about the census.


----------



## rutabowa (Feb 18, 2021)

belboid said:


> sneering at low paid temp workers.


(it's not that badly paid)


----------



## ska invita (Feb 18, 2021)

we need a musical interlude


----------



## belboid (Feb 18, 2021)

brogdale said:


> I'm just not getting what you think you're going to achieve with such a personalised attack style of posting. I've started a thread about the census and been upfront from the OP that I've decided not to engage with the process. I appreciate that you disagree with that position; fair enough...but do you really think that the name-calling stuff might change minds?
> 
> Honestly, I think your posting on this thread has come across as quite strange. For taking a view that you object to I've been called, amongst other things, a pointless, moralistic petty bourgeois individual/dilettante, a fucking dick, a laughable mess of contradictions, deluded, a 'normally intelligent' conspiraloon who is less of a cunt than a massive cunt (like Dennis Nielsen).
> 
> ...


There's a longstanding tradition on this board of taking the piss out of people talking bollocks and being highly selective in what parts of arguments they respond to.   I am simply continuing in that tradition.


----------



## belboid (Feb 18, 2021)

The 2011 census was the first which asked about languages spoken within households.  This allowed for councils and local community groups to develop plans and courses in local languages which could be targeted accurately at the populations that needed them, thus helping with community cohesion and integration.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 19, 2021)

belboid said:


> There's a longstanding tradition on this board of taking the piss out of people talking bollocks and being highly selective in what parts of arguments they respond to.   I am simply continuing in that tradition.



I'm sure that's how you'd like to justify your posting on the thread but, simply repeating that someone taking a different view to your own is talking bollocks, does not make it so.

So far on the thread I've made quite a few factual posts about the UK's 2021 Census (& other census events) and I've not seen you dispute any of these posts. Is that because they aren't in fact bollocks?

If any of the following posts were factually wrong I'd be interested to discuss that (without the 'traditional' abuse if possible).

#1. Date of Census & Outsourcing contracts

#4 Question changes for 2021

#8 The Scottish decision for postponement to 2022

#14 The intended online nature of the census

#24 & #64 The neoliberal state’s desire to drop census as it is presently undertaken inc. #67 2008 Treasury select committee report about ditching census in present form

#42 & #49 conviction rate for non-compliance

#57 #64 Role of Adecco in recruitment, training & remuneration of enumerators

#96, #98 & 104 Leidos ownership and work with US security services

#102 US abuse census data confidentiality

#129 Leidos/Lockheed Martin corporate connections

#131, #137 #140 & #146 UK Census confidentiality exceptions

#161 PCS demands for postponement

#162 & 166 The ONS Employment survey


----------



## belboid (Feb 19, 2021)

brogdale said:


> I'm sure that's how you'd like to justify your posting on the thread but, simply repeating that someone taking a different view to your own is talking bollocks, does not make it so.
> 
> So far on the thread I've made quite a few factual posts about the UK's 2021 Census (& other census events) and I've not seen you dispute any of these posts. Is that because they aren't in fact bollocks?
> 
> ...


I've disputed many of those along the way (eg, you got the name of the arms company, what they do wrong, who they employ wrong and how much they are paid wrong), and have said some of your replies have been contradictory whilst in other cases you have replied to criticisms of your argument by saying 'yes it is', if that much.  There have also been various comments which are true but of no relevance to whether one should complete the form or not. 

In that vein, I agree almost entirely with everything in that article about the PCS argument and with their position entirely. Of course it should have been postponed, its bloody daft doing it now - part of Tory sabotage plans I fear. And of course it should have been in house, but, again, that is no reason not to complete it. PCS do NOT suggest doing so, they are very supportive of it (hardly surprising as they have members in the ONS).


----------



## belboid (Feb 19, 2021)

brogdale said:


> According to Wiki there are only a few changes to the 2011 questions, but those added look capable of generating some 'debate':
> 
> View attachment 254395


I dont think we have talked about the first of these questions, I must admit.

It is an interesting one, my immediate reaction was 'really? _That's _a priority?' - and I still largely think that. But considering the growth of groups like Help for Heroes (no matter how much they make you want to puke) and increased focus upon what happens to people when they leave, it will be fascinating to find out. To see whether all the bullshit they sell you about that role has _any _resemblance to reality.  The implications for policy (which we can actually influence) are clear and significant.


----------



## belboid (Feb 19, 2021)

Here's another interesting tale - from the 2001 census. 

Due to slight boundary changes for the city and differences in lower level output areas (!) the area covered by Manchester council found the census had removed 14,000 homes, housing 25,000 people, from their boundaries.  They complained and, after a years argument, had them returned.  It wasn't just a silly argument over whether they were bigger than Salford or not, it was about the level of government grant they received - it amounted to £7.5million. 

£300 a head may not sound a lot and, in this instance, it _was _money simply moved from one council to another. But it is what determines levels of council grants from government (amongst other things). £300 per person that the council will lose if you don't exist at all, each year for ten years (given government cuts, it probably still is about £300 twenty years later).  It may not be earth-shattering, but it's not insignificant.





__





						BBC NEWS | England | Manchester | Census 'lost' 25,000 people
					





					news.bbc.co.uk


----------



## belboid (Feb 22, 2021)

I see the transphobes have formally given the ONS until 6pm Wednesday to remove the guidance on the sex question or they’ll demand a judicial review.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 22, 2021)

Meanwhile some remainer/rejoiner folks are encouraging like-minded types to declare their 'national identity' as European.


----------



## 19force8 (Feb 22, 2021)

belboid said:


> I see the transphobes have formally given the ONS until 6pm Wednesday to remove the guidance on the sex question or they’ll demand a judicial review.


That'll be another outbreak of legal grifting then.

Over the last year or two they have turned into some sort of litigation cult. Can't remember where I saw the account of their online fundraising, but it showed over £1.2million raised to fund various legal actions last year.


----------



## ska invita (Feb 22, 2021)

belboid said:


> I see the transphobes have formally given the ONS until 6pm Wednesday to remove the guidance on the sex question or they’ll demand a judicial review.


What is the guidance?


----------



## 19force8 (Feb 22, 2021)

ska invita said:


> What is the guidance?


That respondents can answer using their identified gender. So, much the same as the guidance in the 2011 census.


----------



## belboid (Feb 22, 2021)

ska invita said:


> What is the guidance?






			
				Census said:
			
		

> This question is vital for understanding population growth and equality monitoring. Please select either "Female" or "Male".
> 
> If you are considering how to answer, use the sex recorded on one of your legal documents such as a birth certificate, Gender Recognition Certificate, or passport.
> 
> If you are aged 16 or over, there is a later voluntary question on gender identity. This asks if the gender you identify with is different from your sex registered at birth. If it is different, you can then record your gender identity.


They don't use the 'if you are considering how to answer...' bit elsewhere, which allows it to be more widely interpreted, but it is that accepting any legal document that is the big 'problem'. 

Apparently there is a campaign to answer the question but attach a strongly worded letter of complaint as well.  For it to be electronically read by a machine made by a notable makers of phallic weaponry and quietly discarded.


----------



## belboid (Feb 22, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Meanwhile some remainer/rejoiner folks are encouraging like-minded types to declare their 'national identity' as European.


Yes.  And, you know what?  I cant see any issue with that. They will all be enumerated, as Jedi's were, and it will be vaguely interesting to see how many people do it. 

In Sheffield last time 81 people stated their religion as Heavy Metal, making it more popular locally than Jainism and Baha'i


----------



## brogdale (Feb 24, 2021)

This feels like a massive cop-out...but I have to admit that I like the music used in the (_grabs garlic)_ Saatchi TV advert for the 2021 census.

It's a cover of the Zombies' 1968 _This Will Be Our Year _performed by a Norwich band _The Vagaband:_


----------



## Dom Traynor (Feb 24, 2021)

Refusal to participate in the census is an act of social vandalism, the victims are charities, campaigners, the poor and the vulnerable.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 24, 2021)

Dom Traynor said:


> Refusal to participate in the census is an act of social vandalism, the victims are charities, campaigners, the poor and the vulnerable.


94% complied in 2011 and since then the poor & vulnerabe have got poorer relying on ever more charity.


----------



## miss direct (Feb 24, 2021)

I had a census lady come round a few years ago (confusing because there was no census then - maybe it was practice). She had a tablet and sat at the kitchen table. Surely they won't be allowed in homes during covid? I remember questions about sexuality and she held the tablet up for those and didn't ask them aloud - said it was in case people felt like they couldn't be open due to family members/others around. I just remember thinking that my household at the time would really not give any useful data at all. One Greek lady who had just moved in, a French couple who were just in the UK for 6 weeks and me, who was just there for 2 months and couldn't answer half of the questions because they just didn't make sense for someone with a life like mine (at that point).


----------



## Acanthus (Feb 27, 2021)

Brogdale:

I've read nearly all this thread, and agree with your stance and reasoning completely. I'm glad you brought up this Leidos connection, for I've looked high and low for peoples' views on this, and the subject of your OP seems to be unique. It's as if the entire anarch-pacifist community have yet to discover the Leidos-ONS collaboration, unlike the controversy of 2011.

I never took part in the previous census on grounds of conscience, due the appallingly insensitive and unethical agreement to employ L-M. For the same reason, I disagree with the Leidos involvement. In 2011 the Quaker mayor of ?Stroud refused to comply with the census on the same grounds, and was taken to court - and won his case. (Human Rights legislation resulted in the Equality Act, of which one 'protected characteristic' is religion and/or philosophical belief). It's no longer illegal to be a conscientious objector in times of war, and in many ways much harder than blindly following orders. Thankfully the dark days of enforced labour camps, white feathers, hate language, shootings at dawn, etc. for COs have long gone.

I also object to the rather puerile bullying and insults being thrown at you over your strong principles. We aren't being 'black sheep' for the mere sake of it. If we break our principles at the first hurdle, there's little point in having any principles - and I'd end up wracked with feelings of guilt. Far from 'drivel' you talk much sense, and I admire your tenacity.


----------



## Kevbad the Bad (Feb 27, 2021)

Dom Traynor said:


> Refusal to participate in the census is an act of social vandalism, the victims are charities, campaigners, the poor and the vulnerable.


It all depends on how the census is used. It might be used for constructive social planning. Or it might be used for destructive, discriminatory purposes. Or something in between. Or nothing much. Or negative political purposes. Or whatever. So any refusal or compliance can only be truly judged long after the event. Which makes it nigh on impossible to make moral judgements derived from potential consequences.


----------



## Acanthus (Feb 27, 2021)

I agree completely, Kevbad - especially when governments lack openness and habitually lie, and that's happening more and more, it would seem.  How can we safely trust them?  We can't.


----------



## belboid (Feb 27, 2021)

Acanthus said:


> Brogdale:
> 
> I've read nearly all this thread, and agree with your stance and reasoning completely. I'm glad you brought up this Leidos connection, for I've looked high and low for peoples' views on this, and the subject of your OP seems to be unique. It's as if the entire anarch-pacifist community have yet to discover the Leidos-ONS collaboration, unlike the controversy of 2011.
> 
> ...


No, you’re up your own arse wankers who are stealing £3000 from your community.   There is no campaign this time same as their wasn’t in 2001 because no one really gives a fuck but you were manipulated by cleverer people out to abolish the census.   And at least the mayor of Stroud campaigned publicly against the l&m involvement, unlike lazy brogdale who is just not filling it in.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 27, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> I have always found it weird that what is commonly called "history" is mainly just "what leaders and governments do", wars etc.... And what 99.9999% of what ordinary people do day to day just isn't recorded in any way, as though it is not of any interest.


Funny enough, Foucault had some things to say about that in the very thing I have been reading this morning.  Foucault’s very point was that it was actually the transformation of what is recorded _from_ being about leaders _to_ being about ordinary people that was intrinsic to the way modern societies control people.  He said (in _Discipline and Punish_, 1975):



> For a long time ordinary individuality — the everyday individuality of everybody — remained below the threshold of description.  To be looked at, observed, described in detail, followed form day to day by an uninterrupted writing, was a privilege.  The chronicle of a man, the account of his life, his histiography, written as he lived out his life, formed part of the rituals of his power.  The disciplinary methods [_i.e. the ways in which discipline is imposed on the population — my note_] reversed this relation, lowered the threshold of describable individuality and made of this description a means of control and a method of domination.  It is no longer a monument for future memory but a document for possible use.


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 27, 2021)

I have been strong armed into working on this. Not looking forward to asking people about their sexual orientation


----------



## Acanthus (Feb 27, 2021)

Belboid: Your response is not only ad hominem, but also crude and makes no logical sense.  Sorry, but it's impossible to reason with such replies.  Don't be surprised if I ignore similar of what some may call 'drivel'.


----------



## Acanthus (Feb 27, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> I have been strong armed into working on this. Not looking forward to asking people about their sexual orientation


That's not a compulsory question, though.


----------



## belboid (Feb 27, 2021)

miss direct said:


> I had a census lady come round a few years ago (confusing because there was no census then - maybe it was practice). She had a tablet and sat at the kitchen table. Surely they won't be allowed in homes during covid? I remember questions about sexuality and she held the tablet up for those and didn't ask them aloud - said it was in case people felt like they couldn't be open due to family members/others around. I just remember thinking that my household at the time would really not give any useful data at all. One Greek lady who had just moved in, a French couple who were just in the UK for 6 weeks and me, who was just there for 2 months and couldn't answer half of the questions because they just didn't make sense for someone with a life like mine (at that point).


That’s the point of doing it, to find out things like that, things that aren’t recorded anywhere else, about people who may not be here long, because it’s snapshot of who is in Britain, including people only in very short term stays.


----------



## belboid (Feb 27, 2021)

Acanthus said:


> Belboid: Your response is not only ad hominem, but also crude and makes no logical sense.  Sorry, but it's impossible to reason with such replies.  Don't be surprised if I ignore similar of what some may call 'drivel'.


Your post was sanctimonious drivel with no content.


----------



## belboid (Feb 27, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> I have been strong armed into working on this. Not looking forward to asking people about their sexual orientation


You wont


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 27, 2021)

Acanthus said:


> That's not a compulsory question, though.


It’s not compulsory to answer, but I think it’s compulsory to ask it


----------



## belboid (Feb 27, 2021)

Acanthus said:


> Belboid: Your response is not only ad hominem, but also crude and makes no logical sense.  Sorry, but it's impossible to reason with such replies.  Don't be surprised if I ignore similar of what some may call 'drivel'.


Why do you want to steal £3000 from your community?


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 27, 2021)

belboid said:


> You wont


We’ll see, training on Monday


----------



## rutabowa (Feb 27, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> We’ll see, training on Monday


Me too (different city I think)


----------



## planetgeli (Feb 27, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> We’ll see, training on Monday





rutabowa said:


> Me too (different city I think)



Good luck to you both. A cautionary tale.

In 2011, with time on my hands, I got the job I presume you both will be doing. My training consisted of a couple of hours of being told things weren't quite up to speed yet. During this training I found myself the only person there questioning (critically, but I thought helpfully) the logistics.

I then went to pick up my boxes of stuff from the team leader. When I got to his house I was met with an absolute garage full of boxes and a stressed leader trying to sort it all out. Thank God I didn't go for the leader job I thought to myself. I could never have stored all that. The leader mentioned to me, in the most suspicious tones, that he'd noticed I was the only one being critical (of the mess) at the meeting.

Got home and unpacked. I have a small house. My boxes took up half my living room. Then I set to work. What I found was all my addresses were completely out of order. I live in the countryside. Most homes here don't have house numbers but names. I was given a map of the area. I remember spending about 16 hours trying to sort out the mess of the addresses. It got worse. We'd been given a laptop each. The laptops were not properly working. The site needed to connect to wasn't working. But the worst thing of all was the laptop and website were absolute essential to the job and the laptop/website continually crashed my whole internet every time I tried to use it.

After 16 hours of sorting, and barely getting halfway through the address pile, and the laptop issues showing no sign of being solved, I gave up. The biggest reason I gave up was because I was not prepared to have no personal internet for the next 6 weeks.

Maybe they fixed the issues. I don't know. Because I walked out. When I returned all my stuff to the leader he was pissed off I was trying to claim 16 hours of work. It took me weeks to get what I was owed. I actually wish I'd tipped the boxes out back in his garage so he (or ore likely some other poor fool) would have had to do all the work I'd done over again.

I hope you don't face these problems. They've had 10 years to fix them right?

Good luck (seriously) to both. I think the Census is a good thing. But in 2011, in Wales, it was one of the most piss poorly organized projects I've ever had the misfortune to work with.


----------



## rutabowa (Feb 27, 2021)

I'm hoping that because I'm doing it in a geographically small area in a city the addresses cant go too wrong! I am glad I don't have a "leader" role though.


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 27, 2021)

planetgeli said:


> Good luck to you both. A cautionary tale.
> 
> In 2011, with time on my hands, I got the job I presume you both will be doing. My training consisted of a couple of hours of being told things weren't quite up to speed yet. During this training I found myself the only person there questioning (critically, but I thought helpfully) the logistics.
> 
> ...


My role is helping people do it over the phone if they struggle to do it online. No paper involved


----------



## belboid (Feb 27, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> My role is helping people do it over the phone if they struggle to do it online. No paper involved


ohh, you'll be explaining what transgender and asking about sexual orientation lots then!  Good luck


----------



## brogdale (Feb 27, 2021)

belboid said:


> Why do you want to steal £3000 from your community?


OK, I'll bite, then...care to show your working about this 'theft' of £3k from my community?


----------



## belboid (Feb 27, 2021)

I already did, p182.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 27, 2021)

belboid said:


> I already did, p182.


But that was a story about an underlying error in population estimation, not about people refusing to complete their census return. 

Is there any evidence that the state will  not factor in non-compliance when estimating population for the purposes of grant funding?


----------



## belboid (Feb 27, 2021)

brogdale said:


> But that was a story about an underlying error in population estimation, not about people refusing to complete their census return.
> 
> Is there any evidence that the state will  not factor in non-compliance when estimating population for the purposes of grant funding?


It isn't 'estimation', it is an actual count, of actual people. Estimations are those figures that they come up with afterwards, _based upon _what they find out in the census.  If they don't think you're there, they don't count you.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 27, 2021)

belboid said:


> It isn't 'estimation', it is an actual count, of actual people. Estimations are those figures that they come up with afterwards, _based upon _what they find out in the census.  If they don't think you're there, they don't count you.


Yeah, certainly...but the ONS uses many other data sets to set their final estimates and with an estimated (2011) return rate of 94%, they have means to compensate for non-compliance. I still don't see where you're getting this 'theft' of £300 pa/£3kpd from?


----------



## brogdale (Feb 27, 2021)

There's a pdf about the "Coverage assessment and adjustment methods" they used to do this in 2011 here.


----------



## belboid (Feb 27, 2021)

aah, the link to a list of documents comprising 100's of pages of material, always the most convinving.

Yes, the ONS will make estimates based upon previous data and what they can glean from this years so far.  They'll be wrong, but who needs accurate data?


----------



## brogdale (Feb 27, 2021)

belboid said:


> aah, the link to a list of documents comprising 100's of pages of material, always the most convinving.
> 
> Yes, the ONS will make estimates based upon previous data and what they can glean from this years so far.  They'll be wrong, but who needs accurate data?


The first link would do you:




but the thing is that the demographers and statisticians have well established means to process, clean, adjust their raw undercounts to produce estimates informing resource allocation. My decision not to engage will not 'steal' £3k from my community or any community; you were not making sense with that guff.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 27, 2021)

Love the idea that MI5 would need access to census data in order to be able to gather information on people. As if intelligence agencies didn't, you know, gather intelligence.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 27, 2021)

NoXion said:


> Love the idea that MI5 would need access to census data in order to be able to gather information on people. As if intelligence agencies didn't, you know, gather intelligence.


Yes, or that the state need a census to know that we exist!


----------



## NoXion (Feb 27, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Yes, or that the state need a census to know that we exist!



Maybe not all branches of the government employ spies, snoops and snitches and/or access to the data they gather?


----------



## brogdale (Feb 27, 2021)

NoXion said:


> Maybe not all branches of the government employ spies, snoops and snitches and/or access to the data they gather?


Maybe not, but it's interesting to note that elements of the neoliberal state appear to have long felt it doesn't need a conventional census to know about population:


----------



## belboid (Feb 27, 2021)

brogdale said:


> The first link would do you:
> 
> View attachment 256450
> 
> ...


well, at least you are admitting that it is involved with resource allocation, that is at least a step forward. But it is still no argument against the fact that they are wrong, and working off assumptions that may well  be out of date (which is why there is a census).  Lets hope you're a straight white man with no particular needs that are generally ill met by the state.


----------



## belboid (Feb 27, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Maybe not, but it's interesting to note that elements of the neoliberal state appear to have long felt it doesn't need a conventional census to know about population:
> 
> View attachment 256453


A - I believe that is about paper based forms, hence the push towards a digital first census (Scotland and NI are apparently not prepared for a fully digital census yet, which is why their versions are delayed, nothing to do with Covid, surprisingly)

B - whether this is about paper or not, there certainly is a drive from the right to cancel the census, they hate it for reasons that are nothing to do with arms companies or privacy.  It is bizarre and counter-productive for those who oppose their attempts to extend the market further and further to support them in destroying the census.


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 27, 2021)

is this you, brogdale ?


----------



## platinumsage (Feb 27, 2021)

Interestingly the 1937 Soviet census revealed that the population was 18 million lower than claimed, and 10 million lower than official death records suggested, presumably due to famine etc.

Stalin wasn't happy and promptly executed a number of the prominent statisticians involved.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 27, 2021)

belboid said:


> well, at least you are admitting that it is involved with resource allocation, that is at least a step forward. But it is still no argument against the fact that they are wrong, and working off assumptions that may well  be out of date (which is why there is a census).  Lets hope you're a straight white man with no particular needs that are generally ill met by the state.


Yeah, and the £3k 'theft'?


----------



## belboid (Feb 27, 2021)

Why do people making dumb 'points' include those big smilies?  Is it to cover for the fact that there is no actual point they are making?  It's always struck me as weird.


----------



## Flavour (Feb 27, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> My role is helping people do it over the phone if they struggle to do it online. No paper involved



I did this in 2011! I think I got 1 phone call in 2 weeks.


----------



## miss direct (Feb 27, 2021)

Is it one form per household? Or per person?


----------



## belboid (Feb 27, 2021)

One section for the household and then one each for everyone in said household.


----------



## miss direct (Feb 27, 2021)

My housemate will probably chuck it in the bin like he did with my post the other day. What if I dont want my housemates to know private stuff about me?


----------



## belboid (Feb 27, 2021)

Grab it before they do and do it online!

For student houses, they say (and it applies to any other shared household):


You and your housemates should have received a letter containing the access code needed to fill in a household census questionnaire online. If the household has not received this letter or cannot access it, you need to request a new access code.

If a member of the household can access the letter, they should:


include you on the household form
share the code with you so you can fill in your own answers on the household form
request a new access code for you should you prefer to answer separately from the rest of the household
It’s your joint responsibility to complete the census, not your landlord’s. The form needs to include information on everyone who normally lives in the household.

You should be included in the census for your university address.

You can answer separately from your student household if you’d prefer to keep your answers private. You can request an access code to fill in an individual questionnaire.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 27, 2021)

belboid said:


> Why do people making dumb 'points' include those big smilies?  Is it to cover for the fact that there is no actual point they are making?  It's always struck me as weird.


It's because your claim was laughable.


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 27, 2021)

Flavour said:


> I did this in 2011! I think I got 1 phone call in 2 weeks.


That’s what I like to hear.
Anyway, not sure what all this Addeco stuff is all about - it’s all being done by the council up here


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 27, 2021)

miss direct said:


> My housemate will probably chuck it in the bin like he did with my post the other day. What if I dont want my housemates to know private stuff about me?


You can elect to do it yourself online


----------



## brogdale (Feb 27, 2021)

platinumsage said:


> Interestingly the 1937 Soviet census revealed that the population was 18 million lower than claimed, and 10 million lower than official death records suggested, presumably due to famine etc.
> 
> Stalin wasn't happy and promptly executed a number of the prominent statisticians involved.


In the PRC they had the official ML pro-natalist stance that (as the workers of the world create the wealth, the more workers the more wealth for the community) until...they didn't. Perceiving a Malthusian crisis of 'positive checks' (famine etc) they abruptly adopted anti-fatalism and promptly imprisoned/shot their former demographers.


----------



## Serge Forward (Feb 27, 2021)

belboid said:


> Why do people making dumb 'points' include those big smilies?  Is it to cover for the fact that there is no actual point they are making?  It's always struck me as weird.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 27, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> is this you, brogdale ?
> View attachment 256457


----------



## brogdale (Feb 27, 2021)

Serge Forward said:


>


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 27, 2021)

brogdale said:


>


----------



## brogdale (Feb 27, 2021)

belboid said:


> A - I believe that is about paper based forms, hence the push towards a digital first census (Scotland and NI are apparently not prepared for a fully digital census yet, which is why their versions are delayed, nothing to do with Covid, surprisingly)
> 
> B - whether this is about paper or not, there certainly is a drive from the right to cancel the census, they hate it for reasons that are nothing to do with arms companies or privacy.  It is bizarre and counter-productive for those who oppose their attempts to extend the market further and further to support them in destroying the census.


No, in 2008 _Counting the population_ questioned the very notion of a conventional 2021 Census and looked toward a more integrated, register based system of collating demographic data.


----------



## Cerv (Feb 27, 2021)

platinumsage said:


> Interestingly the 1937 Soviet census revealed that the population was 18 million lower than claimed, and 10 million lower than official death records suggested, presumably due to famine etc.
> 
> Stalin wasn't happy and promptly executed a number of the prominent statisticians involved.


reducing the population further could hardly have helped with his problem


----------



## belboid (Feb 28, 2021)

brogdale said:


> It's because your claim was laughable.


There it is again.


brogdale said:


> No, in 2008 _Counting the population_ questioned the very notion of a conventional 2021 Census and looked toward a more integrated, register based system of collating demographic data.


that's the one where they recommended ID cards. You sure you wanna quote that as being in your favour?

(i mentioned it earlier, its where they talk about a 'population register')


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

belboid said:


> There it is again.
> 
> that's the one where they recommended ID cards. You sure you wanna quote that as being in your favour?
> 
> (i mentioned it earlier, its where they talk about a 'population register')


 
The point in question is not whether or not I am “favoured” by any particular form of state data gathering, but what the neoliberal state itself wants.

It seems that during the last Labour government there was a view that dynamic data collection methodologies could replace the decadal static, snapshot censal exercise.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

belboid said:


> Lets hope you're a straight white man with no particular needs that are generally ill met by the state.


If there was any validity to such a crass observation, the logic would appear to suggest that the best way to effect improved state service provision would be by persuading large numbers of  “straight while men with no particular needs” not to return their census forms.


----------



## belboid (Feb 28, 2021)

brogdale said:


> The point in question is not whether or not I am “favoured” by any particular form of state data gathering, but what the neoliberal state itself wants..


It seems like the point is for you not to bother reading the links you post.   Seems to be a bit of a habit with you.    Anyway, you carry on, I’m sure you’re impressing yourself.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

belboid said:


> It seems like the point is for you not to bother reading the links you post.   Seems to be a bit of a habit with you.    Anyway, you carry on, I’m sure you’re impressing yourself.


Odd response.   

I'm not returning any census return because I'm unwilling to engage with a neoliberal state exercise engaging and enriching US defence corporations.

Beyond that, I'm happy to engage on this thread about any aspect of Census related matters and will challenge stuff that appears ill-thought through. Up to you whether or not you want to.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

So...I've been having a look at how the decision to go ahead with this census during the pandemic will impact folk like my very elderly, shielding parents.

Seems like they'll:
1. Get a letter offering them a code for online or a phone number to ring for paper.

They're not picking up/opening all mail now
If they do, they're likely to mis-place/forget/ignore
Same for paper version if they did get round to ringing for one
2. They'll get a reminder letter?

see above
3. An Adecco recruited fieldworker will call at their door to offer "assisted digital" entry

I encourage them not to answer the door unless they know who it is
but, supposing they do answer, the fieldworker proposes to enter their data at 2m distance from their doorstep
they're both deaf (to some degree) so this would involve a conversation, at some considerable volume, about their personal details with their front door open for half an hour (?) in March
this will all occur on the public pavement outside their terraced house, possibly in front of passers by and/or neighbours 
Can't say that this looks like a good prospect and all involving folk with a fair degree of confusion who's memory of the previous 7 or so census events will be about getting a form to fill in delivered to the door.


----------



## belboid (Feb 28, 2021)

Good thing they can ask for a form then, isnt it?


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

belboid said:


> Good thing they can ask for a form then, isnt it?


That's the point; I really don't think that they can.


----------



## belboid (Feb 28, 2021)

Well, guess what?  That's another thing you are wrong about. You could even do it on their behalf.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

belboid said:


> Well, guess what?  That's another thing you are wrong about. You could even do it on their behalf.


I think you've forgotten...I'm not engaging with the process myself, let alone for others.


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 28, 2021)

Silly man


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Silly man


All opinions are fine, but there will be old folks in the position I've described who don't have switched-on, engaged offspring on hand to help them.


----------



## platinumsage (Feb 28, 2021)

19force8 said:


> That respondents can answer using their identified gender. So, much the same as the guidance in the 2011 census.



Nothing new there:


----------



## belboid (Feb 28, 2021)

brogdale said:


> All opinions are fine, but there will be old folks in the position I've described who don't have switched-on, engaged offspring on hand to help them.


good thing they can just ask then.  As you intimated in the first post but then decided to contradict yourself cos, well, god knows why.


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 28, 2021)

brogdale said:


> All opinions are fine, but there will be old folks in the position I've described who don't have switched-on, engaged offspring on hand to help them.


That’s where people like me come in.


----------



## platinumsage (Feb 28, 2021)

Lots of cartoons about censuses past.

Wanker:


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

belboid said:


> good thing they can just ask then.  As you intimated in the first post but then decided to contradict yourself cos, well, god knows why.


Unless I've mis-read the stuff, it looks like that 'just asking' would presuppose they've picked up, opened, retained and responded to the phone number given. Given their confused and chaotic days I'm not at all certain any of that will/would happen.


----------



## belboid (Feb 28, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Unless I've mis-read the stuff...


I think we can take that as a given


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> That’s where people like me come in.


That's great, but there are folk who won't even know that such help exists or how it might be accessed. 
tbh, my main issue is that their days are such a mass of confusion and the effort of just surviving atm means this exercise is hardly like to register on their view.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

belboid said:


> I think we can take that as a given


"we"   

That's not an answer, but hey...


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 28, 2021)

brogdale said:


> That's great, but there are folk who won't even know that such help exists or how it might be accessed.
> tbh, my main issue is that their days are such a mass of confusion and the effort of just surviving atm means this exercise is hardly like to register on their view.


They’ll be informed that help is available


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

No, I think the 'timeline' of events I detailed above is really quite a possible outcome for my folks and quite a few other very old/vulnerable folk. A consequence of the ONS took the decision to plough ahead with the census during the pandemic.



> Seems like they'll:
> 1. Get a letter offering them a code for online or a phone number to ring for paper.
> 
> They're not picking up/opening all mail now
> ...


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> They’ll be informed that help is available


Go on...


----------



## belboid (Feb 28, 2021)

A very similar way to every other census. Dealing with elderly people for are a bit deaf and forgetful is not exactly new.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 28, 2021)

I am depressed at the lack of empathy for the fact that some people might not be in a position to immediately grasp that a census is happening, let alone just merrily go online to complete it or be happy to look up a phone number and chat on the phone to a stranger about it


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

belboid said:


> A very similar way to every other census. Dealing with elderly people for are a bit deaf and forgetful is not exactly new.


I get that, but the circumstance under which the ONS has decided to proceed with this census are new.
Elderly and vulnerable shielding folk who might have had support from family members in the past are on their own atm and the previous MO of fieldworkers going into houses to act as an amanuensis is inoperable.


----------



## belboid (Feb 28, 2021)

kabbes said:


> I am depressed at the lack of empathy for the fact that some people might not be in a position to immediately grasp that a census is happening, let alone just merrily go online to complete it or be happy to look up a phone number and chat on the phone to a stranger about it


There is no lack of empathy with such people.   There haven’t been any such people on the thread though.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 28, 2021)

belboid said:


> There is no lack of empathy with such people.   There haven’t been any such people on the thread though.


When presented with exactly that, your response has been to strenuously deny it's a problem.


----------



## belboid (Feb 28, 2021)

kabbes said:


> When presented with exactly that, your response has been to strenuously deny it's a problem.


No, I’m just not going along with some poster bullshitting reasons to have a pop.  Especially when said poster contradicts themselves.  

The very isolated are one of the key demographics the census aims to catch, a group who are often left out of other info gathering techniques. I find it a tad disingenuous to use them as an excuse for why the census is shit.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

belboid said:


> No, I’m just not going along with some poster bullshitting reasons to have a pop.  Especially when said poster contradicts themselves.
> 
> The very isolated are one of the key demographics the census aims to catch, a group who are often left out of other info gathering techniques. I find it a tad disingenuous to use them as an excuse for why the census is shit.


This is not about the census being shit, it's about the implications of the decision to forge ahead with the primarily digital data collecting exercise during the lockdown of a pandemic.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> They’ll be informed that help is available


Sorry, perhaps wasn't clear enough...how will they be identified and contacted?


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 28, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Go on...


Where?


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 28, 2021)

kabbes said:


> I am depressed at the lack of empathy for the fact that some people might not be in a position to immediately grasp that a census is happening, let alone just merrily go online to complete it or be happy to look up a phone number and chat on the phone to a stranger about it


That’s why people are knocking on doors


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Where?


Kent.


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 28, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Sorry, perhaps wasn't clear enough...how will they be identified and contacted?


Dunno


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> That’s why people are knocking on doors


My understanding is that the fieldwork only commences after the census day itself.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Dunno


OK fair enough.
My fear is that there's plenty that will be hard to contact or not even known about.


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 28, 2021)

brogdale said:


> My understanding is that the fieldwork only commences after the census day itself.


Yes, it starts tomorrow but goes on until May


----------



## belboid (Feb 28, 2021)

Which is exactly why we have a census.


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 28, 2021)

brogdale said:


> OK fair enough.
> My fear is that there's plenty that will be hard to contact or not even known about.


I’m sure they’ll at least get to everyone on the electoral rolls. I dunno though - not sure where they get people’s contact details


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Yes, it starts tomorrow but goes on until May


The door-knocking commences after March 21st according to this ONS website:


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> I’m sure they’ll at least get to everyone on the electoral rolls. I dunno though - not sure where they get people’s contact details


Yeah, but none of that seems to avoid the scenario that I foresaw for my confused old parents. If, as I think, they'll miss the whole thing, the first they'll hear from the Adecco recruits is when they're invited to reveal their personal details on the public path outside their front door. I'm not happy about that.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

belboid said:


> Which is exactly why we have a census.


It isn't; according to the ONS census data is anonymised.


----------



## belboid (Feb 28, 2021)

brogdale said:


> It isn't; according to the ONS census data is anonymised.


Eh? Of course it is once it’s collected.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

belboid said:


> Eh? Of course it is once it’s collected.


You're not making sense.


----------



## belboid (Feb 28, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Yeah, but none of that seems to avoid the scenario that I foresaw for my confused old parents. If, as I think, they'll miss the whole thing, the first they'll hear from the Adecco recruits is when they're invited to reveal their personal details on the public path outside their front door. I'm not happy about that.


They won’t be so invited.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

belboid said:


> They won’t be so invited.


Go on...


----------



## belboid (Feb 28, 2021)

They’ll be given a reminder, a phone number, or even a contact centre place to visit if/when they can open.   Or they’ll be given the form, they might even have been sent one initially.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

belboid said:


> They’ll be given a reminder, a phone number, or even a contact centre place to visit if/when they can open.   Or they’ll be given the form, they might even have been sent one initially.


OK, that's useful to know.
So, they'll be asked to write down a number/accept a card (?) and then make a phone call (they're housebound so they won't be visiting any 'centre'). If they're given a form who will collect it?


----------



## belboid (Feb 28, 2021)

They can hand it to an enumerator or take it to a post box, with the sae that was included.


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 28, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Go on...


Why don’t you read up on this?


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 28, 2021)

brogdale said:


> OK, that's useful to know.
> So, they'll be asked to write down a number/accept a card (?) and then make a phone call (they're housebound so they won't be visiting any 'centre'). If they're given a form who will collect it?


It’s all done over the phone if you need help


----------



## kabbes (Feb 28, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> That’s why people are knocking on doors


And you see no issue with people knocking on the doors of confused old people in the middle of a pandemic and asking questions about personal information?

ETA: it doesn't have to be asking _for_ personal information.  They are asking _about _personal information, in the sense that they are giving out a form that requests personal information be sent off to some postal address.  I am amazed that anybody can't see an issue with this, in a world in which identity theft is so fucking rife that we are being bombarded with adverts telling us not to do the exact thing that is happening here.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

belboid said:


> They can hand it to an enumerator or take it to a post box, with the sae that was included.


No, they can't get to the postbox. So a collection of the paper return will be arranged?


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> It’s all done over the phone if you need help


They have call screening BT phones and only answer numbers logged in their memory.


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 28, 2021)

brogdale said:


> They have call screening BT phones and only answer numbers logged in their memory.


No, you call us up and we make an appointment to help you over the phone


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 28, 2021)

brogdale said:


> No, they can't get to the postbox. So a collection of the paper return will be arranged?


They can do it on the phone. Getting a bit fed of repeating myself here. Go have a read up on it


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> They can do it on the phone. Getting a bit fed of repeating myself here. Go have a read up on it


tbh, just saying things like 'they can do it' doesn't really fit with my experience of the life of isolated, confused older/vulnerable people.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> No, *you* call us up and we make an appointment to help you over the phone


It's not me; it's my confused, isolated 90 YO parents.


----------



## belboid (Feb 28, 2021)

kabbes said:


> And you see no issue with people knocking on the doors of confused old people in the middle of a pandemic and asking questions about personal information?
> 
> ETA: it doesn't have to be asking _for_ personal information.  They are asking _about _personal information, in the sense that they are giving out a form that requests personal information be sent off to some postal address.  I am amazed that anybody can't see an issue with this, in a world in which identity theft is so fucking rife that we are being bombarded with adverts telling us not to do the exact thing that is happening here.


as just said, they wont be asking about personal information on the doorstep. And, yes, the census requires personal information, so do a fuck of a lot of things, because sometimes it is useful and necessary.


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 28, 2021)

brogdale said:


> tbh, just saying things like 'they can do it' doesn't really fit with my experience of the life of isolated, confused older/vulnerable people.


It will be explained, I’m sure


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 28, 2021)

brogdale said:


> It's not me; it's my confused, isolated 90 YO parents.


Are they typing your words?


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> It will be explained, I’m sure


OK, hmmm


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Are they typing your words?


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 28, 2021)

brogdale said:


>


You’re asking these dumb questions not them


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> You’re asking these dumb questions not them


I don't think they're dumb questions.
As a helper, do you really think they are?


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 28, 2021)

brogdale said:


> I don't think they're dumb questions.
> As a helper, do you really think they are?


Yes, from you. But not from people who struggle with tech or cannot access the information themselves


----------



## kabbes (Feb 28, 2021)

belboid said:


> as just said, they wont be asking about personal information on the doorstep. And, yes, the census requires personal information, so do a fuck of a lot of things, because sometimes it is useful and necessary.


They will be asking about personal information.  They will be asking a confused older person to fill out a form with their personal information and send it off to an address.  This comprises an action in the set of actions “asking about personal information”

Now, I don’t have a problem with the census. I’ll certainly be filling it out myself. It definitely facilitates the exercise of power in order to control the populace but its position on the list of things that do this, I doubt manages to get into the six figures.

This isn’t about doing the census, though, it’s about how you engage with the public.  The messages you give to people are important.  They need to be clear and consistent.  The clear and consistent message that benefits those more confused by the modern world is: don’t give your data to people.  This is the issue you need to work around to deal with the problem of how to record the details of confused older people.  And you don’t solve any problem by simply pretending it’s _not a problem_!


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Yes, from you. But not from people who struggle with tech or cannot access the information themselves


I'd give yourself a little while to think about what you've just said there, tbh.


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 28, 2021)

brogdale said:


> I'd give yourself a little while to think about what you've just said there, tbh.


You are able to find these things out by Googling. Not everyone is IT literate. Some may not even be aware of the census. You are and have had plenty of time to find out the answers to the questions you’ve been asking. 
If you called up the helpline and I answer I would help you.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 28, 2021)

Thus spake Orang Utan, legendary non-empath.  The perfect man to have on a helpline


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 28, 2021)

kabbes said:


> Thus spake Orang Utan, legendary non-empath.  The perfect man to have on a helpline


Fuck off, I’m good at my job. You are finally going on ignore


----------



## kabbes (Feb 28, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Fuck off, I’m good at my job. You are finally going on ignore


Ah.  Irony from the man that delights in throwing totally unprovoked personal insults at me out of context on innocent, non-confrontational threads.  It’s okay apparently to say all sorts to me, but calling you a non-empath sends you over the edge.

I’m delighted for you to not engage with anything I say.  I can’t remember anything positive ever once having come of it.


----------



## belboid (Feb 28, 2021)

kabbes said:


> They will be asking about personal information.  They will be asking a confused older person to fill out a form with their personal information and send it off to an address.  This comprises an action in the set of actions “asking about personal information”
> 
> Now, I don’t have a problem with the census. I’ll certainly be filling it out myself. It definitely facilitates the exercise of power in order to control the populace but its position on the list of things that do this, I doubt manages to get into the six figures.
> 
> This isn’t about doing the census, though, it’s about how you engage with the public.  The messages you give to people are important.  They need to be clear and consistent.  The clear and consistent message that benefits those more confused by the modern world is: don’t give your data to people.  This is the issue you need to work around to deal with the problem of how to record the details of confused older people.  And you don’t solve any problem by simply pretending it’s _not a problem_!


this is all very confused, Are you saying that elderly people should never confirm their name?  As that clearly falls within your set of actions “asking about personal information.”  That would be a tad foolish, to say the least.

Such people will be dealt with sympathetically, attempts can be made to help them find someone they would be comfortable with supporting them to fill it in (when that is legal).  Any workers, and the form itself, will be clearly identified as 'important government information' or somesuch and there will be a wide variety of methods available to check it is official. With any such exercise there is a small risk of someone trying to scam it, pretend to be a worker to gain access so it is probably wise to make sure they know all about it in advance, as far as practicable, and that officers are not meant to be entering houses.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> You are able to find these things out by Googling. Not everyone is IT literate. Some may not even be aware of the census. You are and have had plenty of time to find out the answers to the questions you’ve been asking.
> If you called up the helpline and I answer I would help you.


OK.
The questions I've asked you are the ones that I've not been able to find out from google, like how will the state necessarily know that my old Mum & Dad are confused, knackered and not bothered.
The stuff i have been able to find out from Google is this; if they don't get to engage with the census return as the state wants, this will happen:

_An Adecco recruited fieldworker will call at their door to offer "assisted digital" entry_

_I encourage them not to answer the door unless they know who it is_
_but, supposing they do answer, the fieldworker proposes to enter their data at 2m distance from their doorstep_
_they're both deaf (to some degree) so this would involve a conversation, at some considerable volume, about their personal details with their front door open for half an hour (?) in March_
_this will all occur on the public pavement outside their terraced house, possibly in front of passers by and/or neighbours_
I'm not happy about that.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 28, 2021)

belboid said:


> this is all very confused, Are you saying that elderly people should never confirm their name?  As that clearly falls within your set of actions “asking about personal information.”  That would be a tad foolish, to say the least.
> 
> Such people will be dealt with sympathetically, attempts can be made to help them find someone they would be comfortable with supporting them to fill it in (when that is legal).  Any workers, and the form itself, will be clearly identified as 'important government information' or somesuch and there will be a wide variety of methods available to check it is official. With any such exercise there is a small risk of someone trying to scam it, pretend to be a worker to gain access so it is probably wise to make sure they know all about it in advance, as far as practicable, and that officers are not meant to be entering houses.


I don’t think that the census workers themselves are the issue here.  And I don’t think it’s an insoluble problem either.  I was objecting to the blanket insistence that there was nothing  to be solved in the first place.


----------



## belboid (Feb 28, 2021)

brogdale said:


> OK.
> The questions I've asked you are the ones that I've not been able to find out from google, like how will the state necessarily know that my old Mum & Dad are confused, knackered and not bothered.
> The stuff i have been able to find out from Google is this; if they don't get to engage with the census return as the state wants, this will happen:
> 
> ...


Why ae you asking a question which has already been answered? When you first asked it.  I refer you back to that.


----------



## belboid (Feb 28, 2021)

kabbes said:


> I don’t think that the census workers themselves are the issue here.  And I don’t think it’s an insoluble problem either.  I was objecting to the blanket insistence that there was nothing  to be solved in the first place.


you were the only person who thought there were any such blanket insistence.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 28, 2021)

belboid said:


> you were the only person who thought there were any such blanket insistence.


Oh come on.  Both you and OU were saying (and OU still is saying) that brogdale’s parents don’t present a difficulty because somebody will just knock on their door and couldn’t apparently see any issue with this solution at all.  Plus they can just Google and/or phone a helpline.


----------



## belboid (Feb 28, 2021)

kabbes said:


> Oh come.  Both you and OU were saying (and OU still is saying) that brogdale’s parents don’t present a difficulty because somebody will just knock on their door and couldn’t apparently see any issue with this solution at all.


or perhaps we are just a bit sick of brogdale's dubious doubts.   Beyond that, such issues aren't new.  Usually there is a neighbour or family member who is happy to help them, which is obviously trickier at the moment, but quite possible if they have care needs and are thus allowed visitors.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 28, 2021)

belboid said:


> such issues aren't new.  Usually there is a neighbour or family member who is happy to help them, which is obviously trickier at the moment, but quite possible if they have care needs and are thus allowed visitors.


Right.  But we aren’t in that state right now and that presents a unique problem.  To me, it seems that the whole process should have been delayed a year until that was not the case.


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 28, 2021)

I agree that it shouldn’t be happening this year and that Addeco should have their contract withdrawn. But it’s too late for that now


----------



## belboid (Feb 28, 2021)

kabbes said:


> Right.  But we aren’t in that state right now and that presents a unique problem.  To me, it seems that the whole process should have been delayed a year until that was not the case.


as I said at the beginning, this is part of why i think there is a tory plot to make it a bit rubbish as an excuse to do away with it. Which is why it is depressing to see some going along with them.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

belboid said:


> Why ae you asking a question which has already been answered? When you first asked it.  I refer you back to that.


No, that question hasn't been answered at all.
You said that "they can ask for a form" which makes many assumptions about how they might perceive what they're being asked to do, their ability to analyse what they're told and act on that.

Ultimately, if they fail to comply in the way that the Adecco recruit wants, they will be asked to divulge personal details on their doorstep on the public footpath outside their house.
That seems like a pretty shabby position to be put in when you're 90 and confused about most things.


----------



## belboid (Feb 28, 2021)

If only they knew someone who could help them.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

belboid said:


> If only they knew someone who could help them.


Not everyone does; that's the point.
And in a time of lockdown they'll be others that might, in other circs , have been able to access support.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2021)

The trouble is that the planning for 'digital assistance' for the 'digitally excluded' was, obviously, undertaken pre-pandemic when inviting old /vulnerable people into centres where they could be helped probably looked like a nice idea.

In a lockdown that 'assistance' is going to take the form of doorstep, socially distanced digital inputting.


----------



## William of Walworth (Mar 1, 2021)

Acanthus said:
			
		

> Belboid: Your response is not only ad hominem, but also crude and makes no logical sense.  Sorry, but it's impossible to reason with such replies.  Don't be surprised if I ignore similar of what some may call 'drivel'.





belboid said:


> Your post was sanctimonious drivel *with no content*.



I disagree. For me, that earlier post from Acanthus had some interesting content about the Mayor of Stroud's position that I'd never heard about before.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 1, 2021)

William of Walworth said:


> I disagree. For me, that earlier post from Acanthus had some interesting content about the Mayor of Stroud's position that I'd never heard about before.


Won't be long before acanthus leaves _gets coat_


----------



## brogdale (Mar 1, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Won't be long before acanthus leaves _gets coat_


VG   
But on a semi-serious note; you can hardly blame them if they did decide to withdraw from the thread when greeted with a 'reply' like this:


belboid said:


> No, you’re up your own arse wankers who are stealing £3000 from your community. There is no campaign this time same as their wasn’t in 2001 because no one really gives a fuck but you were manipulated by cleverer people out to abolish the census. And at least the mayor of Stroud campaigned publicly against the l&m involvement


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 1, 2021)

brogdale said:


> VG
> But on a semi-serious note; you can hardly blame them if they did decide to withdraw from the thread when greeted with a 'reply' like this:


I'm surprised anyone sticks around here tbh


----------



## brogdale (Mar 1, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> I'm surprised anyone sticks around here tbh


Certainly been a great deal of personalised abuse thrown around.  
Shame; I thought it would be an interesting topic for discussion.


----------



## belboid (Mar 1, 2021)

William of Walworth said:


> I disagree. For me, that earlier post from Acanthus had some interesting content about the Mayor of Stroud's position that I'd never heard about before.


Yes the greens led a campaign last time.  This time ten years ago it had already been running for four years.   They don’t seem to be doing so this year, probably because they have just about enough honesty to recognise when something had completely and utterly failed.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 1, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Certainly been a great deal of personalised abuse thrown around.


yes, you called me a "goon".


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 1, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> yes, you called me a "goon".


Depends whether he means you as Neddy Seagoon or Eccles


----------



## brogdale (Mar 1, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> yes, you called me a "goon".


Not directly, but nonetheless I apologise for any offence caused.
It was wrong of me to categorise all of the ONS staff recruited by Adecco as "goons"; I have subsequently learned that it is only as subset of the field staff that will be specially trained to conduct formal interviews under caution.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 1, 2021)

I don't really care either way, but it is probably part of the reason why it didn't end up being the "interesting debate" that was envisaged.

I have learnt some things that might be useful though in any case! So it has been useful on the whole


----------



## brogdale (Mar 1, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> I don't really care either way, but it is probably part of the reason why it didn't end up being the "interesting debate" that was envisaged.


Interesting that you ascribe the failure of the thread to the one instance of "offence" you attribute to the OPer.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 1, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Interesting that you ascribe the failure of the thread to the one instance of "offence" you attribute to the OPer.


"part of the reason".


----------



## brogdale (Mar 1, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> "part of the reason".


No doubt the thread will move on as more Urbs get the paperwork through the door.


----------



## planetgeli (Mar 1, 2021)

BTW rutabowa I've just remembered that besides that morning's 2 hour 'training' I got where they were just basically panicking about the logistics I did get 2 days in a fancy seaside hotel as well. Cannot remember a single thing we did there, apart from the breakfast and evening meal, but I'm sure we did something. Are you getting the 2 day hotel gig? And aren't you meant to be on training this morning?


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 1, 2021)

planetgeli said:


> BTW rutabowa I've just remembered that besides that morning's 2 hour 'training' I got where they were just basically panicking about the logistics I did get 2 days in a fancy seaside hotel as well. Cannot remember a single thing we did there, apart from the breakfast and evening meal, but I'm sure we did something. Are you getting the 2 day hotel gig? And aren't you meant to be on training this morning?


I'm nearly there!

Most of the training is online, this is just half an hour to check docs and pick up stuff


----------



## belboid (Mar 1, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Shame; I thought it would be an interesting topic for discussion.


?? This is page 12, there has clearly been a fair amount of discussion.   Yet another complaint with no basis in reality.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 1, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> I'm nearly there!
> 
> Most of the training is online, this is just half an hour to check docs and pick up stuff


Are you going to be one of the door-to door fieldworkers?


----------



## brogdale (Mar 1, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Not directly, but nonetheless I apologise for any offence caused.
> It was wrong of me to categorise all of the ONS staff recruited by Adecco as "goons"; I have subsequently learned that it is only as subset of the field staff that will be specially trained to conduct formal interviews under caution.
> 
> View attachment 256759


Just a reminder to anyone else considering non-compliance with this census that to avoid the CPS being able to mount a case against you, it is important not to divulge any details when the 'specially trained' units come knocking on your door after March 21st. Best option is obviously not to answer the door to them, but if you do happen to be confronted...stay quiet. If they don't know who you are they can't prosecute.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 1, 2021)

The 2011 experience of councillor Marjoram should act as a warning to anyone answering the door to the specially trained Addeco compliance units:


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 1, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Are you going to be one of the door-to door fieldworkers?


Yes


----------



## belboid (Mar 1, 2021)

She got a summons because she publicly announced she was refusing to comply and was willing to be fined.  She acted as part of a campaign which hoped to make a difference (although it didn’t).  Fair play to her, I have complete respect for those making such a stand.   Her answering the door will almost definitely have been entirely irrelevant to the prosecution.   

Plus, after Christmas?? I doubt adecco will employ anyone for ten months


----------



## Sasaferrato (Mar 1, 2021)

Count Cuckula said:


> Am I likely to actually get trouble if I don't do this census? Don't like the idea of giving my info to nosey capitalist organisations.


The fine is £1000.00 IIRC.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 1, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> Yes


I see. 
Are you able to confirm what I've read on the ONS site that:
a) door-to-door fieldwork will take place following the actual census day date of March 21st
b) fieldworkers will input household data (socially distanced) at the doorstep if the householder has not been able to return an online or written form?


----------



## brogdale (Mar 1, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> The fine is £1000.00 IIRC.


Maximum.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 1, 2021)

brogdale said:


> The 2011 experience of councillor Marjoram should act as a warning to anyone answering the door to the specially trained Addeco compliance units:
> 
> View attachment 256771
> 
> View attachment 256773


yeh but the thing we want to know is did this interruption fuck his lunch?


----------



## brogdale (Mar 1, 2021)

belboid said:


> She got a summons because she publicly announced she was refusing to comply and was willing to be fined.  She acted as part of a campaign which hoped to make a difference (although it didn’t).  Fair play to her, I have complete respect for those making such a stand.   *Her answering the door will almost definitely have been entirely irrelevant to the prosecution.  *
> 
> Plus, after Christmas?? I doubt adecco will employ anyone for ten months


No, I think you're quite wrong about that.
The CPS would not proceed on the basis of reported statements in the media; the ONS make quite clear that successful prosecutions result from direct evidence of wilful non-compliance collected by "specially trained field staff" conducting formal interviews under caution as determined by PACE:


----------



## belboid (Mar 1, 2021)

Maybe, but he will have been targeted due to his openness.  And if he was done after Christmas, are you really saying no one should answer their door for nine months??!!  Seems a tad impractical.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 1, 2021)

As a reassurance to anyone else considering non-compliance, the chances of prosecution are vanishingly remote.

Of the 1.6M missing households in 2011, only 12,000 received follow-up household visits from the "specially trained" units, (0.75%), and only 157 of those cases proceeded to court, (0.0098%), leading to 120 convictions, (0.0075%).

Roughly a 1 in 13,000 chance of prosecution.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 1, 2021)

brogdale said:


> I see.
> Are you able to confirm what I've read on the ONS site that:
> a) door-to-door fieldwork will take place following the actual census day date of March 21st
> b) fieldworkers will input household data (socially distanced) at the doorstep if the householder has not been able to return an online or written form?


I know it is starting next monday, so before march 21st. I should find out the rest this week.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 1, 2021)

belboid said:


> Maybe, but he will have been targeted due to his openness.  And if he was done after Christmas, are you really saying no one should answer their door for nine months??!!  Seems a tad impractical.


No; earlier in the thread I suggested that, if the door were answered to the "specially trained" unit, declining to answer questions at the door appeared to be the best way to avoid offering evidence of wilful non-compliance. If the authorities don't know who you are, they can't prosecute.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 1, 2021)

brogdale said:


> No; earlier in the thread I suggested that, if the door were answered to the "specially trained" unit, declining to answer questions at the door appeared to be the best way to avoid offering evidence of wilful non-compliance. If the authorities don't know who you are, they can't prosecute.


i don't suppose there's any power of entry which might require engagement with the census people in the first place.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 1, 2021)

‘Specially trained’ makes it sound like they’re crack troops like the SAS or something.
I’d just say ‘trained’, or even ‘barely trained’


----------



## brogdale (Mar 1, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> ‘Specially trained’ makes it sound like they’re crack troops like the SAS or something.
> I’d just say ‘trained’, or even ‘barely trained’


I'm using the wording used by the ONS; I have no idea what it means in practice.


----------



## belboid (Mar 1, 2021)

brogdale said:


> As a reassurance to anyone else considering non-compliance, the chances of prosecution are vanishingly remote.
> 
> Of the 1.6M missing households in 2011, only 12,000 received follow-up household visits from the "specially trained" units, (0.75%), and only 157 of those cases proceeded to court, (0.0098%), leading to 120 convictions, (0.0075%).
> 
> Roughly a 1 in 13,000 chance of prosecution.


100% chance of being a selfish cunt, 0% chance of making a difference to anything.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 1, 2021)

I know, I was just laughing at the language they used


----------



## brogdale (Mar 1, 2021)

belboid said:


> 100% chance of being a selfish cunt, 0% chance of making a difference to anything.


Unwarranted personal abuse being rarely heuristic of a successful argument.


----------



## belboid (Mar 1, 2021)

One never has a ‘successful argument’ with conspiraloons and on this topic you are well and truly in that camp.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 1, 2021)

belboid said:


> One never has a ‘successful argument’ with conspiraloons and on this topic you are well and truly in that camp.


Oh dear; back to that.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 1, 2021)

I wouldn't assume anything online at the moment is an up to date summary of how it will work; I get the feeling it has been changed right till the last minute because of covid, and noone has had the training yet.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 1, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> I wouldn't assume anything online at the moment is an up to date summary of how it will work; I get the feeling it has been changed right till the last minute because of covid, and noone has had the training yet.


Interesting to hear your first-hand account from the workers' point of view.
Again, the Scottish decision to delay for a year looks like a sound one.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 1, 2021)

brogdale said:


> b) fieldworkers will input household data (socially distanced) at the doorstep if the householder has not been able to return an online or written form?


I can answer this now: that definitely would not be allowed if there was any chance that a third party could overhear.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 1, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> I can answer this now: that definitely would not be allowed if there was any chance that a third party could overhear.


Good to know; thanks.
Sure rules that out for a lot of terraced/front-door onto pavement properties, then.


----------



## William of Walworth (Mar 1, 2021)

brogdale said:
			
		

> b) fieldworkers will input household data (socially distanced) at the doorstep if the householder has not been able to return an online or written form?






			
				rutabowa said:
			
		

> I can answer this now: that definitely would not be allowed if there was any chance that a third party could overhear.





brogdale said:


> Good to know; thanks.
> Sure rules that out for *a lot of terraced/front-door onto pavement properties, then*.



Such as our house! 

(and yes, it actually *+is+* in the middle of the street  )

But we'll be complying with the state authorities on-line anyway


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> I know it is starting next monday, so before march 21st. I should find out the rest this week.


Any idea what the fieldworkers tasked from next Monday will be doing door-to-door?


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 2, 2021)

No, at least not accurately. I only started yesterday and the training is all week. Like I said, I should have more information by friday; anything else would be speculation/guessing.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> No, at least not accurately. I only started yesterday and the training is all week. Like I said, I should have more information by friday; anything else would be speculation/guessing.


I suppose one consequence of going ahead in the face of the pandemic/lockdown is that things will inevitably be very 'last minute'.


----------



## belboid (Mar 2, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> No, at least not accurately. I only started yesterday and the training is all week. Like I said, I should have more information by friday; anything else would be speculation/guessing.


What, have they not given you your invisible hypodermic so you can inject the 5G chip into people yet? Something is amiss


----------



## A380 (Mar 2, 2021)

belboid said:


> What, have they not given you your invisible hypodermic so you can inject the 5G chip into people yet? Something is amiss


Don’t be stupid you conspialoon. Everyone knows census staff will use an  aerosol mind control agent not an injection.


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 2, 2021)

Received and completed within 10 minutes 

I didn't argue the toss over what it says on my browny-purple passport valid until 2025, but I gave my "national Identity" as "European".


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 2, 2021)

Just finished this online


----------



## bellaozzydog (Mar 2, 2021)

Pirate FM is pumping locals to state nationality as “Cornish” if they feel “Cornish”


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

bellaozzydog said:


> Pirate FM is pumping locals to state nationality as “Cornish” if they feel “Cornish”


Seems fair enough; question 14 asks "_How would you describe your national identity?" _so, if that's how you would describe it, that's the correct response.


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 2, 2021)

If I'm honest, I identify with a very small part of Bristol where I live - there are certainly large parts of the city where I don't feel at home - notably the area where I grew up and where my siblings live...
I've totally lost any fellow feeling with the country as a whole - though I find much of the world a lot more scary.
I'm hoping to one day formally become a citizen of another country which is a dilemma... once again I suspect I will develop an affection for the local area - though I'm quite likely to find myself surrounded by second homes - and who knows, I might thereby strike up friendships with wealthy metropolitans ...


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 2, 2021)

gentlegreen said:


> If I'm honest, I identify with a very small part of Bristol where I live - there are certainly large parts of the city where I don't feel at home - notably the area where I grew up and where my siblings live...
> I've totally lost any fellow feeling with the country as a whole - though I find much of the world a lot more scary.
> I'm hoping to one day formally become a citizen of another country which is a dilemma... once again I suspect I will develop an affection for the local area - though I'm quite likely to find myself surrounded by second homes - and who knows, I might thereby strike up friendships with wealthy metropolitans ...


What's wrong with striking friendships with wealthy metropolitans on here?


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 2, 2021)

You guys could all be sophisticated bots


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 2, 2021)

I did one yesterday and they let me put Scottish/NZ 
I wonder if there’ll be Jedis again or summat else as daft


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> I did one yesterday and they let me put Scottish/NZ
> I wonder if there’ll be Jedis again or summat else as daft


tbf to those claiming to be of the Jedi religion, the state does invite the response _any other religion (write in). _And including a fictional belief system seems every bit as credible as any of the first 7 options...for obvious reasons.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 2, 2021)

Except it isn’t a religion


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Except it isn’t a religion


Invite folk to respond about supernatural belief systems and you're gonna get some strange answers.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 2, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Invite folk to respond about supernatural belief systems and you're gonna get some strange answers.


That’s not the point


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> That’s not the point


What is the point?


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 2, 2021)

brogdale said:


> What is the point?


Putting Jedi is daft and a lie


----------



## kabbes (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Putting Jedi is daft and a lie


So is Christianity.  At least Jediism doesn’t pretend you can _physically_ come back to life, just that you can be a spooooooky ghost.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 2, 2021)

kabbes said:


> So is Christianity.  At least Jediism doesn’t pretend you can _physically_ come back to life, just that you can be a spooooooky ghost.


Christianity is a religion though and its adherents are (largely) not pretending


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Putting Jedi is daft and a lie


Not if those responding believe it to be true, and it is a voluntary question so it's not an offence to put whatever you like in those.
It rather begs the question of what value voluntary questions are and why the state wants to know about supernatural beliefs in the first place.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 2, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Not if those responding believe it to be true, and it is a voluntary question so it's not an offence to put whatever you like in those.
> It rather begs the question of what value voluntary questions are and why the state wants to know about supernatural beliefs in the first place.


People only put Jedi down as a joke. It’s not real.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> People only put Jedi down as a joke. It’s not real.


If they truly believe, who are you to say otherwise?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 2, 2021)

What is a religion?  There are many people who take Jediism very seriously as a structured system of spirituality.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 2, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Seems fair enough; question 14 asks "_How would you describe your national identity?" _so, if that's how you would describe it, that's the correct response.


Would that include “none”?


----------



## A380 (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> People only put Jedi down as a joke. It’s not real.


The Force is strong with this one. This is not the thread you are looking for.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Christianity is a religion though and its adherents are (largely) not pretending


Hardly any Christians I know have any real hard belief in the Bible as the literal word of God, as evidenced by their ignoring of its doctrines (surely the last thing you’d do if you really believed it).  They are just soft C of E types that like the community of it.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> Would that include “none”?


Yep, they offer the box labelled "Other" (write in) and, if you wanted to respond to the census, and that's how you describe your nationality, then...yeah, go for it!


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 2, 2021)

brogdale said:


> If they truly believe, who are you to say otherwise?


They don’t


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 2, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Yep, they offer the box labelled "Other" (write in) and, if you wanted to respond to the census, and that's how you describe your nationality, then...yeah, go for it!
> 
> View attachment 256989


We don’t get the option until ‘22, but it’s worth the troll.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Yep, they offer the box labelled "Other" (write in) and, if you wanted to respond to the census, and that's how you describe your nationality, then...yeah, go for it!
> 
> View attachment 256989


Just don't let Theresa May know!


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> They don’t


Seeing into others' souls...impressive.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 2, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Seeing into others' souls...impressive.


Come off it, you know it’s not a religion and is just put down as a laugh


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Come off it, you know it’s not a religion and is just put down as a laugh


Genuinely don't know what unknown people believe?
How do you know?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> People only put Jedi down as a joke. It’s not real.


so you say Jedi Church - Jedi Religion and Jedi Faith


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 2, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Genuinely don't know what unknown people believe?
> How do you know?


he doesn't


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 2, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Genuinely don't know what unknown people believe?
> How do you know?


Stop with this daftness. You’re aware of the films


----------



## A380 (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Stop with this daftness. You’re aware of the films


An elegant post from a more civilised age.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Stop with this daftness. You’re aware of the films


There’s a Church of John Coltrane.  They know he was a jazz musician.  It’s tempting to think they’re just jazz fans with a heightened sense of metaphor, but they claim to be sincere.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Stop with this daftness. You’re aware of the films


I once saw that shitty Robert Powell film about Jesus; doesn't mean I know whether Christians' believe all the stuff they say they do.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 2, 2021)

brogdale said:


> I once saw that shitty Robert Powell film about Jesus; doesn't mean I know whether Christians' believe all the stuff they say they do.


You can’t really compare them.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> You can’t really compare them.


I just did, but I still don't know how you know what these folk all believe.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

If the state regarded some responses as invalid expressions of supernatural belief systems they could, of course, make that explicit on the census form and offer a list of unacceptable religions.
Otherwise, we have to assume that the state values all these responses.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 2, 2021)

brogdale said:


> I just did, but I still don't know how you know what these folk all believe.


I’ve seen the films. They’re definitely made up.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> I’ve seen the films. They’re definitely made up.


The films are real; they depict a fictional narrative.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> I’ve seen the films. They’re definitely made up.


so what you're saying is nothing in those films are real. nothing. jedis, lasers, the ewoks, the notion of men and women, androids - none of it exists outside the star wars universe.


----------



## planetgeli (Mar 2, 2021)

brogdale said:


> The films are real; they depict a fictional narrative.



Not too dissimilar to the bible but with a touch more consistency.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 2, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> so what you're saying is nothing in those films are real. nothing. jedis, lasers, the ewoks, the notion of men and women, androids - none of it exists outside the star wars universe.





brogdale said:


> The films are real; they depict a fictional narrative.


Quite. So no one sincerely believes in it as a religion.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Quite. So no one sincerely believes in it as a religion.


apparently - and unsurprisingly - you're wrong. ‘You have to face the darkness within you’: meet the real-life Jedi knights


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Quite. So no one sincerely believes in it as a religion.


Again, who are you to peer into other people's souls and judge the sincerity of their supernatural beliefs?


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 2, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Again, who are you to peer into other people's souls and judge the sincerity of their supernatural beliefs?


We seem to be going round in circles. The Jedis and their belief were made up by George Lucas and its adherents know this


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> We seem to be going round in circles. The Jedis and their belief were made up by George Lucas and its adherents know this


Whereas other religious belief systems were not 'made up'?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> We seem to be going round in circles. The Jedis and their belief were made up by George Lucas and its adherents know this


that's nothing, islam was made up by mohammed and everyone knows this


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 2, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Whereas other religious belief systems were not 'made up'?


Of course but their faith is still real


----------



## kabbes (Mar 2, 2021)

Scientology is based on a science fiction book.  Is that also not a religion?


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 2, 2021)

Sadly there are those who might legitimately claim all manner of conspiraloonery as religion.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Of course but their faith is still real


Again, such judgement.

The Census question asks respondents to say "_What is your religion?", _there's no guidance regarding the timeframe of acceptable origin or whether or not their faith in the religion is "real".

Seems like a junk question, tbh.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 2, 2021)

kabbes said:


> Scientology is based on a science fiction book.  Is that also not a religion?


 No


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> No


It is if people include it in their response to question 16 on the census, and the state will record it as such under the "Other religions" category.


----------



## Santino (Mar 2, 2021)

kabbes said:


> Hardly any Christians I know have any real hard belief in the Bible as the literal word of God, as evidenced by their ignoring of its doctrines (surely the last thing you’d do if you really believed it).  They are just soft C of E types that like the community of it.


Yeah but you don't have to believe that the Bible is the word of God to be a Christian. That's a very parvenu aspect.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 2, 2021)

brogdale said:


> It is if people include it in their response to question 16 on the census, and the state will record it as such under the "Other religions" category.


No, it’s a blank field so people can put down anything they want


----------



## kabbes (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> No


I see.  You should keep an annual register for the world to consult.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 2, 2021)

Santino said:


> Yeah but you don't have to believe that the Bible is the word of God to be a Christian. That's a very parvenu aspect.


You’re probably supposed to if you are C of E or a Catholic though


----------



## Sasaferrato (Mar 2, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> apparently - and unsurprisingly - you're wrong. ‘You have to face the darkness within you’: meet the real-life Jedi knights



Well, if Scientology is recognised as a kosher religion, pretty much anything can be.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 2, 2021)

kabbes said:


> I see.  You should keep an annual register for the world to consult.


Thanks


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

Santino said:


> Yeah but you don't have to believe that the Bible is the word of God to be a Christian. That's a very parvenu aspect.


Yes, in 2011 33.2 million people (59.3 per cent of the population) recorded their religion as Christian; it would be surprising if all of them believed that the Bible is the word of God.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Mar 2, 2021)

kabbes said:


> Scientology is based on a science fiction book.  Is that also not a religion?



No it is a fucking kleptocracy.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 2, 2021)

Sasaferrato said:


> No it is a fucking kleptocracy.


Mind you, so is Roman Catholicism and other churches


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> No, it’s a blank field so people can put down anything they want


exactly; as opposed to those that actively choose the "No Religion" option; it is therefore officially recorded by the state as a religion and included within the "other religion" category.


----------



## Santino (Mar 2, 2021)

kabbes said:


> You’re probably supposed to if you are C of E or a Catholic though


Not Catholic. It was the Protestants who pushed the Bible as the sole authority, the Church of Rome depended more on the unbroken link with St Peter and thus Christ himself. Of course, the Protestants had no textual support for the Bible as the sole authority, because nowhere in the Bible does it say that it is itself the only authority.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 2, 2021)

Santino said:


> Not Catholic. It was the Protestants who pushed the Bible as the sole authority, the Church of Rome depended more on the unbroken link with St Peter and thus Christ himself. Of course, the Protestants had no textual support for the Bible as the sole authority, because nowhere in the Bible does it say that it is itself the only authority.


“I’ma Christian but the Bible is a load of balls” is a tough sell.


----------



## Santino (Mar 2, 2021)

kabbes said:


> “I’ma Christian but the Bible is a load of balls” is a tough sell.


It's more of a Vision Statement than a Operating Plan though, isn't it? Let alone a procedural manual.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 2, 2021)

brogdale said:


> exactly; as opposed to those that actively choose the "No Religion" option; it is therefore officially recorded by the state as a religion and included within the "other religion" category.


Doesn’t mean it’s a religion.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Doesn’t mean it’s a religion.


According to the state, (ONS), it does. If believers in Scientology thought it were not a religion they could tick the "No religion" box.
All of which, again, brings into focus the value of the question.


----------



## A380 (Mar 2, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> that's nothing, islam was made up by mohammed and everyone knows this


Can I have your watch?


----------



## belboid (Mar 2, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> We don’t get the option until ‘22, but it’s worth the troll.


It's as useful to know as knowing if someone considers themself to be English rather than British, or whatever, so why the hell not?


----------



## belboid (Mar 2, 2021)

brogdale said:


> According to the state, (ONS), it does. If believers in Scientology thought it were not a religion they could tick the "No religion" box.
> All of which, again, brings into focus the value of the question.


massive logic fail there.


Such data is collated and released - 81 people put heavy metal as their religion in Sheffield last time.  For all practical purposes they are filed along with any other non-believers, or maybe as 'others' depending upon the whim of whoever is using the data . They are too few to statistically significant to show up as even 0.1% anywhere other than Brighton, which means they don't particularly impact upon any other groups' figures. They have yet to claim any form of discrimination against them or adaptations required (in the workplace say) to meet the needs of their belief system , nor have they tried to claim charitable status which would force the law to clarify the situation. Oddly enough, simply writing something in a box doesn't make it magically become a reality.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 2, 2021)

brogdale said:


> According to the state, (ONS), it does. If believers in Scientology thought it were not a religion they could tick the "No religion" box.
> All of which, again, brings into focus the value of the question.


Irrelevant


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 2, 2021)

If Jedis are a real religion, let’s persecute them and see if they’re prepared to be martyred for their faith. They’d change their tune quickly


----------



## belboid (Mar 2, 2021)

Oh, I should have spent six seconds googling.

Jedi isn't a religion, the Charity Commission so ruled in 2016.









						Jedi is not a religion, Charity Commission rules
					

Jedi, the worship of the mythology of Star Wars is not a religion, says the Charity Commission.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## xenon (Mar 2, 2021)

Oh nos, not the charity commission....


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 2, 2021)

belboid said:


> Oh, I should have spent six seconds googling.
> 
> Jedi isn't a religion, the Charity Commission so ruled in 2016.
> 
> ...


If they’re going to start ruling on what is and isn’t a “real” religion, they’re going to have to explain what the line is and why they chose it.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Irrelevant


This is a thread about the census.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

belboid said:


> massive logic fail there.


I've not claimed that the census question is logical.


----------



## belboid (Mar 2, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> If they’re going to start ruling on what is and isn’t a “real” religion, they’re going to have to explain what the line is and why they chose it.


They did.


----------



## belboid (Mar 2, 2021)

brogdale said:


> I've not claimed that the census question is logical.


No, you claimed that because one government department includes space to write whatever you like to describe your religion, that means that the state accepts whatever is written there as a 'religion' in any other circumstance.  It does not.   

All it means is that sometime next year there will be a number of the amount of people who wrote 'jedi' on a form.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 2, 2021)

belboid said:


> They did.


Oh ffs, do I have to read everything myself now? I thought this was Urban75!


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Mar 2, 2021)

I am actually a member of the Church of the Latter Day Dude









						Get Ordained for Free at the Religion of Dudeism
					

Get ordained for free at the world's most easygoing religion. Inspired by The Big Lebowski, Taoism, Zen and more.




					dudeism.com
				




They do certificates of ordination as well and you can become a Dudeist Priest.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 2, 2021)

brogdale said:


> This is a thread about the census.


So?


----------



## belboid (Mar 2, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> Oh ffs, do I have to read everything myself now? I thought this was Urban75!


Its long and boring, or I'd precis for you.  Essentially referred them to Arkell vs Pressdram


----------



## belboid (Mar 2, 2021)

Count Cuckula said:


> I am actually a member of the Church of the Latter Day Dude
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I've forgotten which church I'm ordained in, but it allows me to carry out weddings in 31 states (it claimed at the time)


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 2, 2021)

belboid said:


> I've forgotten which church I'm ordained in, but it allows me to carry out weddings in 31 states (it claimed at the time)


I’m a minister in the Universal Life Church


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> I’m a minister in the Universal Life Church


snap


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

belboid said:


> No, you claimed that because one government department includes space to write whatever you like to describe your religion, that means that the state accepts whatever is written there as a 'religion' in any other circumstance.  It does not.
> 
> All it means is that sometime next year there will be a number of the amount of people who wrote 'jedi' on a form.


But those ticking the "Other religion" box will figure in the state's (ONS) data. 
I think you're getting a bit confused about what a religion is and what the Charity Commission considers a religion for the purpose of defining charitable tax status. For instance, Paganism is recorded under 'Other Religions' and yet the Pagan federation has not succeeded in attaining charitable status.

Did the ONS go back and disaggregate the 2011 Jedi data from the 'Other religion' category and add them to 'No religion'?


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> So?


So, I'm struggling to see how you can cast a discussion about the definition of religion in the religion question in the census in a thread about the census as "irrelevant'.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 2, 2021)

brogdale said:


> So, I'm struggling to see how you can cast a discussion about the definition of religion in the religion question in the census in a thread about the census as "irrelevant'.


Cos we were talking about whether Jedi was a religion or not. It isn’t. People can put it in a field on a survey form but doing that doesn’t make it a religion


----------



## belboid (Mar 2, 2021)

brogdale said:


> But those ticking the "Other religion" box will figure in the state's (ONS) data.
> I think you're getting a bit confused about what a religion is and what the Charity Commission considers a religion for the purpose of defining charitable tax status. For instance, Paganism is recorded under 'Other Religions' and yet the Pagan federation has not succeeded in attaining charitable status.
> 
> Did the ONS go back and disaggregate the 2011 Jedi data from the 'Other religion' category and add them to 'No religion'?


No, as I have already said twice, they give the exact number of people writing jedi and leave it up to whoever is using the data to do with it what they want.  That's a beauty of the data, the interpretation is actually left to the user, it isn't determined by the state, or even by the ONS.

I note how you have changed the terms of your argument though.


----------



## belboid (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Cos we were talking about whether Jedi was a religion or not. It isn’t. People can put it in a field on a survey form but doing that doesn’t make it a religion


note the smilie - always a clear sign


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

belboid said:


> No, as I have already said twice, they give the exact number of people writing jedi and leave it up to whoever is using the data to do with it what they want.  That's a beauty of the data, the interpretation is actually left to the user, it isn't determined by the state, or even by the ONS.
> 
> I note how you have changed the terms of your argument though.


No, you're wrong about that. The discussion wasn't about the 'beauty' of how the data might be interpreted; it was just about whether or not the state statisticians include write-in religions under the 'Other religion' category.

Here is a link to the file which shows the full classification of religions in
England and Wales and how they were grouped for the Key Statistics KS07

In a response to an FoI about the Jedi inclusion the ONS said:



> The religion question was voluntary in the 2001 Census. Respondents were
> given the opporunity to write in their religion in the 'any other
> religion' box. All 'write in' religions would have been assigned to one
> of the codes in the above file. Jedi was included so that it could be
> ...


----------



## kabbes (Mar 2, 2021)

Subjective belief combined with ritual makes something a religion.  If it’s sincerely held, I don’t see that any outsider can countermand that


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Cos we were talking about whether Jedi was a religion or not. It isn’t. People can put it in a field on a survey form but doing that doesn’t make it a religion


Maybe that's what you thought was being discussed. What I said was that the state statisticians included it in their 'Other religions' category.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 2, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Maybe that's what you thought was being discussed. What I said was that the state statisticians included it in their 'Other religions' category.


That doesn’t make it a religion


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> That doesn’t make it a religion


According to?


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 2, 2021)

brogdale said:


> According to?


Anyone with any sense


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Anyone with any sense


I see.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 2, 2021)

If I say that I worship the Red Ape cos I am an Orangutanian, is it now a religion?


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> If I say that I worship the Red Ape cos I am an Orangutanian, is it now a religion?


According to the ONS, it would seem so; yes.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 2, 2021)

kabbes said:


> Subjective belief combined with ritual makes something a religion.  If it’s sincerely held, I don’t see that any outsider can countermand that


Actually, come to think of it, I’m not so sure that the belief is necessary.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Mar 2, 2021)

bugger.  suppose i'll have to do this.  if it was after i got the vaccination then they could save everyone's time and just download the info...


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

kabbes said:


> Actually, come to think of it, I’m not so sure that the belief is necessary.


The ONS are explicit that they are only asking about affiliation, not belief for the purpose of the census. It seems that the write-in inclusion policy is in response to the 2010 Equality Act. 

So much of the argument above over the last few pages is redundant wrt this process. If you write in a religion it will contribute to the 'Other religion' data unless the ONS suspect that the write-ins are as a result of a concerted campaign. Hence the reason that they did disaggregate out the Jedi numbers.


----------



## belboid (Mar 2, 2021)

brogdale said:


> According to the ONS, it would seem so; yes.
> 
> View attachment 257041


You're just proving you have no idea what you're talking about.


----------



## belboid (Mar 2, 2021)

*“There are four kinds of people in this world: cretins, fools, morons, and lunatics…Cretins don’t even talk; they sort of slobber and stumble…Fools are in great demand, especially on social occasions. They embarrass everyone but provide material for conversation…Fools don’t claim that cats bark, but they talk about cats when everyone else is talking about dogs. They offend all the rules of conversation, and when they really offend, they’re magnificent…Morons never do the wrong thing. They get their reasoning wrong. Like the fellow who says that all dogs are pets and all dogs bark, and cats are pets, too, therefore cats bark…Morons will occasionally say something that’s right, but they say it for the wrong reason…A lunatic is easily recognized. He is a moron who doesn’t know the ropes. The moron proves his thesis; he has logic, however twisted it may be. The lunatic on the other hand, doesn’t concern himself at all with logic; he works by short circuits. For him, everything proves everything else. The lunatic is all idée fixe, and whatever he comes across confirms his lunacy. You can tell him by the liberties he takes with common sense, by his flashes of inspiration, and by the fact that sooner or later he brings up the Templars…There are lunatics who don’t bring up the Templars, but those who do are the most insidious. At first they seem normal, then all of a sudden…”*


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

brogdale said:


> According to Wiki there are only a few changes to the 2011 questions, but those added look capable of generating some 'debate':
> 
> View attachment 254395


I can see the scope for confusion in respondents answering question 32:



There must have been a more straightforward way of constructing that question?


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 2, 2021)

Come on folks. I know it’s a year in and we’re all tetchy, but this is really quite easy.  I’ll give an example.  I used to think that nobody really believed in a flat earth. They were joking. Trolling. Surely, right?  And probably a lot are, but it turns out that we have now to accept that some are perfectly sincerely.

Similarly with Jedi.  It started as a joke to troll the census. Hilarious japes.  And for most it still is that: a joke.  But what if for some it isn’t?  What if they have rituals and worship, a philosophy to go with it.  What if they know it came from a film but want to adopt it as their way of expressing spirituality? What makes it a religion.  That it’s old? Nope. That it’s factual? What facts? The ceremonies are made up. So what? Aren’t they all

I know Episcopalians who call themselves Christian, who go to church, do the praying and singing, but as far as God goes they’re agnostic or even atheist. They’ll enter Christian in the census. Are their entries to be discounted?

Like I said, there’s a Church of John Coltrane. Do you get to determine it’s a joke? Do the ONS?

We don’t actually know if some Jedis are sincere or not. But what if some are?


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 2, 2021)

brogdale said:


> I can see the scope for confusion in respondents answering question 32:
> 
> View attachment 257044
> 
> There must have been a more straightforward way of constructing that question?


I don't remember that question


----------



## brogdale (Mar 2, 2021)

gentlegreen said:


> I don't remember that question


The PDFs of the household surveys are here if you want to check back.


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 2, 2021)

brogdale said:


> The PDFs of the household surveys are here if you want to check back.


I suppose the online version means one never sees some questions ...


----------



## a_chap (Mar 2, 2021)

brogdale said:


> I can see the scope for confusion in respondents answering question 32:
> 
> View attachment 257044
> 
> There must have been a more straightforward way of constructing that question?



Seems pretty well worded to me.


----------



## Serge Forward (Mar 3, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Seems fair enough; question 14 asks "_How would you describe your national identity?" _so, if that's how you would describe it, that's the correct response.


Anti-nationalist obviously


----------



## kabbes (Mar 3, 2021)

I genuinely don't know how I would describe my national identity, and it's an interesting reflection.  I wonder if this sense of ambivalence regading national identity that is undoubtedly felt by a great swathe of socially liberal and/or historically aware people in England is peculiar to the English or if it is a common phenomenon across other former colonial powers.


----------



## A380 (Mar 3, 2021)

kabbes said:


> I genuinely don't know how I would describe my national identity, and it's an interesting reflection.  I wonder if this sense of ambivalence regading national identity that is undoubtedly felt by a great swathe of socially liberal and/or historically aware people in England is peculiar to the English or if it is a common phenomenon across other former colonial powers.


Alderanian obvs.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 3, 2021)

kabbes said:


> I genuinely don't know how I would describe my national identity, and it's an interesting reflection.  I wonder if this sense of ambivalence regading national identity that is undoubtedly felt by a great swathe of socially liberal and/or historically aware people in England is peculiar to the English or if it is a common phenomenon across other former colonial powers.


This census does, effectively, ask 2 questions about 'nationality'; one functional (Q 20 passports held, if any) and one (Q 14) about the respondent's perceived identity, and I agree that any question about 'national identity' put to those living in such a confused polity does deserve more thought than a cursory tick.





I'm pretty sure that, had the census coincided more closely with May's "...citizen of nowhere." comment, there'd have been a significant write-in for "the World" or "Nowhere".


----------



## brogdale (Mar 3, 2021)

Nationality not my bag, but seems odd that there's no "Irish" option in the list for Q14.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 3, 2021)

National identity, like all identity, is contextual and I think the problem with the census question is that any context is missing.  If I’m with Americans, I feel deeply English because I notice the national differences in behaviours and assumptions and they also act as if I am generally representative of English people.  If I’m with a bunch of patriotic English people, however, I feel alien to them in terms of common archetype and even, due to my immigrant roots, potentially “unenglish”.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 3, 2021)

kabbes said:


> National identity, like all identity, is contextual and I think the problem with the census question is that any context is missing.  If I’m with Americans, I feel deeply English because I notice the national differences in behaviours and assumptions and they also act as if I am generally representative of English people.  If I’m with a bunch of patriotic English people, however, I feel alien to them in terms of common archetype and even, due to my immigrant roots, potentially “unenglish”.


I suppose this multi-dimensional nature of identity is one reason why the census developers have stuck with the _Tick all that apply _instruction?


----------



## Idaho (Mar 3, 2021)

I'll tick English. I'm certainly not Scottish or Welsh. British is much more a political identity than a cultural one, and with the decline of empire and devolution/independence, one that is increasingly anachronistic. I was born in England, I live in England, I sound English, I share (willingly or unwillingly) a bunch of cultural cues, customs and norms that are recognisably English to Scots or Welsh. I'm not an English nationalist, or any kind of nationalist, but that doesn't stop me being English.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 3, 2021)

Idaho said:


> I'll tick English. I'm certainly not Scottish or Welsh. British is much more a political identity than a cultural one, and with the decline of empire and devolution/independence, one that is increasingly anachronistic. I was born in England, I live in England, I sound English, I share (willingly or unwillingly) a bunch of cultural cues, customs and norms that are recognisably English to Scots or Welsh. I'm not an English nationalist, or any kind of nationalist, but that doesn't stop me being English.


In the light of what you've said there, it's interesting to note that the tick-box option order has changed from the last Census (2011) with the "British" option now placed first.


----------



## kenny g (Mar 3, 2021)

Sad that English regions aren't represented. I would put myself down as a Londoner.


----------



## Idaho (Mar 3, 2021)

brogdale said:


> In the light of what you've said there, it's interesting to note that the tick-box option order has changed from the last Census (2011) with the "British" option now placed first.
> 
> View attachment 257102
> 
> View attachment 257103


Tories... Sigh...


----------



## Idaho (Mar 3, 2021)

kenny g said:


> Sad that English regions aren't represented. I would put myself down as a Londoner.


That's not a national identity. That's an English person trying to avoid calling themselves English.

I think of myself as a southerner. The North and South of England have their own distinctiveness. It's all balls really.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 3, 2021)

kenny g said:


> Sad that English regions aren't represented. I would put myself down as a Londoner.


If you plan on responding to the census, you could use the write-in option for question 14 for that response.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 3, 2021)

Idaho said:


> That's not a national identity. That's an English person trying to avoid calling themselves English.


Objectively that might be true, but the question actually invites respondents to _describe their national identity. _So, if that's how Kenny wants to describe it, I guess that's the correct response for him?


----------



## brogdale (Mar 3, 2021)

kenny g said:


> Sad that English regions aren't represented. I would put myself down as a Londoner.


In the past, when I have responded to census requests, I have written in _Kentish._


----------



## kenny g (Mar 3, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Objectively that might be true, but the question actually invites respondents to _describe their national identity. _So, if that's how Kenny wants to describe it, I guess that's the correct response for him?


If it is true objectively then that is good enough for me. "Urban" would be fitting for some.


----------



## ginger_syn (Mar 3, 2021)

Idaho said:


> I'll tick English. I'm certainly not Scottish or Welsh. British is much more a political identity than a cultural one, and with the decline of empire and devolution/independence, one that is increasingly anachronistic. I was born in England, I live in England, I sound English, I share (willingly or unwillingly) a bunch of cultural cues, customs and norms that are recognisably English to Scots or Welsh. I'm not an English nationalist, or any kind of nationalist, but that doesn't stop me being English.


For me the British option is the only one that fits, my family is a mix of irish and english, my mother was born in wales as was 2 of my younger brothers and sister, my dad in england as was one of my brothers and i was born in a british military hospital in germany , I don't feel welsh even though I've lived here most of my life, I'm not english, I'm not irish though I'm eligible for an irish passport, British is whats left. And I'm happy with that.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 3, 2021)

Tempted to put God’s Own Country (Yorkshire)


----------



## Idaho (Mar 3, 2021)

I suppose this shows that it's a meaningful discussion/concept, but a pointless census question.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 3, 2021)

Idaho said:


> That's not a national identity.


What_ is_ a national identity?  Does it have to coincide with the borders of a nation state?  If so it's a bureaucratic designation, not an identity.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 3, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Tempted to put God’s Own Country (Yorkshire)


religion was yesterday!


----------



## brogdale (Mar 3, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> What_ is_ a national identity?  Does it have to coincide with the borders of a nation state?  If so it's a bureaucratic designation, not an identity.


Or extant nation; that's why I was happier to 'identify with' the Jutish Kingdom of Kent.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 3, 2021)

And we haven't even got to the ethnicity question yet!


----------



## Elpenor (Mar 3, 2021)

Having been born, and only lived in England, I will choose English, assuming I get a chance to fill it in as I may still be living in a hotel on the date.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 3, 2021)

brogdale said:


> And we haven't even got to the ethnicity question yet!


That’s a thorny one too - no separate box for GRT


----------



## PursuedByBears (Mar 3, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Tempted to put God’s Own Country (Yorkshire)


I completed it yesterday and put Northern English 😀


----------



## Idaho (Mar 3, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> What_ is_ a national identity?  Does it have to coincide with the borders of a nation state?  If so it's a bureaucratic designation, not an identity.


We Dumnonians refuse to answer such questions.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 3, 2021)

Idaho said:


> We Dumnonians refuse to answer such questions.


ONS wouldn't allow a discrete Cornwall or Cornish tick box.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 3, 2021)

PursuedByBears said:


> I completed it yesterday and put Northern English 😀


That’s one question I asked that to no answer: how can you do the Census before the 21st cos you can’t predict who’s going to be in the house on that day?


----------



## brogdale (Mar 3, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> That’s one question I asked that to no answer: how can you do the Census before the 21st cos you can’t predict who’s going to be in the house on that day?


Wrote in "_Mysticism" _in answer to Question 16?


----------



## PursuedByBears (Mar 3, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> That’s one question I asked that to no answer: how can you do the Census before the 21st cos you can’t predict who’s going to be in the house on that day?


You can in lockdown


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 3, 2021)

Idaho said:


> We Dumnonians refuse to answer such questions.


Hmm. Now I have to think about my Early Mediaeval identity. I live in what was Altclud, but I was brought up on the border between Dalriada and Pictland.  If nationality is different from ethnicity (as it is), then I’ll need to give that proper consideration.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 3, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Objectively that might be true, but the question actually invites respondents to _describe their national identity. _So, if that's how Kenny wants to describe it, I guess that's the correct response for him?


Actually, if they want me to _describe_ it, maybe I should write them a 500 word essay.  “Well, let me start four generations ago, when the British colonialists were driven out of Ireland, the Cypriots were living in small villages and a minor Italian princeling lost all his money gambling and womanising in his way across the Mediterranean...”


----------



## brogdale (Mar 3, 2021)

kabbes said:


> Actually, if they want be to _describe_ it, maybe I should write them a 500 word essay.  “Well, let me start four generations ago, when the British colonialists were driven out of Ireland, the Cypriots were living in small villages and a minor Italian princeling lost all his money gambling and womanising in his way across the Mediterranean...”


_see additional sheet 14.  _


----------



## A380 (Mar 3, 2021)

Mercian till I die.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 3, 2021)

OK, so this year's Census question 15 is the ethnicity one; it is compulsory to respond:

the additions appear to be:
a) "Roma" tick box in "White"
b) a write-in option under the "Black, African background" tick box.



...and here's the similar question from the previous 3 census forms:

2011:
 2001

1991

I suppose one pretty obvious question is how are people supposed to know their own ethnicity?


----------



## belboid (Mar 3, 2021)

brogdale said:


> I suppose one pretty obvious question is how are people supposed to know their own ethnicity?


Seriously? That’s your question?


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 3, 2021)

belboid said:


> Seriously? That’s your question?


I guess it’s possible to be adopted with no information about your parentage


----------



## brogdale (Mar 3, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> I guess it’s possible to be adopted with no information about your parentage


But even that presupposes that your biological parents were/are aware of their ethnic group and/or passed on that information.
For instance, my mother's 'maiden name' can be discerned as being of Irish origin or possibly a bastardisation of an Huguenot surname. She doesn't know and neither do I.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 3, 2021)

Neither does my Father, for that matter, but he'd probably opt for Anglo-Saxon or that first white option. Not sure where that leaves me.


----------



## belboid (Mar 3, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> I guess it’s possible to be adopted with no information about your parentage


true, but you probably still have an idea of your 'ethnicity' - a highly malleable concept.  And there is room for unsure in the final write in box.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 3, 2021)

The wording of the question asks that your one response "best describes your ethnic group or background", so if you have an Irish mother and English father...


----------



## belboid (Mar 3, 2021)

Any Other Mixed....



It's almost as if you are desperate to find problems that aren't really there


----------



## brogdale (Mar 3, 2021)

belboid said:


> Any Other Mixed....
> 
> 
> 
> It's almost as if you are desperate to find problems that aren't really there


I suppose that's right, it's just that the first 3 option boxes there appear primarily addressed towards 'mixed colour' ethnicities, it might not be immediately obvious that someone wishing to define a mixed 'white' ethnicity should tick that box.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 3, 2021)

brogdale said:


> OK, so this year's Census question 15 is the ethnicity one; it is compulsory to respond:
> 
> the additions appear to be:
> a) "Roma" tick box in "White"
> ...


ah but it's not 'what are you' but 'what best describes' so there'll be a level of self-definition going on there

certainly none of the tick-box options really matches how i'd self-describe to government


----------



## Idaho (Mar 3, 2021)

Ethnicity in the sense of trying to get a perfect definition of your primal ancestral roots is a load of balls anyhow.

The question should be: if a bunch of random strangers were to make a snap decision on your ethnicity, what would it most likely be?


----------



## brogdale (Mar 3, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> ah but it's not 'what are you' but 'what best describes' so there'll be a level of self-definition going on there
> 
> certainly none of the tick-box options really matches how i'd self-describe to government


I think for most folk self-definition is all there is; do many people really know their ethnicity?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 3, 2021)

brogdale said:


> I think for most folk self-definition is all there is; do many people really know their ethnicity?


do many people really care?


----------



## brogdale (Mar 3, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> do many people really care?


A valid question, but in this context, largely irrelevant. The point is that the state are making such an ethnic self-description a compulsory element of a compulsory document.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 3, 2021)

brogdale said:


> A valid question, but in this context, largely irrelevant. The point is that the state are making such an ethnic self-description a compulsory element of a compulsory document.


yes. but that doesn't mean people are going to focus their attention on it as the government might like

some 'sod it, i'll tick there' will doubtless go on


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 3, 2021)

belboid said:


> Seriously? That’s your question?


It’s a good one. The questioners actually want to know “what colour are you” but are trying to be polite.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 3, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> yes. but that doesn't mean people are going to focus their attention on it as the government might like
> 
> some 'sod it, i'll tick there' will doubtless go on


Not only for that particular question, either!


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 3, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Not only for that particular question, either!


i think we could come up with a more entertaining and indeed informative survey of the nation.

for example 'what tv programme/s would you recommend in the following categories' (non-compulsory)

drama
comedy
game show
documentary


----------



## belboid (Mar 3, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> It’s a good one. The questioners actually want to know “what colour are you” but are trying to be polite.


Really? I think they are asking how people describe their ethnicity, because ethnicity is a massive part of how people are discriminated against.  As we have discussed various times on the boards, being 'white; doesn't mean you aren't severely discriminated against for being Roma white, or Polish white, or Jewish white.  So a simple 'what colour are you?' wouldn't reveal anything like the same amount of information.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 3, 2021)

belboid said:


> Really? I think they are asking how people describe their ethnicity, because ethnicity is a massive part of how people are discriminated against.  As we have discussed various times on the boards, being 'white; doesn't mean you aren't severely discriminated against for being Roma white, or Polish white, or Jewish white.  So a simple 'what colour are you?' wouldn't reveal anything like the same amount of information.


I never know how to answer, to be honest.


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 3, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> i think we could come up with a more entertaining and indeed informative survey of the nation.
> 
> for example 'what tv programme/s would you recommend in the following categories' (non-compulsory)
> 
> ...


"none of the above"


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 3, 2021)

belboid said:


> Really? I think they are asking how people describe their ethnicity, because ethnicity is a massive part of how people are discriminated against.  As we have discussed various times on the boards, being 'white; doesn't mean you aren't severely discriminated against for being Roma white, or Polish white, or Jewish white.  So a simple 'what colour are you?' wouldn't reveal anything like the same amount of information.


if you've ever wondered how the nazis managed to find jews so efficiently you might be surprised to learn it was because they'd been honest in censuses. so since reading about that in edwin black's 'ibm and the holocaust' i've been rather more cagey about the information i provide the government through forms and the like - after all, you never know what they'll do with it even if they won't use it to kill you


----------



## kabbes (Mar 3, 2021)

I genuinely don’t know how to answer the ethnicity question.  The question is a garbled mess of cultural and hereditary background, and this is made worse if you happen to have multiple backgrounds of both.  It’s a subjective measure of a subjective concept, which makes it statistically dangerous as data.


----------



## belboid (Mar 3, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> if you've ever wondered how the nazis managed to find jews so efficiently you might be surprised to learn it was because they'd been honest in censuses. so since reading about that in edwin black's 'ibm and the holocaust' i've been rather more cagey about the information i provide the government through forms and the like - after all, you never know what they'll do with it


absolutely, IBM's involvement should be made much more of.  And, as noted above, I can well understand the fears of such groups.  Fortunately there has never been any example of UK census data being abused in any significant way.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 3, 2021)

belboid said:


> Fortunately there has never been any example of UK census data being abused in any significant way.


There never is until it happens


----------



## brogdale (Mar 3, 2021)

belboid said:


> Really? I think they are asking how people describe their ethnicity, because ethnicity is a massive part of how people are discriminated against.  As we have discussed various times on the boards, being 'white; doesn't mean you aren't severely discriminated against for being Roma white, or Polish white, or Jewish white.  So a simple 'what colour are you?' wouldn't reveal anything like the same amount of information.


That's certainly the explanation offered by the ONS when discussing why they decided against purely geographically determined categories; ; it didn't differentiate 'visible' and 'invisible' minorities:



Interesting that the state seem keen for folk to self-define their national identity, ethnicity and sex but don't ask similar question about the issue arguably behind the largest aggregate discrimination in neoliberal societies...class.


----------



## belboid (Mar 3, 2021)

kabbes said:


> I genuinely don’t know how to answer the ethnicity question.  The question is a garbled mess of cultural and hereditary background, and this is made worse if you happen to have multiple backgrounds of both.  It’s a subjective measure of a subjective concept, which makes it statistically dangerous as data.


The question isn't garbled at all, it is perfectly straight forward. How _you _define 'ethnicity' may be, but that is your definition. If you believe it is mutli-multiple, write that in.


----------



## belboid (Mar 3, 2021)

brogdale said:


> That's certainly the explanation offered by the ONS when discussing why they decided against purely geographically determined categories; ; it didn't differentiate 'visible' and 'invisible' minorities:
> 
> View attachment 257146
> 
> Interesting that the state seem keen for folk to self-define their national identity, ethnicity and sex but don't ask similar question about the issue arguably behind the largest aggregate discrimination in neoliberal societies...class.


there are questions about class throughout.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 3, 2021)

belboid said:


> The question isn't garbled at all, it is perfectly straight forward. How _you _define 'ethnicity' may be, but that is your definition. If you believe it is mutli-multiple, write that in.


It’s garbled in how it’s interpreting the concept of ethnicity.  This confuses the whole process.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 3, 2021)

belboid said:


> there are questions about class throughout.


In which case you'll be able to point me to the question where respondents are invited to describe their class.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 3, 2021)

belboid said:


> The question isn't garbled at all, it is perfectly straight forward. How _you _define 'ethnicity' may be, but that is your definition. If you believe it is mutli-multiple, write that in.


I don’t think they want my ethnicity.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 3, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> I don’t think they want my ethnicity.


If we took belboid’s advice literally, the ONS would end up with 20 million unique ethnicity categories.  This would be no use to anyone.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 3, 2021)

It’s going to be _so much fun_ asking these questions.


----------



## belboid (Mar 3, 2021)

brogdale said:


> In which case you'll be able to point me to the question where respondents are invited to describe their class.


you do love your non-sequiturs.  To repeat, they ask questions _about _class throughout.


----------



## MickiQ (Mar 3, 2021)

I can't remember any questions about ethnicity in the last census was there one? If there was I can't remember what I put for it. For me it's simple white British, English if I'm going to be fussy about it (though I have a few Welsh, Irish and French genes knocking around in there)
For Mrs Q it's a tad more interesting, Her father is white but her mother is Filipina making her half white/half Asian. Our kids are three quarter white/one quarter Asian but they look more Asian than white and even my grandson where his Filipino genes are down to 12.5% has got his mothers colouring especially brown eyes and jet black hair, People have commented that he looks Mediterranean. 
As for my 75% technically white son he told me that during his first couple of weeks at Uni people complimented him on what good English he spoke for a Korean.


----------



## belboid (Mar 3, 2021)

kabbes said:


> If we took belboid’s advice literally, the ONS would end up with 20 million unique ethnicity categories.  This would be no use to anyone.


no they wouldnt. Most people will simply tick the very first box (again).  Cos most people aren't trying to be smart arses.  But if that is your belief, go for it.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 3, 2021)

belboid said:


> you do love your non-sequiturs.  To repeat, they ask questions _about _class throughout.


You were, I think, responding to this?  



> Interesting that the state seem keen for folk to *self-define their national identity, ethnicity and sex but don't ask similar question about the issue arguably behind the largest aggregate discrimination in neoliberal societies...class.*



I think you'd agree that the census doesn't, in fact, include a question asking respondents to best describe their class, unlike national identity, ethnicity and gender.


----------



## belboid (Mar 3, 2021)

Aah, there's that telling smilie again.....

Ones national identity etc are primarily determined by yourself, you can reject societies definition if you desire.  Class is based on objective material conditions. I think I have seen you, I've certainly seen many people,  note this fact as a reason why 'identity politics' is inferior (for want of a better word) to class politics.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 3, 2021)

belboid said:


> Aah, there's that telling smilie again.....
> 
> Ones national identity etc are primarily determined by yourself, you can reject societies definition if you desire.  Class is based on objective material conditions. I think I have seen you, I've certainly seen many people,  note this fact as a reason why 'identity politics' is inferior (for want of a better word) to class politics.


Aah, so you do agree    that's a start, I suppose.

I don't think the UK state has ever attempted to categorise class in purely Marxist terms but, just to play along with your line for a moment, if that were the case, there doesn't seem to be any question relating to ownership of the means of production.

In which case, for a state that you say is so concerned to ameliorate discrimination, it seems something of an oversight not to ask respondents to self describe their class as is done for the other innate and acquired characteristics in questions 14. 15. 16 & 27.

e2a :


----------



## Serge Forward (Mar 3, 2021)

My brother had his DNA done, and aside from the 60-odd per cent Irish, the rest was a hodge-podge of English, Scottish, Scandinavian, Spanish, Central and Eastern European. So, I'm wondering if he'll now put the full breakdown on the form? I think he should


----------



## belboid (Mar 3, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Aah, so you do agree    that's a start, I suppose.
> 
> I don't think the UK state has ever attempted to categorise class in purely Marxist terms but, just to play along with your line for a moment, if that were the case, there doesn't seem to be any question relating to ownership of the means of production.
> 
> ...



lol


The census provides information which is available (for free) to anyone to use and interpret. It isn't about forcing categories on people.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 3, 2021)

Serge Forward said:


> My brother had his DNA done, and aside from the 60-odd per cent Irish, the rest was a hodge-podge of English, Scottish, Scandinavian, Spanish, Central and Eastern European. So, I'm wondering if he'll now put the full breakdown on the form? I think he should


I gather that DNA testing for ancestry is becoming a more common thing; that might well make a few folk think carefully about that question, I suppose?


----------



## Serge Forward (Mar 3, 2021)

I reckon he needs to put every single miniscule percentage decimal point in there


----------



## brogdale (Mar 3, 2021)

Serge Forward said:


> I reckon he needs to put every single miniscule percentage decimal point in there


"...best describes..."

So, yeah!


----------



## kabbes (Mar 3, 2021)

belboid said:


> no they wouldnt. Most people will simply tick the very first box (again).  Cos most people aren't trying to be smart arses.  But if that is your belief, go for it.


Which brings us back to the fact that the question is conceptually a garbled mess requiring an subjective assessment of a subjective criteria, meaning that any statistics derived from it will be flawed, by which I mean systematically biased.  The moment the answers you get depend on what you put as your first box, you have a problem.


----------



## belboid (Mar 3, 2021)

Pettifogging. It isn't perfect, but it is simple, straight forward and vastly better than existing alternatives.  What is in the first box is what is the likeliest answer based upon previous censuses and existing knowledge, any other option would be notably more confusing.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 3, 2021)

Just completed it, less than 10 minutes. Wasn’t that hard, reckon I got a decent score.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Mar 3, 2021)

would i get prosecuted if i put 'mixed, black and white cat' in the write in box?


----------



## moochedit (Mar 3, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Just completed it, less than 10 minutes. Wasn’t that hard, reckon I got a decent score.



Thought we had to do it march 21st or something like that? Not had the letter yet.


----------



## moochedit (Mar 3, 2021)

Puddy_Tat said:


> would i get prosecuted if i put 'mixed, black and white cat' in the write in box?


Try it! Let us know how you get on


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 3, 2021)

moochedit said:


> Thought we had to do it march 21st or something like that? Not had the letter yet.



You can do it in advance if you know who will be in your house on 21st March, this year more than any we can be pretty sure on that one.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 3, 2021)

Puddy_Tat said:


> would i get prosecuted if i put 'mixed, black and white cat' in the write in box?


One of the censuses from 100ish years ago includes somebody listing their cat with occupation as “mouser”


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 3, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> You can do it in advance if you know who will be in your house on 21st March, this year more than any we can be pretty sure on that one.


There’s a stable owner in Bethlehem who’d recommend caution.


----------



## belboid (Mar 3, 2021)

Puddy_Tat said:


> would i get prosecuted if i put 'mixed, black and white cat' in the write in box?


If said cats name was on the deeds, tenancy or paid any of the bills it would be required I think.


----------



## kenny g (Mar 3, 2021)

Straight into the bin shall it go. Total bullshit.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 3, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> There’s a stable owner in Bethlehem who’d recommend caution.



You can go back in and change it if you need to, would imagine they had Brenda in mind when they sorted that out.


----------



## planetgeli (Mar 3, 2021)

kenny g said:


> Straight into the bin shall it go. Total bullshit.



I grew up in what was called an 'expanded town' in the 60s and 70s. Overspill London, solving their housing crisis by exporting their population. I had but a minimal grasp on this when I was a teenager, but I remember it did affect how the people I lived with thought.

Nearly 50 years on this grabbed my attention again a few weeks ago. Thanks to the internet (ain't it great sometimes?) I was able to google a load of interesting stuff about this. One bit of that interesting stuff was being able to find the answer in 2 seconds as to just how much my town expanded rapidly compared to decades of almost non-growth before. From this I was able to gain a better grasp of the realities people in that town faced, a better understanding of why people's attitudes were the way they were when I was a teenager.

I couldn't have done that without the census.

So no. Not total bullshit. At all.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 3, 2021)

kenny g said:


> Straight into the bin shall it go. Total bullshit.


They've said that they'll only be delivering paper forms in a limited number of areas and most of us will just get a letter with the access codes on it. 

I'm wondering how that might affect rates of return; with the delivery of a substantial form to fill in it was, I think, perhaps harder to ignore/put to the back go the mind. But a letter with codes?

Hmmm I suppose time will tell.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Mar 3, 2021)

So you can actually put your national identity as: none?


----------



## A380 (Mar 3, 2021)

Ethnicity- Sand Person.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 3, 2021)

Count Cuckula said:


> So you can actually put your national identity as: none?


You can put anything - the ‘other’ field is blank


----------



## brogdale (Mar 3, 2021)

Count Cuckula said:


> So you can actually put your national identity as: none?


Yep, if that's how you would describe it, under "Other, write in":


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Mar 3, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Yep, if that's how you would describe it, under "Other, write in":
> 
> View attachment 257186


That's good


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 4, 2021)

Did you know that whilst in 2001 350,000 people put "jedi" as religion, by 2011 this figure had halved? Changing demographics.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 4, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> Did you know that whilst in 2001 350,000 people put "jedi" as religion, by 2011 this figure had halved? Changing demographics.


The joke wore off


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 4, 2021)

I could not comment on that interpretation


----------



## kabbes (Mar 4, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> Did you know that whilst in 2001 350,000 people put "jedi" as religion, by 2011 this figure had halved? Changing demographics.


Attack of the Clones (2002) and The Clone Wars (2004) converted people to the dark side.


----------



## moochedit (Mar 4, 2021)

kabbes said:


> Attack of the Clones (2002) and The Clone Wars (2004) converted people to the dark side.



Yeah bet the recent Disney films lost a few members as well! 

Wonder if The Mandalorian has caused any converts from "Jedi" to "Mandalorian" this time?


----------



## moochedit (Mar 4, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> Did you know that whilst in 2001 350,000 people put "jedi" as religion, by 2011 this figure had halved? Changing demographics.



Their lack of faith is disturbing!


----------



## brogdale (Mar 4, 2021)

Full list of 'other' religions recorded by the ONS in 2011:



Take yer pick!


----------



## brogdale (Mar 4, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> I could not comment on that interpretation


But the ONS are very clear about the limitations of their question methodology wrt to religion:



It's only about self-described 'connection' or 'affiliation', not about actual practice, observance or belief, so folk saying they feel connected with Jediism seems reasonable enough.


----------



## souljacker (Mar 4, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Full list of 'other' religions recorded by the ONS in 2011:
> 
> View attachment 257239
> 
> Take yer pick!



No Pastafarians?


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 4, 2021)

brogdale said:


> But the ONS are very clear about the limitations of their question methodology wrt to religion:
> 
> View attachment 257246
> 
> It's only about self-described 'connection' or 'affiliation', not about actual practice, observance or belief, so folk saying they feel connected with Jediism seems reasonable enough.


Yes, noone is going "fail" the census by writing it, and it won't affect anything that happens in real life. (i.e. Councils didn't suddenly start building loads of jedi churches based on the figures). It is completely pointless, but harmless.


----------



## girasol (Mar 4, 2021)

cupid_stunt said:


> They were advertising for door knockers around here, and with so little work on due to covid, I almost applied, then thought I don't fancy knocking doors, due to covid.


Same here


----------



## moochedit (Mar 4, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> Yes, noone is going "fail" the census by writing it, and it won't affect anything that happens in real life. (i.e. Councils didn't suddenly start building loads of jedi churches based on the figures). It is completely pointless, but harmless.



I suspect the joke awnsers like "jedi" and "heavy metal" are just regarded the same as "no religeon" by the authorities.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 4, 2021)

moochedit said:


> I suspect the joke awnsers like "jedi" and "heavy metal" are just regarded the same as "no religeon" by the authorities.


Which kind of brings us back to the question of why the state wants/needs to know about the supernatural belief affiliation of citizens.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 4, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Which kind of brings us back to the question of why the state wants/needs to know about the supernatural belief affiliation of citizens.




Enough people don't tick the Christianity box they'll cancel Christmas & Easter.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 4, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Which kind of brings us back to the question of why the state wants/needs to know about the supernatural belief affiliation of citizens.


This supernatural stuff- what do mean?
Are you introducing your own bias here?


----------



## brogdale (Mar 4, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> This supernatural stuff- what do mean?
> Are you introducing your own bias here?


 
Thought that the antonym of naturalism was widely understood to cover supposed phenomena that aren't subject to the laws of nature?


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 4, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Thought that the antonym of naturalism was widely understood to cover supposed phenomena that aren't subject to the laws of nature?


It seems like something a militant atheist would say, dismissing faith as a fallacious belief in the supernatural


----------



## brogdale (Mar 4, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> It seems like something a militant atheist would say, dismissing faith as a fallacious belief in the supernatural


I don't think that it's necessary to be an atheist, "militant"( ? ) or otherwise, to appreciate that belief in matters that aren't subject to the laws of nature therefore relate to the supernatural.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 4, 2021)

brogdale said:


> I don't think that it's necessary to be an atheist, "militant"( ? ) or otherwise, to appreciate that belief in matters that aren't subject to the laws of nature therefore relate to the supernatural.


Hmm, but if you believe in the supernatural, then it isn’t supernatural to you


----------



## brogdale (Mar 4, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Hmm, but if you believe in the supernatural, then it isn’t supernatural to you


So...you're suggesting that supernatural beliefs should be called belief in the supernatural because those involved in believing in supernatural matters might not like that?


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 4, 2021)

brogdale said:


> So...you're suggesting that supernatural beliefs should be called belief in the supernatural because those involved in believing in supernatural matters might not like that?


You’ve lost me


----------



## A380 (Mar 4, 2021)

souljacker said:


> No Pastafarians?


All hail the FSM, May her noodley appendages bless you.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 4, 2021)

Was having a look at how the ONS propose to include the homeless in their census operation and it seems that they're offering a number of means:

get recorded at a hostel or shelter
where they are 'sofa-surfing'
on their mobile phone
Which all sound reasonable, but I'd think there has to be a danger of considerable under-representation of some groups, particularly those rough sleeping.

In past census operations the ONS have sent out fieldworkers/outreach workers to contact and collate rough sleeper data but it looks as though they've abandoned that idea as too costly.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 4, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Which kind of brings us back to the question of why the state wants/needs to know about the supernatural belief affiliation of citizens.


I can think of lots of reasons the information is useful. it could be used to make decisions on where/if to build places of worship. Or by supermarkets to decide whether to stock halal/kosher food. or in deciding whether or not to give permission for street celebrations on holy days in a certain area. or more generally to get insight into demographics at a snapshot in time.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 4, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> I can think of lots of reasons the information is useful. it could be used to make decisions on where/if to build places of worship. Or by supermarkets to decide whether to stock halal/kosher food. or in deciding whether or not to give permission for street celebrations on holy days in a certain area. or more generally to get insight into demographics at a snapshot in time.


Yeah, I get those points but not much of that involves the state. 
I'd have thought (hoped) that religions themselves were responsible for providing the buildings required and supermarkets will stock what turns them a profit. As to street celebrations; you'd kind of hope that LAs didn't just restrict them to beliefs with the biggest numbers?


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 4, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Yeah, I get those points but not much of that involves the state.


The information isn't specifically for use by the state, it can be used by anyone. You have been using a lot of data from previous censuses in this very thread.

Don't you think it is at all useful to have any record whatsoever of approximately how many people of every religion are in every area/the country? Even it is just for historical use (e.g. "in 1900 the great majority of people in the UK were CofE, but by 2030 the majority did not have any religion" or whatever).

We wouldn't even be able track approximate population changes without it. Noone would have anywhere to live, we woudl have run out of houses 300 years ago.


----------



## moochedit (Mar 4, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Enough people don't ticket the Christianity box they'll cancel Christmas & Easter.



Don't tell farmerbarleymow  or hash tag


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 4, 2021)

brogdale said:


> As to street celebrations; you'd kind of hope that LAs didn't just restrict them to beliefs with the biggest numbers?


"I see you want to hold a pagan nationalist street rally in the middle of an 80% orthodox jewish area, we question your motives and say no" etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc


----------



## Kevbad the Bad (Mar 4, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Which kind of brings us back to the question of why the state wants/needs to know about the supernatural belief affiliation of citizens.


Praps we could start by disestablishing the C of E, given how few of us subscribe to its antiquated beliefs. And stop giving credence or paying particular respect to other religions too. (That's not the state talking, btw. That's me.) There was never any justification for a national established religion, but if hardly anyone agrees with it...


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 4, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Yeah, I get those points but not much of that involves the state.
> I'd have thought (hoped) that religions themselves were responsible for providing the buildings required and supermarkets will stock what turns them a profit. As to street celebrations; you'd kind of hope that LAs didn't just restrict them to beliefs with the biggest numbers?


Those with greater numbers would need more planning


----------



## hash tag (Mar 4, 2021)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Enough people don't tick the Christianity box they'll cancel Christmas & Easter.


I am not Christian. It would be hypocritical of me to celebrate something I do not believe in. We can hope. We have far too much time off work in this country, the productivity must be shocking. Working a few extra days a year would surely help the greater good and all that.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 4, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Yeah, I get those points but not much of that involves the state.
> I'd have thought (hoped) that religions themselves were responsible for providing the buildings required


planning permission


brogdale said:


> and supermarkets will stock what turns them a profit.


how would they know what should be stocked, if there was no information on demographics? trial and error?


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 4, 2021)

Kevbad the Bad said:


> There was never any justification for a national established religion, but if hardly anyone agrees with it...


What figures did you use to decide hardly anyone agrees with it? Where did they come from!


----------



## flypanam (Mar 4, 2021)

The census figures for Northern Ireland will be interesting, we’ll see if the catholic community is bigger than the Protestant.


----------



## Kevbad the Bad (Mar 4, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> What figures did you use to decide hardly anyone agrees with it? Where did they come from!


I was making the assumption that those who do not adhere to the C of E would not believe in it being established. They might do, but then again some who do adhere may believe in disestablishment.  Try looking at this link for the statistics:-








						Religion and belief: some surveys and statistics
					

Numerous surveys indicate that the proportion of individuals who do not hold religious beliefs is steadily increasing and perhaps now represents the majority of the UK’s population. Religions and beliefs are notoriously difficult to measure, as they are not fixed or innate, and therefore any...




					humanism.org.uk


----------



## brogdale (Mar 4, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Those with greater numbers would need more planning


Yeah, but the application process should cover that, tbh.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 4, 2021)

Kevbad the Bad said:


> I was making the assumption that those who do not adhere to the C of E would not believe in it being established. They might do, but then again some who do adhere may believe in disestablishment.  Try looking at this link for the statistics:-
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You are making quite a few assumptions there then. As are the humanist society in that link. They are obviously partisan towards humanism; it is taking figures from a lot of different small surveys and trying to use them to make a very specific case (that was already decided on before they looked at any figures).

The figures from the census, however, are non-partisan. They are taken direct from the people of the country without interpretation (ie not saying "well they might have said they were religious but I don't reckon they really meant it" like the humanist article says, which is very arrogant), and it has a sample size of about 95% of the population; and because it is done every 10 years it can be tracked over time. Pretty useful. It is not going to give perfectly accurate results, but definitely more accurate than small polls done by partisan organisations.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 4, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> The information isn't specifically for use by the state, it can be used by anyone. You have been using a lot of data from previous censuses in this very thread.
> 
> Don't you think it is at all useful to have any record whatsoever of approximately how many people of every religion are in every area/the country? Even it is just for historical use (e.g. "in 1900 the great majority of people in the UK were CofE, but by 2030 the majority did not have any religion" or whatever).
> 
> We wouldn't even be able track approximate population changes without it. Noone would have anywhere to live, we woudl have run out of houses 300 years ago.


Not sure whether or not I think it is useful to know about numbers subscribing to different religions, tbh. I certainly can't see what it's got to do with the housing market?


----------



## Idaho (Mar 4, 2021)

I put humanist. Seems the best description of me.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 4, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> "I see you want to hold a pagan nationalist street rally in the middle of an 80% orthodox jewish area, we question your motives and say no" etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc


Wasn't aware that the Police or LAs used census data to make decisions about religious celebration permissions?


----------



## brogdale (Mar 4, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> planning permission
> 
> how would they know what should be stocked, if there was no information on demographics? trial and error?


Do local authority planning committees use census data to determine whether or not churches can be converted into mosques or vice versa?
As for supermarkets, pretty sure that they'll see whatever turns them a profit; if the demand exists, they'll exploit it; don't think they need censal data about religions to work that out.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 4, 2021)

Idaho said:


> I put humanist. Seems the best description of me.


If really pushed, I think I'd have to plump for igtheism.


----------



## Kevbad the Bad (Mar 4, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> You are making quite a few assumptions there then. As are the humanist society in that link. They are obviously partisan towards humanism; it is taking figures from a lot of different small surveys and trying to use them to make a very specific case (that was already decided on before they looked at any figures).
> 
> The figures from the census, however, are non-partisan. They are taken direct from the people of the country without interpretation (ie not saying "well they might have said they were religious but I don't reckon they really meant it" like the humanist article says, which is very arrogant), and it has a sample size of about 95% of the population; and because it is done every 10 years it can be tracked over time. Pretty useful. It is not going to give perfectly accurate results, but definitely more accurate than small polls done by partisan organisations.


Everyone makes assumptions all the time. The C of E has always made the assumption that they speak, preach and pray on behalf of everyone in England. Well they don't. This will become clearer with each passing census, if they continue to happen, and unless the C of E and other religions seek to suppress the question on religion, because they don't like the direction of travel of the answer.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 4, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Not sure whether or not I think it is useful to know about numbers subscribing to different religions, tbh. I certainly can't see what it's got to do with the housing market?


To know where more housing is required because population is increasing. If there was no record of population then that kind of planning could not happen until it was far too late. 

Same for schools, hospitals, old peoples homes, nurseries etc etc etc etc. If those kind of places had to wait till people demanded them (like you suggest supermarkets should do for stocking e.g. halal food etc), rather than being able to predict and plan years/decades ahead, then it would be a total disaster.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 4, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Was having a look at how the ONS propose to include the homeless in their census operation and it seems that they're offering a number of means:
> 
> get recorded at a hostel or shelter
> where they are 'sofa-surfing'
> ...


This looks like quite a bold ONS claim:


----------



## brogdale (Mar 4, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> To know where more housing is required because population is increasing. If there was no record of population then that kind of planning could not happen until it was far too late.
> 
> Same for schools, hospitals, old peoples homes, nurseries etc etc etc etc. If those kind of places had to wait till people demanded them (like you suggest supermarkets should do for stocking e.g. halal food etc), rather than being able to predict and plan years/decades ahead, then it would be a total disaster.


The religion question?


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 4, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Wasn't aware that the Police or LAs used census data to make decisions about religious celebration permissions?


The data is used all the time, by loads of organisations. It is open. You have been using it multiple times in this thread.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 4, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> The data is used all the time, by loads of organisations. It is open. You have been using it multiple times in this thread.


Not totally convinced by this; so if I wanted to do that cross-carrying walk to church stuff at Easter in an area with a low christian count, I wouldn't be allowed? Seems potentially quite discriminatory, no?


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 4, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Not totally convinced by this; is if I wanted to do that cross-carrying walk to church stuff in an area with a low christian count, I wouldn't be allowed? Seems potentially quite discriminatory, no?


The census data does not make decisions; people make the decisiosn. Maybe people will still make wrong decision; but they are more likely to make right decisions (ie not allowing nationalist rallies in an orthodox jewish area, was my example) if they are basing them on accurate data, rather than basing them on no data at all and just guessing/using their internal prejudices.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 4, 2021)

Kevbad the Bad said:


> Everyone makes assumptions all the time. The C of E has always made the assumption that they speak, preach and pray on behalf of everyone in England. Well they don't. This will become clearer with each passing census, if they continue to happen, and unless the C of E and other religions seek to suppress the question on religion, because they don't like the direction of travel of the answer.


My point was: you needed the census data to make this argument. If you didn't have it, any organisation/religion could just claim any number they wanted.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 4, 2021)

so brogdale are you filling it in now?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 4, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> My point was: you needed the census data to make this argument. If you didn't have it, any organisation/religion could just claim any number they wanted.


no. no you don't. see eg Church attendance in England 2018 | Statista.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 4, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> so brogdale are you filling it in now?


Unless the state have withdrawn from their out-sourcing contract with the US defence corporation, no.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 4, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> no. no you don't. see eg Church attendance in England 2018 | Statista.


I can't read sources for that, it costs $468 per year.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 4, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> The census data does not make decisions; people make the decisiosn. Maybe people will still make wrong decision; but they are more likely to make right decisions (ie not allowing nationalist rallies in an orthodox jewish area, was my example) if they are basing them on accurate data, rather than basing them on no data at all and just guessing/using their internal prejudices.


When the neoliberal state decides not to undertake another census in it's present form how do you think such decisions will be informed?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 4, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> I can't read sources for that, it costs $468 per year.


you do know what eg means, i hope. this is far from a unique source.

e2a: What is happening to Church of England attendance? | Psephizo where the author notes that each year the cofe release data on attendance


----------



## belboid (Mar 4, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> you do know what eg means, i hope. this is far from a unique source.
> 
> e2a: What is happening to Church of England attendance? | Psephizo where the author notes that each year the cofe release data on attendance


Absolutely no possibility of systemic bias or double counting there, is there?


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 4, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> you do know what eg means, i hope. this is far from a unique source.
> 
> e2a: What is happening to Church of England attendance? | Psephizo where the author notes that each year the cofe release data on attendance


My exact point was that without census data you would have to rely on data from partisan organisations. I would suggest that the CofE is an example of a partisan organisation.

Any more?


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 4, 2021)

brogdale said:


> When the neoliberal state decides not to undertake another census in it's present form how do you think such decisions will be informed?


No idea. Facebook surveys?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 4, 2021)

belboid said:


> Absolutely no possibility of systemic bias or double counting there, is there?


i'm not saying the data are entirely unproblematic. the census itself isn't free from systemic bias and may include some double counting as well as some people not taking part.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 4, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> No idea. Facebook surveys?


As a non-FB user, I'd be comfortable if folk could share such data in a voluntary manner.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 4, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> the census itself isn't free from systemic bias and may include some double counting as well as some people not taking part.


Of course, noone claimed it was perfect. Just that it is by far the biggest and most unbiased source we have.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 4, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> My exact point was that without census data you would have to rely on data from partisan organisations. I would suggest that the CofE is an example of a partisan organisation.


or from the ons like this one Religion by sex and age group, Great Britain, January to December 2019 - Office for National Statistics


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 4, 2021)

brogdale said:


> As a non-FB user, I'd be comfortable if folk could share such data in a voluntary manner.


You wouldn't be comfortable when all the money for the NHS was used building 50 hospitals in a village with 200 people in, because a load of anonymous people on facebook voted for that as a joke.


----------



## belboid (Mar 4, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> i'm not saying the data are entirely unproblematic. the census itself isn't free from systemic bias and may include some double counting as well as some people not taking part.


Double counting is a very small issue for the census, they have systems built in to check on such matters (eg double checking those in halls of residence aren’t also listed at their parents, seeing if visitors have responded at their home addresses too).  Should be even less of an issue this time with covid restrictions.  And, unlike the CofE, they have no particular reason to exaggerate or minimise particular numbers.  Vast difference.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 4, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> or from the ons like this one Religion by sex and age group, Great Britain, January to December 2019 - Office for National Statistics


Closer, as it is a non-partisan organisation. But check the following line: "*Estimates are based on a survey and are therefore subject to a margin of uncertainty. They should therefore be treated accordingly.*"

Maybe the ONS could occasionally do a much bigger survey, where they actually tried to talk to everyone in the country, not just a sample? Maybe they could do it once every 10 years too, so it was really easy to see changes over decades?


----------



## planetgeli (Mar 4, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> or more generally to get insight into demographics at a snapshot in time.



Exactly as I outlined in post 586.

Schools, particularly, (as you also mentioned in another post) rely heavily on the Census for prediction of when new buildings are needed.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 4, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> Closer, as it is a non-partisan organisation. But check the following line: "*Estimates are based on a survey and are therefore subject to a margin of uncertainty. They should therefore be treated accordingly.*"
> 
> Maybe the ONS could occasionally do a much bigger survey, where they actually tried to talk to everyone in the country? Maybe they could do it once every 10 years too, so it was really easy to see changes over decades?


i see that they now do very limited talking to people even when they do speak to them. and probably even less this year.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 4, 2021)

I see.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 4, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> You wouldn't be comfortable when all the money for the NHS was used building 50 hospitals in a village with 200 people in, because a load of anonymous people on facebook voted for that as a joke.


Again, I can't see what that's got to do with the religion question?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 4, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Again, I can't see what that's got to do with the religion question?


god answering their prayers


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 4, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Again, I can't see what that's got to do with the religion question?


I can't help you any further.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 4, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> I can't help you any further.


That's OK.


----------



## belboid (Mar 4, 2021)

A video from the Traveller Movement about why the census is greatly important to them.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 4, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> You wouldn't be comfortable when all the money for the NHS was used building 50 hospitals in a village with 200 people in, because a load of anonymous people on facebook voted for that as a joke.


We were talking about the religion question; I think you're talking about bigger issues around the collation of demographic data.
I don't know what makes the neoliberal state confident that it can do without the census in its present form, but I'm kind of assuming there's a belief that they've got alternative means of estimating/modelling demographic trends using real-time, dynamic data sources rather than the decadal snapshot.


----------



## belboid (Mar 4, 2021)

brogdale said:


> We were talking about the religion question; I think you're talking about bigger issues around the collation of demographic data.
> I don't know what makes the neoliberal state confident that it can do without the census in its present form, but I'm kind of assuming there's a belief that they've got alternative means of estimating/modelling demographic trends using real-time, dynamic data sources rather than the decadal snapshot.


That’s one fuck of a naive assumption.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 4, 2021)

belboid said:


> That’s one fuck of a naive assumption.


It was prefaced with "I don't know what makes the neoliberal state confident that it can do without the census in its present form,", so perhaps you know more?


----------



## brogdale (Mar 4, 2021)

It was this sort of stuff that I'd seen:


 but, as I said, if you know more...


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 4, 2021)

brogdale said:


> It was this sort of stuff that I'd seen:
> 
> View attachment 257293
> but, as I said, if you know more...


and they said this National census in 2011 could be last of its kind in 2010

interesting 2003 article about the census The last census? - Prospect Magazine


----------



## belboid (Mar 4, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> and they said this National census in 2011 could be last of its kind in 2010


Yes, they’ve been trying to do away with it for years.  Labour wanted to replace it with us cards and other far more intrusive methods of surveillance.  Hardly something to support in any way shape or form.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 4, 2021)

belboid said:


> Yes, they’ve been trying to do away with it for years.  Labour wanted to replace it with us cards and other far more intrusive methods of surveillance.  Hardly something to support in any way shape or form.


i wasn't proposing or opposing but simply noting


----------



## belboid (Mar 4, 2021)

And I am noting that it’s a really bad idea.


----------



## Kevbad the Bad (Mar 4, 2021)

Even the census is unreliable on religious data. I have it on good authority that physical presence ( no host-related puns intended) at religious services this past year has plummeted catastrophically. It's almost as if no-one has been going to church at all, except for vaccinations, of course.


----------



## belboid (Mar 4, 2021)

Kevbad the Bad said:


> Even the census is unreliable on religious data. I have it on good authority that physical presence ( no host-related puns intended) at religious services this past year has plummeted catastrophically. It's almost as if no-one has been going to church at all, except for vaccinations, of course.


There is no census data on religious attendance over the last year.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 4, 2021)

belboid said:


> And I am noting that it’s a really bad idea.


Will you have the opportunity, in any professional capacity, to have any input into the state decision making about the future of the census in 2023?


----------



## belboid (Mar 4, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Will you have the opportunity, in any professional capacity, to have any input into the state decision making about the future of the census in 2023?


?? No.  ‘Professional capacity?’ Is that the only relevant capacity?


----------



## brogdale (Mar 4, 2021)

belboid said:


> ?? No.  ‘Professional capacity?’ Is that the only relevant capacity?


OK, just thought from the way you posted that you were involved in the census.


----------



## belboid (Mar 4, 2021)

I just know how incredibly useful it is


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 4, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Hmm, but if you believe in the supernatural, then it isn’t supernatural to you


What? Miracles - by definition things that are supernatural - are a significant part of a number of religions.

(I'm probably going to regret getting sucked into this weird thread but it's the end of the work day)


----------



## brogdale (Mar 4, 2021)

belboid said:


> I just know how incredibly useful it is


That's fair enough.
As I said upthread, I too have used censal data professionally, and regret that the government's stupid decision to outsource to a vile US defence & spy corporation means that I feel unable to participate.


----------



## belboid (Mar 4, 2021)

Right, that’s why you’ve spent umpteen pages slagging off every aspect of it and saying it’s next to useless.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 4, 2021)

belboid said:


> Right, that’s why you’ve spent umpteen pages slagging off every aspect of it and saying it’s next to useless.


That's not true.
I've tried to explore the relevance, construction and use of a number of individual questions that appear in the census.


----------



## belboid (Mar 4, 2021)

Sure


----------



## brogdale (Mar 4, 2021)

belboid said:


> Sure


You've been there all the way...so you know.


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Mar 4, 2021)

hash tag said:


> I am not Christian. It would be hypocritical of me to celebrate something I do not believe in. We can hope. We have far too much time off work in this country, the productivity must be shocking. Working a few extra days a year would surely help the greater good and all that.



Perhaps we should all claim to be Hedonists.  Then we might get lots of extra days off.


----------



## hash tag (Mar 4, 2021)

ElizabethofYork said:


> Perhaps we should all claim to be Hedonists.  Then we might get lots of extra days off.


That couldn't be good for the UK economy.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 4, 2021)

hash tag said:


> That couldn't be good for the UK economy.


It might be


----------



## kenny g (Mar 4, 2021)

If someone wants to fill it in that is their choice. Bin bound it will go.


----------



## belboid (Mar 4, 2021)

kenny g said:


> If someone wants to fill it in that is their choice. Bin bound it will go.


Well, it's the law actually, but hey ho


----------



## kenny g (Mar 4, 2021)

belboid said:


> Well, it's the law actually, but hey ho



I suppose you better report us to the relevant authorities then! Showing your true colours at last...


----------



## belboid (Mar 4, 2021)

That will be done by the repeated visits you'll be getting from census officers. So, if you fancy not answering the door for nine months, go wild.


----------



## kenny g (Mar 4, 2021)

belboid said:


> That will be done by the repeated visits you'll be getting from census officers. So, if you fancy not answering the door for nine months, go wild.



Oh no! The census officers! Better fill it in in case they knock on my door. Received absolutely no comeback last time around and expect to receive none this year. 

As I say, null returns will be provided because it is a pile of shite. My time is better served doing anything else. As HMG announce every 10 years they are considering not doing it,   but like some bureaucratic  zombie it stumbles on decade after decade, I will go with the zeitgeist and not participate. I am sure this offends various " census officers" which is a fancy term for local government desk jockeys earning a few extra squid but so be it. The whole concept is like something from the Bible. It is completely outdated and ignores the discovery of statistical sampling hundred of years ago.


----------



## kenny g (Mar 4, 2021)

And by the way, I always answer the door. Haven't had a TV licence since Jimmy Saville's funeral was treated as a national tragedy by the BBC and have absolutely no worries whatsoever about speaking to anyone on my doorstep.


----------



## belboid (Mar 4, 2021)

You’ll waste more time on your doorstep than it would take you to complete it and risk prosecution.   Sounds utterly pointless, but whatever.


----------



## kenny g (Mar 4, 2021)

__





						Non-compliance with the 2021 Census - Office for National Statistics
					





					www.ons.gov.uk
				




Is the kind of twaddle we are up against.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 5, 2021)

kenny g said:


> It is completely outdated and ignores the discovery of statistical sampling hundred of years ago.


I am not an expert in statistics like you must be, but I thought statistical sampling was still quite error-prone, and able to overlook large sections of society? Which, I thought, was why political polls don't all agree with each other, and don't always predict election results correctly.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 5, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> I am not an expert in statistics like you must be, but I thought statistical sampling was still quite error-prone, and able to overlook large sections of society? Which, I thought, was why political polls don't all agree with each other, and don't always predict election results correctly.


Maybe, but the head of the ONS has said that "regular, large scale population surveys", in conjunction with 'administrative data', will be considered in 2023 when they make the decision whether or not to continue with the census in its present form.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 5, 2021)

I know, that has been repeated many times in this thread. The only alternative to him saying that would have been for him to say "we are not even _considering _any alternative ways of doing it, ever", which would rightly be seen as pretty irresponsible and ridiculous thing for a head of statistics to say.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 5, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> I know, that has been repeated many times in this thread. The only alternative to him saying that would have been for him to say "we are not even _considering _any alternative ways of doing it, ever", which would rightly be seen as pretty irresponsible and ridiculous thing for a head of statistics to say.


Not sure what your point is, then...unless you think that the census is some 'sacred cow' beyond change?


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 5, 2021)

My point was: The fact that the ONS are "considering other alternatives" is not any indication that the census "is completely outdated and ignores the discovery of statistical sampling hundred of years ago".


----------



## brogdale (Mar 5, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> My point was: The fact that the ONS are "considering other alternatives" is not any indication that the census "is completely outdated and ignores the discovery of statistical sampling hundred of years ago".


All other ONS data collection is undertaken by (sample) survey; in fact I've currently got an ONS letter on my table inviting me to take part in their latest employment data survey...inc. the £15 shopping voucher incentive.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 5, 2021)

ok


----------



## belboid (Mar 5, 2021)

brogdale said:


> All other ONS data collection is undertaken by (sample) survey; in fact I've currently got an ONS letter on my table inviting me to take part in their latest employment data survey...inc. the £15 shopping voucher incentive.


So?  One big one, lots of little ones. The little ones use the big one as a basis too for correlation and testing of assumptions.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 5, 2021)

OK...the weekend starts here!

Shall we have a look at (voluntary for 16+ year olds) Question 26?


----------



## kenny g (Mar 5, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> I am not an expert in statistics like you must be, but I thought statistical sampling was still quite error-prone, and able to overlook large sections of society? Which, I thought, was why political polls don't all agree with each other, and don't always predict election results correctly.



Ignoring the flaccid attempt at sarcasm, the difference between the inaccuracies of an opinion poll which is designed to reflect voting intentions and statistical sampling for a population survey should be obvious. Statistical sampling is used all the time for numerous purposes - checking the weights of bags of spuds - the consistency of medicines - the effectiveness of vaccines.


----------



## kenny g (Mar 5, 2021)

belboid said:


> So?  One big one, lots of little ones. The little ones use the big one as a basis too for correlation and testing of assumptions.



The problem with the "one big one" is that it has  flaws where significant groups of the population aren't covered. You have already highlighted traveller/ roma communities but there are plenty of other issues with regards to people living in HMO's etc etc. Executing sampling well can be more accurate then taking an approach which is , at best, from the 19thC.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 6, 2021)

kenny g said:


> Ignoring the flaccid attempt at sarcasm, the difference between the inaccuracies of an opinion poll which is designed to reflect voting intentions and statistical sampling for a population survey should be obvious. Statistical sampling is used all the time for numerous purposes - checking the weights of bags of spuds - the consistency of medicines - the effectiveness of vaccines.


What are you basing your complete confidence that statistical sampling is more accurate than asking 95% of the population? Have you studied it (informally or formally, I'm not saying you need a qualification,  but you do need to have spent time on it)? 

Everything I learnt about statistics says that the greater the sample size, the closer the result approaches accuracy; if you can point me to anything that contradicts that, do it now.

I think it is pretty obvious to most people that the census is closer in nature to an election (ie they are both asking questions of the human population of the UK) than it is to "checking the weights of bags of spuds".

If you are not basing your complete confidence on anything in particular, then why would anyone listen to your opinion on it? It would be like paying attention to a random email telling you you won a lottery.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 6, 2021)

kenny g said:


> Executing sampling well can be more accurate then taking an approach which is , at best, from the 19thC.


19th century is pretty recent as far as maths goes. We still use pythagoras theorem from like 500BC; because it is still right. So age of an approach isn't necessarily a reason to cancel it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 6, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> 19th century is pretty recent as far as maths goes. We still use pythagoras theorem from like 500BC; because it is still right. So age of an approach isn't necessarily a reason to cancel it.


Pythagoras also famous for his ban on beans


----------



## kenny g (Mar 6, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> If you are not basing your complete confidence on anything in particular, then why would anyone listen to your opinion on it? It would be like paying attention to a random email telling you you won a lottery.



Would never profess complete confidence in anything but do have a high degree of certainty :/ 

If you do a 95% sample but miss out 5% of the population all of whom happen to be from a particular sector then that is less accurate than a 20% sample which includes a representation of the missed out sector in the sample. For example, if you design a census that includes  the 95% of the population who can read and write you miss out all of those who can't. If you take a complete return of 20% of the population including those who can't read and write and then  extrapolate, the result will be more representative as it includes the illiterate. 

Statistical sampling recognises the real world fact that a 100 % sample is not achievable and that the percentage who are not sampled in the attempt to reach 100% are often the ones that particularly need to be included in returns.


----------



## kenny g (Mar 6, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> 19th century is pretty recent as far as maths goes. We still use pythagoras theorem from like 500BC; because it is still right. So age of an approach isn't necessarily a reason to cancel it.



Thanks for stating the obvious. According to the wiki page on statistical sampling a form of it is referenced in the Bible so I suppose it has pedigree. My point was that things have moved on from the time of Herod and even the 1801 census. We are not talking about predictions of voting intentions but measuring actual facts on the ground. Doing a rigorous sample would be more accurate than the current system of forms chased up by half hearted door knockings.


----------



## hipipol (Mar 6, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> 19th century is pretty recent as far as maths goes. We still use pythagoras theorem from like 500BC; because it is still right. So age of an approach isn't necessarily a reason to cancel it.


Equally his Dualist obsession about no shagging, renouncing worldly wealth has been practiced ever since.......besides he knew fuck all about stats and was obv completely nuts about anything other than triangles - Euclid would have been a better example
I will answer everything truthfully and trust em, everything or my names not Guiermo Anusol the 3rd


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 6, 2021)

kenny g said:


> Would never profess complete confidence in anything but do have a high degree of certainty :/
> 
> If you do a 95% sample but miss out 5% of the population all of whom happen to be from a particular sector then that is less accurate than a 20% sample which includes a representation of the missed out sector in the sample. For example, if you design a census that includes  the 95% of the population who can read and write you miss out all of those who can't. If you take a complete return of 20% of the population including those who can't read and write and then  extrapolate, the result will be more representative as it includes the illiterate.
> 
> Statistical sampling recognises the real world fact that a 100 % sample is not achievable and that the percentage who are not sampled in the attempt to reach 100% are often the ones that particularly need to be included in returns.


What sources are you basing your "high degree of confidence" in, then? Or is it just that you reckon what you say feels about right?

Are any of the figures you quote (eg "all of the 5% who were missed by the census were from 1 demographic", "5% of the population cant read or write") based on real studies, or did you make then up from thin air to try to justify your argument?

Would you be happy with a 20% of population statistical survey then? At what percentage of the population would you start being unhappy with it?

I guess you are already aware of the community engagement programmes to increase response in communities that tend to have lower response rates eg travelers as already mentioned. Not sure what a statistical survey would do to improve on that.


----------



## kenny g (Mar 6, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> What sources are you basing your "high degree of confidence" in, then? Or is it just that you reckon what you say feels about right?
> 
> Are any of the figures you quote (eg "all of the 5% who were missed by the census were from 1 demographic", "5% of the population cant read or write") based on real studies, or did you make then up from thin air to try to justify your argument?


 
This is getting silly. It was an example. You are now misquoting me.

I am not coming out with some esoteric pseudo-science. As stated previously, statistical sampling is used widely and effectively in the real world.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 6, 2021)

Your objection to a 95% sample was that it was probably overlooking entire demographics wasn't it? I am suggesting that is very unlikely, particularly given community engagement programmes, and would in fact be far more likely to happen with smaller sample sizes.

In fact, to do a good statistical sample you need the census data. Otherwise where would you look to find out what percentage demographics you need to replicate to get a good snapshot of the population?


----------



## kenny g (Mar 6, 2021)

rutabowa This thread pretty much covers the same topic if you want to read up on it.









						Why is it claimed that a sample is often more accurate than a census?
					

When learning the course of sampling, I meet the following two statements:  1) Sampling error leads to mostly variability, nonsampling errors lead to bias.  2) Because of nonsampling error, a sampl...




					stats.stackexchange.com


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 6, 2021)

kenny g said:


> rutabowa This thread pretty much covers the same topic if you want to read up on it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Right I'm going in on it now.


----------



## kenny g (Mar 6, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> Your objection to a 95% sample was that it was probably overlooking entire demographics wasn't it? I am suggesting that is very unlikely, particularly given community engagement programmes, and would in fact be far more likely to happen with smaller sample sizes.



I do not trust the census in Tower Hamlets or Newham, for example, to be in anyway as accurate as leafy parts of Hertfordshire. I just do not believe that sufficient resources are going to be put into getting accurate figures for these areas.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 6, 2021)

kenny g said:


> rutabowa This thread pretty much covers the same topic if you want to read up on it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I mean 3 of the 5 the answers in that link say that a census will most likely be more accurate than a survey (except in very specific cirumstances). The top voted answer says "So apart from quite unusual circumstances I would say a census is going to be more accurate than a sample." The other two answers point to possible lack of care in some censuses due to the assumption that everyone is covered so no effort needs to be put in to engaging. But as I said, in this specific census we are talking about there are community engagement programmes to try to mitigate this.

And NONE of the answers go so far as you have done and said "a statistical sample is always better than a census and should always replace them". they make points about efficiency, which of course I agree with and that is why the census only happen every 10 years and most ONS studies are done using sampling (which as i said they need the census data for to do accurately)


----------



## kenny g (Mar 6, 2021)

Fair enough. I don't have a great deal of faith in the effectiveness of community engagement programmes and reckon the census misses out significant swathes of the population. I am not aware of ONS doing "deep surveys" In particular areas to see if normal processes are missing out substantial numbers or sectors but I may be wrong. I am thinking of the people who sleep in shop basements, beds in sheds, or the bunk beds in annexes on family houses etc etc.  Also warehouses with bunk beds where staff live illegally. Some London Boroughs have loads of these kinds of accommodation.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 6, 2021)

For sure there will be people missed... I do think, though, that those people who you mentioned would also be missed by a statistical sample (how would the statisticians know that they exist when planning the sample?), and at least with the census there is slightly more of a chance at representing them as there are people going out to every address.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 6, 2021)

brogdale said:


> I get that, but the circumstance under which the ONS has decided to proceed with this census are new.
> Elderly and vulnerable shielding folk who might have had support from family members in the past are on their own atm and the previous MO of fieldworkers going into houses to act as an amanuensis is inoperable.



And as a result the data produced will be a pile of steaming shit. Comparing like for like with prior censuses, which is half the point of the whole excercise, will be impossible.


----------



## hash tag (Mar 6, 2021)

From this morning's walk


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 6, 2021)

was gonna tick no religion but might now vote Jewish so I get more holidays. I’m doing this right, aren’t I?


----------



## hash tag (Mar 6, 2021)

Imagine 

Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion, too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace... You...


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 6, 2021)

SpookyFrank said:


> And as a result the data produced will be a pile of steaming shit. Comparing like for like with prior censuses, which is half the point of the whole excercise, will be impossible.


Were the census people allowed to go inside people's houses to help fill in forms in 2011 then? It is definitely not allowed this year, but the reason given isn't covid, it is just personal safety.


----------



## planetgeli (Mar 6, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> was gonna tick no religion but might now vote Jewish so I get more holidays. I’m doing this right, aren’t I?



Yes. Add 'French' somewhere for even more. You'll barely need to work again.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 6, 2021)

hash tag said:


> Imagine
> 
> Nothing to kill or die for
> And no religion, too
> ...


Written by a man who had a whole apartment hired below his to store all of his and Ono's fur coats


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 6, 2021)

hash tag said:


> From this morning's walkView attachment 257540



They clearly don't give a shit about who is not religious or the number of places in catholic schools wouldn't outstrip the number of catholic children by a factor of about 3:1.


----------



## muscovyduck (Mar 6, 2021)

I filled this in now. Got tripped up a bit on some of the education questions. For nationality I went with "how would I describe myself if I was in a foreign country/how would they describe me". Went with no religion, am culturally attached to one but I want to see its downfall


----------



## planetgeli (Mar 6, 2021)

muscovyduck said:


> For nationality I went with "how would I describe myself if I was in a foreign country/how would they describe me".



Ah, but which foreign country? In the Philippines we had a couple talking to us who got really offended because they insisted we must be Dutch and we were trying to tell them we were from the UK.

"You know (they didn't) London, UK."

"OK. So that makes you what religion? Buddhist, right?"

True conversation. We are not the centre of the world we like to think we are.


----------



## muscovyduck (Mar 6, 2021)

planetgeli said:


> Ah, but which foreign country? In Indonesia we had a couple talking to us who got really offended because they insisted we must be Dutch and we were trying to tell them we were from the UK.
> 
> "You know (they didn't) London, UK."
> 
> ...


Yes I was gonna elaborate but on my mobile. Mainly thinking of where my family's from and how they describe me 'back home', and places where people don't care about the difference between say English and British or Northern Irish and Irish which is most the world tbh


----------



## Kevbad the Bad (Mar 6, 2021)

hash tag said:


> Imagine
> 
> Nothing to kill or die for
> And no religion, too
> ...


Imagine there's no census
It isn't hard to do
no questionnaires or surveys
and no electoral register too
Imagine 95% of the people
with nothing much to do
on the 21st March 2021.


----------



## kenny g (Mar 6, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> For sure there will be people missed... I do think, though, that those people who you mentioned would also be missed by a statistical sample (how would the statisticians know that they exist when planning the sample?), and at least with the census there is slightly more of a chance at representing them as there are people going out to every address.



The point is they are not going to every address in an effective manner. It is at most bods moonlighting from their council jobs knocking on doors asking for forms to be filled out which they probably will be but excluding the bunch of bunk beds in the garage in the garden. An effective sample would be choosing one area and using satellite/ aerial images along with infrared from helicopters, as well as visits to shop basements/ warehosues and actually drilling down to who is sleeping overnight in one ward in one London Borough. I reckon you would find fuck loads more people than you get on census returns.


----------



## steveo87 (Mar 6, 2021)

Unfortunately,  Mrs o87 got to it before I could, so it was filled out legitimately.....


----------



## kenny g (Mar 6, 2021)

steveo87 said:


> Unfortunately,  Mrs o87 got to it before I could, so it was filled out legitimately.....


My wife gets a separate one for her and the children which is possible and a good compromise.


----------



## belboid (Mar 6, 2021)

kenny g said:


> The point is they are not going to every address in an effective manner. It is at most bods moonlighting from their council jobs knocking on doors asking for forms to be filled out which they probably will be but excluding the bunch of bunk beds in the garage in the garden. An effective sample would be choosing one area and using satellite/ aerial images along with infrared from helicopters, as well as visits to shop basements/ warehosues and actually drilling down to who is sleeping overnight in one ward in one London Borough. I reckon you would find fuck loads more people than you get on census returns.


Balls.

the census workers (who, as noted throughout the thread if you havent been paying any attention) are temp workers specially hiried (badly) through an agency. They will, as they have done every decade, go around every house that hasn't returned it and push them toward doing so, answering queries as they go. At that point they will (probably) remind returners that they should make mention of everyone in the house that night, including sofa surfers, people in overcrowded conditions etc etc - and they should probably mention that no non-anonymised data is shared with other government departments for benefits, HMRC etc etc  (ie, they wont grass if the filler is working unlawfully or living with someone when they declare they are single.)  A method such as the one you suggest would, at the very best, merely reveal who lived in one London borough, but it wouldn't really do that effectively as, without giving the officers massively intrusive powers, the amount people would fib would still be as high. And if they had those powers, then those exploiting such people would get wind and just bloody move them for a night or two.

As to travellers, the sites are pretty well known, they aren't in hiding.  So they will be visited, pushed and helped to complete, but, if they dont (and it is well known that such marginalised groups are the least likely to complete, although that 4% also includes a broad range of lazy wankers and bizarre objectees) crude numbers will at least be taken. Not perfect, but better than any other method tried.  It also shows up where further research efforts are required. something a narrower sample wouldn't (or wouldnt anything like as well).  Very small communities are very badly served by such sampling, you might get an idea of how many such small communities there are, but not actually what or where they are.


----------



## belboid (Mar 6, 2021)

kenny g said:


> My wife gets a separate one for her and the children which is possible and a good compromise.


you mean she just omits your details from the one form.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 6, 2021)

kenny g said:


> An effective sample would be choosing one area and using satellite/ aerial images along with infrared from helicopters, as well as visits to shop basements/ warehosues and actually drilling down to who is sleeping overnight in one ward in one London Borough.


That sounds really intrusive to me compared to the census, I don't think it would even be legal. Has anyone seriously suggested that as a possibility? Are you really sure you would prefer that level of surveillance?


----------



## xenon (Mar 6, 2021)

SpookyFrank said:


> And as a result the data produced will be a pile of steaming shit. Comparing like for like with prior censuses, which is half the point of the whole excercise, will be impossible.



I agree they should’ve postponed it until next year. but this idea that all the elderly or otherwise shielding people, are totally Internet illiterate, have no one who can help them is a bit over the top.


----------



## kenny g (Mar 6, 2021)

belboid said:


> Balls.
> 
> the census workers (who, as noted throughout the thread if you havent been paying any attention) are temp workers specially hiried (badly) through an agency. They will, as they have done every decade, go around every house that hasn't returned it and push them toward doing so, answering queries as they go. At that point they will (probably) remind returners that they should make mention of everyone in the house that night, including sofa surfers, people in overcrowded conditions etc etc - and they should probably mention that no non-anonymised data is shared with other government departments for benefits, HMRC etc etc  (ie, they wont grass if the filler is working unlawfully or living with someone when they declare they are single.)  A method such as the one you suggest would, at the very best, merely reveal who lived in one London borough, but it wouldn't really do that effectively as, without giving the officers massively intrusive powers, the amount people would fib would still be as high. And if they had those powers, then those exploiting such people would get wind and just bloody move them for a night or two.
> 
> As to travellers, the sites are pretty well known, they aren't in hiding.  So they will be visited, pushed and helped to complete, but, if they dont (and it is well known that such marginalised groups are the least likely to complete, although that 4% also includes a broad range of lazy wankers and bizarre objectees) crude numbers will at least be taken. Not perfect, but better than any other method tried.  It also shows up where further research efforts are required. something a narrower sample wouldn't (or wouldnt anything like as well).  Very small communities are very badly served by such sampling, you might get an idea of how many such small communities there are, but not actually what or where they are.



Bollocks and balderdash!

Ignoring your "you haven't been paying attention" tones, you appear to have little or no understanding of statistical sampling. The evidence of one ward of one Borough could be used to extrapolate to other wards in other Boroughs.

 Using IR to identify beds in sheds has already been used in local authorities for planning enforcement and EPC purposes. Checking shop basements/ warehouses or in fact people's garages for residents would not be an especially intrusive power and is already available to local authority enforcement teams.


----------



## xenon (Mar 6, 2021)

I haven’t had my letter with the code on yet. Unless I have already accidentally shredded it.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 6, 2021)

kenny g said:


> It is at most bods moonlighting from their council jobs knocking on doors


This is just 100% completely wrong.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 6, 2021)

kenny g said:


> you appear to have little or no understanding of statistical sampling.


The only you link you provided with information about statistical sampling says that census data is more accurate than statistical sampling (in all but a few unusual situations).


----------



## kabbes (Mar 6, 2021)

We just did ours and it was “do you have a medical condition?” that caused the most uncertainty in this house of middle-aged people.


----------



## kenny g (Mar 6, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> This is just 100% completely wrong.



OK, give me evidence why it is 100% wrong. Fool.


----------



## kenny g (Mar 6, 2021)

kabbes said:


> We just did ours and it was “do you have a medical condition?” that caused the most uncertainty in this house of middle-aged people.


 Nobby stiles?


----------



## belboid (Mar 6, 2021)

kenny g said:


> Bollocks and balderdash!
> 
> Ignoring your "you haven't been paying attention" tones, you appear to have little or no understanding of statistical sampling. The evidence of one ward of one Borough could be used to extrapolate to other wards in other Boroughs.
> 
> Using IR to identify beds in sheds has already been used in local authorities for planning enforcement and EPC purposes. Checking shop basements/ warehouses or in fact people's garages for residents would not be an especially intrusive power and is already available to local authority enforcement teams.


giggles

Of course things can be extrapolated from one ward, but they dont do see very well.    See every election opinion poll ever carried out


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 6, 2021)

kenny g said:


> Using IR to identify beds in sheds has already been used in local authorities for planning enforcement and EPC purposes. Checking shop basements/ warehouses or in fact people's garages for residents would not be an especially intrusive power and is already available to local authority enforcement teams.


Checking all the properties in an area with IR, and also checking all basements and gardens? That would be rightly condemned. It sounds like something the gestapo would do. As well as being completely impractical (it would probably cost more than a full census).


----------



## belboid (Mar 6, 2021)

kenny g said:


> OK, give me evidence why it is 100% wrong. Fool.


because they are recruited by Adecco and are usually full-time so they wouldnt have time to do a council job on top.  We've been through this umpteen times already.









						The ONS appoints the Adecco Group UK&I to staff the 2021 Census team - Adecco Group UK & Ireland
					

The Adecco Group UK and Ireland has announced its 'CEO for One Month' for 2019




					adeccogroup.co.uk


----------



## kenny g (Mar 6, 2021)

belboid said:


> giggles
> 
> Of course things can be extrapolated from one ward, but they dont do see very well.    See every election opinion poll ever carried out



Opinion polls are used to predict future intentions. Completely different kind of sampling.


----------



## belboid (Mar 6, 2021)

lol


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 6, 2021)

kenny g said:


> OK, give me evidence why it is 100% wrong. Fool.


Cos that bit has been outsourced as previously discussed on here


----------



## kenny g (Mar 6, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> Checking all the properties in an area with IR, and also checking all basements and gardens? That would be rightly condemned. *It sounds like something the gestapo would do*. As well as being completely impractical (it would probably cost more than a full census).



Right. I hereby invoke Godwin's law. Case dismissed. And how the fuck doing a decent survey of one ward of one Borough would be more expensive than crap surveys of a host of similar Boroughs/ Wards is beyond me.


----------



## belboid (Mar 6, 2021)

double lol


----------



## xenon (Mar 6, 2021)

My God there is some absolute bullshit posted on this thread. I mean you Kenny, sorry.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 6, 2021)

kenny g said:


> Right. I hereby invoke Godwin's law. Case dismissed. And how the fuck doing a decent survey of one ward of one Borough would be more expensive than crap surveys of a host of similar Boroughs/ Wards is beyond me.


You seem confused, I will leave you here.


----------



## kenny g (Mar 6, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Cos that bit has been outsourced as previously discussed on here



So, these bods are going to be effective at identifying all people living in an area?? Census officer job with Adecco | 685764.

Of course they won't. They will knock on doors at most. My point stands.


----------



## xenon (Mar 6, 2021)

Using infer red to analyse every house. Mental.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 6, 2021)

Kevbad the Bad said:


> Imagine there's no census
> It isn't hard to do
> no questionnaires or surveys
> and no electoral register too
> ...


No electoral register? Give over!


----------



## kenny g (Mar 6, 2021)

xenon said:


> My God there is some absolute bullshit posted on this thread. I mean you Kenny, sorry.



Thank you for your "contribution".


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Mar 6, 2021)

i'm still contemplating the 'religion' question





__





						About CatReligion.org | Cat Religion dot org
					

CatReligion.org is a central site for information on the worship of the goddess Bast and the spiritual appreciation of Her children, who humans know as cats.




					catreligion.org


----------



## belboid (Mar 6, 2021)

kenny g said:


> So, these bods are going to be effective at identifying all people living in an area?? Census officer job with Adecco | 685764.
> 
> Of course they won't. They will knock on doors at most. My point stands.


your point stands in a very deep puddle, which seems to be mostly filled with shite.


----------



## kenny g (Mar 6, 2021)

xenon said:


> Using infer red to analyse every house. Mental.



Yeh, Mental. (and BTW I find the use of that term offensive)









						Spy in the sky catches dozens of rogue landlords in Oxford keeping tenants in 'appalling' beds in sheds
					

A PLANE flying over the streets of Oxford has helped catch dozens of rogue landlords keeping tenants in 'appalling' conditions in garden sheds.




					www.oxfordmail.co.uk
				








__





						Beds-in-Sheds Thermal Camera reveals 5 Harrow Cannabis Farms | Tester Blog
					

News broke yesterday about five cannabis farms having been spotted in Harrow, home to one of England's poshest 'public' schools, where there appears to have been rampant profiteering by unscrupulous landlords in their thousands throughout the country renting out sheds with beds at up to £10,000...




					www.tester.co.uk
				








__





						Bluesky Aerial Mapping Helps Harrow Council Tackle Growing Beds in Sheds Problem - The American Surveyor
					

Bluesky Aerial Mapping Helps Harrow Council Tackle Growing Beds in Sheds Problem




					amerisurv.com
				




etc


----------



## xenon (Mar 6, 2021)

kenny g said:


> Thank you for your "contribution".



well it’s been better than yours to be fair.


----------



## kenny g (Mar 6, 2021)

belboid said:


> your point stands in a very deep puddle, which seems to be mostly filled with shite.



Beautiful imagery but still waiting for some kind of substantive argument from you...


----------



## belboid (Mar 6, 2021)

kenny g said:


> Beautiful imagery but still waiting for some kind of substantive argument from you...


I've already provided direct evidence about you being wrong about who works on the census.  You even incorporated it into a subsequent post of yours.  So you know you are talking out of your arse just as well as the rest of us know it.


----------



## kenny g (Mar 6, 2021)

xenon said:


> well it’s been better than yours to be fair.



Apparently I am "mental" for suggesting something that is being used widely in the UK already by local authorities.


----------



## xenon (Mar 6, 2021)

kenny g said:


> Yeh, Mental. (and BTW I find the use of that term offensive)
> 
> 
> 
> ...



right, and how practical is it to use that technology to surveya whole borough? as already mentioned the cost apart from anything else.


----------



## xenon (Mar 6, 2021)

And what does IR tell you about the occupants of those places anyway. Apologies if I’ve caused you offence by saying mental by the way.


----------



## kenny g (Mar 6, 2021)

xenon said:


> right, and how practical is it to use that technology to surveya whole borough? as already mentioned the cost apart from anything else.



As practical as surveying Oxford? In any case, I referred to a ward in a Borough. Are you suggesting that door knocking will be as effective as IR?


----------



## kenny g (Mar 6, 2021)

Anyway, off for a walk but appreciate you allowing me the opportunity to expose your ignorance!


----------



## belboid (Mar 6, 2021)

kenny g said:


> Anyway, off for a walk but appreciate you allowing me the opportunity to expose your ignorance!


hard to be as ignorant as someone who thinks that results from a single ward anywhere in the country can simply be applied to all other wards across the country.


----------



## kenny g (Mar 6, 2021)

belboid said:


> hard to be as ignorant as someone who thinks that results from a single ward anywhere in the country can simply be applied to all other wards across the country.



Not what I said but then misrepresenting and building straw men is par for the course with some folks.


----------



## xenon (Mar 6, 2021)

kenny g said:


> As practical as surveying Oxford? In any case, I referred to a ward in a Borough. Are you suggesting that door knocking will be as effective as IR?



i’m suggesting a comprehensive census is a better way of tracking broad demographic changes thn using infrared to Survey a few buildings in a select region.


----------



## xenon (Mar 6, 2021)

I mean that’s what is For, to track broad changes. Specific surveys to reach other communities regarding particular issues can build on that.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 6, 2021)

So, how's it been going in here, then?


----------



## belboid (Mar 6, 2021)

kenny g said:


> Not what I said but then misrepresenting and building straw men is par for the course with some folks.





kenny g said:


> The evidence of one ward of one Borough could be used to extrapolate to other wards in other Boroughs.


looks pretty fucknig similar


----------



## belboid (Mar 6, 2021)

brogdale said:


> So, how's it been going in here, then?


someone's after your crown


----------



## hash tag (Mar 7, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> This is just 100% completely wrong.





kenny g said:


> OK, give me evidence why it is 100% wrong. Fool.


I am a council employee and there is a note on our intranet asking if we want to help.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 7, 2021)

hash tag said:


> I am a council employee and there is a note on our intranet asking if we want to help.


For knocking on doors?


----------



## brogdale (Mar 7, 2021)

Can anyone explain why question H3 is necessary for the census data and it's eventual analysis, interpretation and use?


----------



## belboid (Mar 7, 2021)

Are you really asking why they want a list of people who are residing at a particular address?


----------



## brogdale (Mar 7, 2021)

belboid said:


> Are you really asking why they want a list of people who are residing at a particular address?


Their names; yes.
Instead of person 1, 2 etc.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 7, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Their names; yes.
> Instead of person 1, 2 etc.


They need to make sure there are no duplicates - a householder may fill out the form for everyone in the house, but others living there might also fill it in as individuals


----------



## brogdale (Mar 7, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> They need to make sure there are no duplicates - a householder may fill out the form for everyone in the house, but others living there might also fill it in as individuals


I see; that makes sense.
There being no other fool-proof means of checking for any duplication at any one household like DoB?


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 7, 2021)

brogdale said:


> I see; that makes sense.
> There being no other fool-proof means of checking for any duplication at any one household like DoB?


People might share DoBs


----------



## brogdale (Mar 7, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> People might share DoBs


tbf, people might share names.


----------



## belboid (Mar 7, 2021)

Duplication (very important if people are allowed visitors), counting the number of ‘family’ units as opposed to HMOs.  The alternative would be a large database of everybody.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 7, 2021)

belboid said:


> Duplication (very important if people are allowed visitors), counting the number of ‘family’ units as opposed to HMOs.  The alternative would be a large database of everybody.


I would think that allowing (online) census returns over a 3 week period might produce more duplication, tbh.
If respondents accurately recorded the household on one day why should anonymised data produce more duplication?


----------



## brogdale (Mar 7, 2021)

Albeit the US bureau, but here's the justification they offer for name collection:



Looks a tad weak, given that a anonymised collection might yield more data from marginalised groups?


----------



## belboid (Mar 7, 2021)

brogdale said:


> I would think that allowing (online) census returns over a 3 week period might produce more duplication, tbh.
> If respondents accurately recorded the household on one day why should anonymised data produce more duplication?


Because people wouldn’t all respond on the same day.  And they’d likely go ‘oh I missed the day, sod it then’


----------



## brogdale (Mar 7, 2021)

belboid said:


> Because people wouldn’t all respond on the same day.  And they’d likely go ‘oh I missed the day, sod it then’


Maybe.
So a return with false names would yield all the data that users demand and, for anyone unwilling to enter their name into a state database, could avoid a fine for non-completion?


----------



## brogdale (Mar 7, 2021)

Yeah, that's it just use credible false names; I can't see how within the assurances of confidentiality that any check could verify.


----------



## belboid (Mar 7, 2021)

You would be eligible for a fine as you were providing untrue information. There are umpteen checks that can be carried out, as I believe the ONS have access to other info (HMRC, DWP etc) that they can double check against.  There is always a double check on submitted details for random postcodes (a fairly standard procedure).


----------



## brogdale (Mar 7, 2021)

belboid said:


> You would be eligible for a fine as you were providing untrue information. There are umpteen checks that can be carried out, as I believe the ONS have access to other info (HMRC, DWP etc) that they can double check against.  There is always a double check on submitted details for random postcodes (a fairly standard procedure).


In 2011 were there any convictions for false data?


----------



## moochedit (Mar 7, 2021)

Questions 49 asks if you mainly work at home or at an office and 50 for the office address if applicable. The problem is yes recently in the weeks since the new year i have mainly worked at home but normally i work in an office and i expect to return to office working in the next few months. Considering it's done every 10 years they don't seem to have allowed for the fact that home working is just temporary for many people.


----------



## belboid (Mar 7, 2021)

brogdale said:


> In 2011 were there any convictions for false data?


no idea


----------



## brogdale (Mar 7, 2021)

belboid said:


> no idea


Reckon Mary and Robert Smith might be over-represented.


----------



## bimble (Mar 7, 2021)

just did it and feel very disappointed, seems like an amazing opportunity to ask questions that might actually be useful or interesting for future planning and there's really nothing there, just what sort of job you do and do you have a car.


----------



## moochedit (Mar 7, 2021)

bimble said:


> just did it and feel very disappointed, seems like an amazing opportunity to ask questions that might actually be useful or interesting for future planning and there's really nothing there, just what sort of job you do and do you have a car.



I think the job address/car stuff is to do with public transport planning (bus routes etc).


----------



## belboid (Mar 7, 2021)

bimble said:


> questions that might actually be useful or interesting for future planning


such as?


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Mar 7, 2021)

belboid said:


> such as?



beans or cheese first?


----------



## bimble (Mar 7, 2021)

belboid said:


> such as?


now you've got me, idk. Was vaguely thinking nhs capacity planning, or what 3 things would make your life better, are you lonely, do you have any plans to reproduce, do you hope to emigrate, that sort of thing.  Stuff i'd be interested in looking at the results from millions of people's input.
But I suppose if it was anonymous you could ask those things, questions about mental health, fears and priorities, how much you drink, that sort of thing, but its very not anonymous so that wouldn't actually work.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 8, 2021)

That last option for Q 19 is proper lol



,,,kinda begs the question of how you chose that option!


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 8, 2021)

brogdale said:


> That last option for Q 19 is proper lol
> 
> View attachment 257899
> 
> ,,,kinda begs the question of how you chose that option!


The form is available in many languages


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 8, 2021)

I’m doing my first phone census thing tomorrow, will report back


----------



## brogdale (Mar 8, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> I’m doing my first phone census thing tomorrow, will report back


Is that helping folk to complete online?


----------



## brogdale (Mar 8, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> The form is available in many languages


Slightly odd question, though.
Setting aside folk with speech impediments, even those with English as their first language might well find it difficult to decide how well they speak the language, don't you think?


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 8, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Is that helping folk to complete online?


Yes. We had quite a few confused people in today who didn’t know what to do.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 8, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Slightly odd question, though.
> Setting aside folk with speech impediments, even those with English as their first language might well find it difficult to decide how well they speak the language, don't you think?


No I don’t. I can speak rudimentary French but i am also able to make the assessment that my French is very poor. C’est la vie!


----------



## Serge Forward (Mar 8, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> No I don’t. I can speak rudimentary French but i am also able to make the assessment that my French is very poor. C’est la vie!


Rudimentary is better than mine. Although my French does have a certain je ne sais rien


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 8, 2021)

Serge Forward said:


> Rudimentary is better than mine. Although my French does have a certain je ne sais rien


Was that a deliberate mistake?


----------



## Serge Forward (Mar 8, 2021)

Quoi?


----------



## brogdale (Mar 8, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Yes. We had quite a few confused people in today who didn’t know what to do.


Older folk?


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 8, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Older folk?


Aye, and people with language barriers. You also get a lot of people who don’t read the whole letter, either cos they have literacy issues or cos they read the first paragraph and  panic. This happens a lot with anything official-looking - council, DWP, HMRC, banks etc


----------



## kebabking (Mar 8, 2021)

I'm going to risk it - I'm not fucking telling any cunt how my general health is. They can piss off, nosey cunts...


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Mar 8, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Was that a deliberate mistake?



mange tout, rodney


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 8, 2021)

Puddy_Tat said:


> mange tout, rodney


Ashby De La Zouche, mon frere, Ashby De La Zouche


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 9, 2021)

It’s quite difficult asking very old people what their last job was (with a brief description of their duties) or the month and year that they arrived in the UK. Also the gender identity question can be met with total bafflement or outrage


----------



## andysays (Mar 9, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> There’s a Church of John Coltrane.  They know he was a jazz musician.  It’s tempting to think they’re just jazz fans with a heightened sense of metaphor, but they claim to be sincere.


I think I might put that down this year, although I might get Orang Utan's stern disapproval as a result


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 9, 2021)

andysays said:


> I think I might put that down this year, although I might get Orang Utan's stern disapproval as a result


Do what you like - I don’t give a fuck!


----------



## kebabking (Mar 9, 2021)

Help me Urban, for I face a conundrum....

I want to bin the thing because while I can see the usefulness of it, I simply refuse to answer questions about my health and sexuality (I'm healthy and boringly straight, but that's not the point), on the other hand I really want to write in some of the other answers, both for the (to me) lols, and just to fuck shit up.

Help me Holy Urban, for I wish to sin, I'm just not sure which one to choose....


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 9, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> It’s quite difficult asking very old people what their last job was (with a brief description of their duties) or the month and year that they arrived in the UK. Also the gender identity question can be met with total bafflement or outrage


Also, had to ask about ethnicity when the person was unsure about a parent’s background having never met them or heard them spoke about


----------



## andysays (Mar 9, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Do what you like - I don’t give a fuck!


I was afraid you would report me for putting down a religion which isn't a real religion, so I'm greatly relieved to hear you won't.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 9, 2021)

kebabking said:


> Help me Urban, for I face a conundrum....
> 
> I want to bin the thing because while I can see the usefulness of it, I simply refuse to answer questions about my health and sexuality (I'm healthy and boringly straight, but that's not the point), on the other hand I really want to write in some of the other answers, both for the (to me) lols, and just to fuck shit up.
> 
> Help me Holy Urban, for I wish to sin, I'm just not sure which one to choose....


I'm thinking that for any folk that want to return with false answers/gaps it's probs best to ask for the paper version because, and I'm guessing here, I assume that the online thing will be like any fucking online form and not let you progress until you've given a response?

And for those that want the 'specially trained' goons off your case, maybe returning under "Mary & Robert Smith" might be a solution?
They'd be hard pressed to prove that you're not dumb or struggle with English enough to make such an 'innocent mistake'.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 9, 2021)

andysays said:


> I was afraid you would report me for putting down a religion which isn't a real religion, so I'm greatly relieved to hear you won't.


That would be unprofessional - I have to put down what people say, even if they misspell it


----------



## belboid (Mar 9, 2021)

kebabking said:


> Help me Urban, for I face a conundrum....
> 
> I want to bin the thing because while I can see the usefulness of it, I simply refuse to answer questions about my health and sexuality (I'm healthy and boringly straight, but that's not the point), on the other hand I really want to write in some of the other answers, both for the (to me) lols, and just to fuck shit up.
> 
> Help me Holy Urban, for I wish to sin, I'm just not sure which one to choose....


the sexuality question is voluntary so you can ignore it if you choose. Though if you are planning on filling the rest in with made up shit, why not just make those bits up too?


----------



## belboid (Mar 9, 2021)

brogdale said:


> goons


prick


----------



## kebabking (Mar 9, 2021)

belboid said:


> the sexuality question is voluntary so you can ignore it if you choose. Though if you are planning on filling the rest in with made up shit, why not just make those bits up too?



nah, theres another thats not voluntary - Q5, its about if you've been divorced and whether that person was of same or opposite sex as you.


----------



## belboid (Mar 9, 2021)

kebabking said:


> nah, theres another thats not voluntary - Q5, its about if you've been divorced and whether that person was of same or opposite sex as you.


oh yeah, forgot that one.


----------



## girasol (Mar 9, 2021)

There seems to be less questions than on last census? Is anyone else doing this for the religion section -> CLIMATE CONCERNED
Census 2021: Declare Yourself Climate Concerned (I haven't given them my email, but filled in the census form)
Seems like a good thing to do.  I did it, not submitted yet though, my husband still has to fill in his section.


----------



## belboid (Mar 9, 2021)

girasol said:


> There seems to be less questions than on last census?


Fewer.

Last time there were 14 household questions and 43 individual ones. this time there are 14 and 50. Three have been added (as discussed above), i think the others are breakdowns of previously asked questions, but I haven't gone through and fully compared them.


----------



## girasol (Mar 9, 2021)

belboid said:


> Fewer.



pedant


----------



## belboid (Mar 9, 2021)

bimble said:


> now you've got me, idk. Was vaguely thinking nhs capacity planning, or what 3 things would make your life better, are you lonely, do you have any plans to reproduce, do you hope to emigrate, that sort of thing.  Stuff i'd be interested in looking at the results from millions of people's input.
> But I suppose if it was anonymous you could ask those things, questions about mental health, fears and priorities, how much you drink, that sort of thing, but its very not anonymous so that wouldn't actually work.


There would definitely be some use to asking about mental health.  I think this is only the third time any health questions have been included, the first time it was a totally one, but they have got better. 

Drinking, naah, people lie to themselves too much to get anything useful, I think. And fears and priorities is too vague, with too many potential answers that couldn't be codified neatly.  Something broad might be doable, but i think you'd get a better general picture from 'normal' surveys, with smaller communities needing specific work (which would be possible when the census reveals how many and where they are!).

It takes a massive row to get any new question on there, and ones will have to slip off to accommodate them (if the form gets too big people wont bother, especially with the later sections).  But the MH one would be worth apush for next time.


----------



## girasol (Mar 9, 2021)

belboid said:


> Fewer.
> 
> Last time there were 14 household questions and 43 individual ones. this time there are 14 and 50. Three have been added (as discussed above), i think the others are breakdowns of previously asked questions, but I haven't gone through and fully compared them.



Maybe filling the form manually felt like I was answering more questions...  Took *fewer * than 10 mins to fill it in.


----------



## andysays (Mar 9, 2021)

girasol said:


> pedant


I suppose people could write that in either the religion or the national identity category, or even both if they were so inclined


----------



## brogdale (Mar 9, 2021)

belboid said:


> prick


 

Much quicker than typing out _*specially trained field staff to conduct formal interviews under caution as required by the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) *_every time the compliance arrangements are discussed.


----------



## miss direct (Mar 9, 2021)

The letter came to my house. I took it. Since I lived in a shared house, how does this work?


----------



## belboid (Mar 9, 2021)

miss direct said:


> The letter came to my house. I took it. Since I lived in a shared house, how does this work?


The 'main householder' (whoever has the tenancy/title deeds, or whoever is down as a billpayer) should complete that Household section and then give each of you the code to complete the individual sections.


----------



## belboid (Mar 9, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Much quicker than typing out _*specially trained field staff to conduct formal interviews under caution as required by the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) *_every time the compliance arrangements are discussed.


you seem unclear about who does what though (shock, horror).   Most people carrying out the survey on behalf of the ONS will have had no such training, so you are just encouraging people to sneer and have a go at ordinary workers.


----------



## miss direct (Mar 9, 2021)

belboid said:


> The 'main householder' (whoever has the tenancy/title deeds, or whoever is down as a billpayer) should complete that Household section and then give each of you the code to complete the individual sections.


Bills are included so that's the landlord. And I can't imagine him being arsed. Nor any of my housemates. Can I just do my bit?


----------



## brogdale (Mar 9, 2021)

belboid said:


> you seem unclear about who does what though (shock, horror).   Most people carrying out the survey on behalf of the ONS will have had no such training, so you are just encouraging people to sneer and have a go at ordinary workers.


Back to comedy mode, eh?


----------



## belboid (Mar 9, 2021)

miss direct said:


> Bills are included so that's the landlord. And I can't imagine him being arsed. Nor any of my housemates. Can I just do my bit?


If he doesn't live there anyone can fill in any of it.  Even if he does live there, there isn't anything stopping you from doing it.  I'd do it, list the occupants and then do my bit, leaving it up to the others to complete if they want to.


----------



## belboid (Mar 9, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Back to comedy mode, eh?


aah, good ol' brogdale, can never admit he has anything wrong, so just posts a dumb as fuck smilie. Classic.


----------



## miss direct (Mar 9, 2021)

belboid said:


> If he doesn't live there anyone can fill in any of it.  Even if he does live there, there isn't anything stopping you from doing it.  I'd do it, list the occupants and then do my bit, leaving it up to the others to complete if they want to.


It's online, right? Not a big paper form?


----------



## belboid (Mar 9, 2021)

miss direct said:


> It's online, right? Not a big paper form?


Yup. So you can complete relevant sections but leave the code for others to do their bit. Not sure what happens if you no one ever does so, I'd presume it gets closed eventually but wouldn't sear to it.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 9, 2021)

miss direct said:


> It's online, right? Not a big paper form?


Yes, but you can ask them to send you a paper form


----------



## miss direct (Mar 9, 2021)

belboid said:


> Yup. So you can complete relevant sections but leave the code for others to do their bit. Not sure what happens if you no one ever does so, I'd presume it gets closed eventually but wouldn't sear to it.


Does that mean they would see all of my stuff? Serious privacy issues there.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 9, 2021)

belboid said:


> aah, good ol' brogdale, can never admit he has anything wrong, so just posts a dumb as fuck smilie. Classic.


Not me who's wrong!


----------



## moochedit (Mar 9, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Yes, but you can ask them to send you a paper form



Letter i received already included a paper form and a return envelope so no need to ask. There is also a web address and access code to do it online. I'll do it online on march 21st.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 9, 2021)

moochedit said:


> Letter i received already included a paper form and a return envelope so no need to ask. There is also a web address and access code to do it online. I'll do it online on march 21st.


Apparently, this delivery of paper forms is only happening in a limited number of areas in which the ONS predict low uptake of the default online option. So, for most areas, if you want the paper version, you do have to request it.


----------



## kebabking (Mar 9, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Apparently, this delivery of paper forms is only happening in a limited number of areas in which the ONS predict low uptake of the default online option. So, for most areas, if you want the paper version, you do have to request it.



See, I've been telling everyone that rural Worcestershire is a hotbed of state-crushing anarchism, but I one would believe me....


----------



## moochedit (Mar 9, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Apparently, this delivery of paper forms is only happening in a limited number of areas in which the ONS predict low uptake of the default online option. So, for most areas, if you want the paper version, you do have to request it.



Ok. I was surprised to get a paper form as everything i'd read about it said it was "online first" but that explains it.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 9, 2021)

kebabking said:


> See, I've been telling everyone that rural Worcestershire is a hotbed of state-crushing anarchism, but I one would believe me....


Reckon they think you're all old codgers round there!


----------



## belboid (Mar 9, 2021)

miss direct said:


> Does that mean they would see all of my stuff? Serious privacy issues there.


No, the individual sections are individual.


----------



## chilango (Mar 9, 2021)

miss direct When I was doing it a few minutes ago there was some sort of "do it seperately from the rest of the household" option when first signing in.


----------



## kebabking (Mar 9, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Reckon they think you're all old codgers round there!



It's possible that using _some_ metrics the hated state apparatus might think that everyone round here was comfortably past the very earliest stages of spring chicken-dom - personally I prefer to concentrate of their fear of us, knowing us all to be a coiled spring of revolutionary action, waiting for the moment to cast aside our Parish council agendas, throw off our hi Viz tabards at the village show, and charge down the ragged battlements of the Capitalist running dogs and to cast our oppressors into the Severn.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 9, 2021)

kebabking said:


> It's possible that using _some_ metrics the hated state apparatus might think that everyone round here was comfortably past the very earliest stages of spring chicken-dom - personally I prefer to concentrate of their fear of us, knowing us all to be a coiled spring of revolutionary action, waiting for the moment to cast aside our Parish council agendas, throw off our hi Viz tabards at the village show, and charge down the ragged battlements of the Capitalist running dogs and to cast our oppressors into the Severn.


POTD!


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 9, 2021)

miss direct said:


> Does that mean they would see all of my stuff? Serious privacy issues there.


Ask for an individual code.


----------



## belboid (Mar 9, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Not me who's wrong!
> 
> View attachment 258019


You misread what I wrote.   Yes some people will be charged with doing just that.  Same as some traffic wardens are so empowered.  But most census workers will not.  And you seem to be wilfully confusing the two groups.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 9, 2021)

belboid said:


> You misread what I wrote.   Yes some people will be charged with doing just that.  Same as some traffic wardens are so empowered.  But most census workers will not.  And you seem to be wilfully confusing the two groups.


Nope, not at all.
But you crack on.


----------



## belboid (Mar 9, 2021)

Okay, thats nice.  Glad we are clear that the people that will be knocking on your door in the next few weeks are not so empowered.


----------



## belboid (Mar 9, 2021)

Grrr, the wankers have won a legal ruling on the 'sex' question - only a birth certificate or GRC are recognised documents for the purpose of the question.









						Census 2021: Judge orders change to sex question guidance
					

Campaign group Fair Play for Women argues the guidance allowed "self-identification" as another sex.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 9, 2021)

belboid said:


> Grrr, the wankers have won a legal ruling on the 'sex' question - only a birth certificate or GRC are recognised documents for the purpose of the question.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The wording of the question about gender identity could be a lot better - I found it confusing myself. It doesn’t scan right.


----------



## belboid (Mar 9, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> The wording of the question about gender identity could be a lot better - I found it confusing myself. It doesn’t scan right.


That's not the one they were complaining about!


----------



## brogdale (Mar 9, 2021)

belboid said:


> Grrr, the wankers have won a legal ruling on the 'sex' question - only a birth certificate or GRC are recognised documents for the purpose of the question.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Timing of the judgement looks unhelpful for the ONS; there must have been a significant number of returns already done using the unlawful guidance.


----------



## belboid (Mar 9, 2021)

anything to say on the substantive question?


----------



## brogdale (Mar 9, 2021)

belboid said:


> anything to say on the substantive question?


What, the sex question?
Reckon folk should be able to say what the fuck they like, or nothing at all if they choose.


----------



## co-op (Mar 10, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Timing of the judgement looks unhelpful for the ONS; there must have been a significant number of returns already done using the unlawful guidance.



According to the evidence given in court about 20% of returns had already been done. It was pretty shabby by the ONS which has done everything it can to muddy the waters on this.


----------



## co-op (Mar 10, 2021)

brogdale said:


> What, the sex question?
> Reckon folk should be able to say what the fuck they like, or nothing at all if they choose.



What's wrong with asking people the two questions?

One about sex, one about gender identity. 

Everyone gets some actual information about wtf is actually happening which is - er - the ONS's actual job. Instead they suddenly caved into to Stonewall et al, and said - in effect - you can answer both questions according to gender identity, thus rendering both questions meaningless. 

And now they've been told to stop it by a judge.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 10, 2021)

co-op said:


> What's wrong with asking people the two questions?
> 
> One about sex, one about gender identity.
> 
> ...


In the forthcoming ONS review of how 'administrative data' might replace the fill-blown census in 2031, I'm sure that they'll consider how they already, effectively have the sex data from their near real-time, dynamic data sets from registration of births, marriages, deaths, migration etc.
Not really sure why that is asked for on the census.


----------



## belboid (Mar 10, 2021)

co-op said:


> What's wrong with asking people the two questions?
> 
> One about sex, one about gender identity.
> 
> ...


Why didn’t you complain ten years ago when exactly the same wording was used? No one cared then, probably because everyone knows that the only people who have a _passport _in the gender they were not assigned at birth are perfectly serious and probably have a good reason for not undergoing full body surgery to live their life.  The idea that they 'caved to Stonewall' is just a bigoted lie. Women weren't written out of existence ten years ago when the same wording was used, so the feared effect doesn't seem to be true. 

Dont know why you are asking the question no one asked - what's wrong with two questions? Almost no one objects to two questions, although one of the tiny groups that did was.......more terf's who didn't want the question on gender to exist at all! 

At least the transphobic bigots from FPW will have one of their favourite claims thrown out when the census shows that the number of lesbians is at the highest ever.


----------



## belboid (Mar 10, 2021)

co-op said:


> It was pretty shabby by the ONS which has done everything it can to muddy the waters on this.


muddy the waters?  Of course, saying the same thing as ten years ago is appalling isnt it?  What scumbags.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 10, 2021)

belboid said:


> Why didn’t you complain ten years ago when exactly the same wording was used? No one cared then, probably because everyone knows that the only people who have a _passport _in the gender they were not assigned at birth are perfectly serious and probably have a good reason for not undergoing full body surgery to live their life.  The idea that they 'caved to Stonewall' is just a bigoted lie. Women weren't written out of existence ten years ago when the same wording was used, so the feared effect doesn't seem to be true.
> 
> Dont know why you are asking the question no one asked - what's wrong with two questions? Almost no one objects to two questions, although one of the tiny groups that did was.......more terf's who didn't want the question on gender to exist at all!
> 
> At least the transphobic bigots from FPW will have one of their favourite claims thrown out when the census shows that the number of lesbians is at the highest ever.



For many going through the transition process, a passport is usually the first document that trans people will obtain as part of the documented proof of transition, and to ensure continued support through the pathway  - and even then, a passport only gets issued with a different gender marker through official support through a GIC and/or GP. when doing so. A GRC is something that often comes much latter - for a start it has to be applied for, providing documentation and evidence of having gone through transition with a GIC, has transitioned for at least two years, sometimes surgery letters (although surgery is not required), and often passport, deed poll is required as part of that. All signed off again by a GIC psychiatrist.

Why I've been saying for ages just how disingenuous such a lot of this 'debate' has been - where was the outrage from these people so seemingly invested in trans issues, feminism or other gender politics ten years ago? We even had threads on urban and I can't remember some of the more recently most vocal people HAVING CONCERNS1!1! then. Fuck urban, seriously.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 10, 2021)

The sex question, as amended, just seems to be asking for data that the state already has?
The % completion of birth certs is higher that that of the census and presumably the state also knows how many GRCs they issue?


----------



## belboid (Mar 10, 2021)

Not everyone was born in the UK.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 10, 2021)

belboid said:


> Not everyone was born in the UK.


True, but  papers associated with settlement/naturalisation etc. would all include sex.


----------



## belboid (Mar 10, 2021)

brogdale said:


> True, but  papers associated with settlement/naturalisation etc. would all include sex.


Not everyone in the UK has applied for citizenship, naturalisation or anything of the kind.


----------



## mauvais (Mar 10, 2021)

So it cost them £100k to errrr have the word 'passport' removed from the list of documents you can consult if you're not sure what sex you are. Big win for the TERFs there.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 10, 2021)

belboid said:


> Not everyone in the UK has applied for citizenship, naturalisation or anything of the kind.


Again, a good point; but with the 2011 census at 94% return, I'd imagine that 'undocumented' migration is unlikely to exceed 6% of the population, so the dynamic, admin data they already have on sex is likely to be every bit as complete as any gathered through the census question?


----------



## belboid (Mar 10, 2021)

It isn't 'undocumented' migration, why are you using that right-wing term?  And your logic seems illogical. Cross-tabulation data (eg of the sex of migrants) wont be collected in sufficient numbers without a census, or something akin to it.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 10, 2021)

belboid said:


> It isn't 'undocumented' migration, why are you using that right-wing term?  And your logic seems illogical. Cross-tabulation data (eg of the sex of migrants) wont be collected in sufficient numbers without a census, or something akin to it.


Not convinced by the sums tbh.
ONS reckon they missed 3.4m of those normally resident in E&W, so it would take a massive under-registration of migrants' sex to get anywhere near that.
e2a: the dynamic administrative data from registration would give greater coverage of sex.


----------



## belboid (Mar 10, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Not convinced by the sums tbh.
> ONS reckon they missed 3.4m of those normally resident in E&W, so it would take a massive under-registration of migrants' sex to get anywhere near that.


but they are two wholly different groups, it is daft to think one can just substitute for the other.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 10, 2021)

belboid said:


> but they are two wholly different groups, it is daft to think one can just substitute for the other.


If overall quantity of data is the state's aim, then admin data on sex giving greater coverage than the census data would suggest that they'll favour the former in their 2023 review.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 10, 2021)

Wonder whether the 2021 online default will affect the response rate?
I've heard some say that it may increase the coverage amongst the young/tech savvy, but I'm still wondering if the absence of the actual big form through the letterbox will cause more to disregard the exercise?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 10, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Wonder whether the 2021 online default will affect the response rate?
> I've heard some say that it may increase the coverage amongst the young/tech savvy, but I'm still wondering if the absence of the actual big form through the letterbox will cause more to disregard the exercise?


perhaps the boredom of the pandemic will encourage a higher participation


----------



## belboid (Mar 10, 2021)

brogdale said:


> If overall quantity of data is the state's aim, then admin data on sex giving greater coverage than the census data would suggest that they'll favour the former in their 2023 review.


You seem to be missing the point.  Yes, using such data will give arguably better results _for that group_, but it wont, by definition, include anyone not in it. And we want to know more than just the total number of people born in the uk who were ascribed male or female at birth.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 10, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> perhaps the boredom of the pandemic will encourage a higher participation


You know, that could well be a thing.
My old Mum sounded quite excited that she'd had the letter..._something _had happened!


----------



## brogdale (Mar 10, 2021)

belboid said:


> You seem to be missing the point.  Yes, using such data will give arguably better results _for that group_, but it wont, by definition, include anyone not in it. And we want to know more than just the total number of people born in the uk who were ascribed male or female at birth.


Are you seriously suggesting that the state doesn't record the sex of any migrants seeking some form of 'documentation'?


----------



## belboid (Mar 10, 2021)

Are you seriously suggesting that every migrant over here seeks some form of documentation?  Or that, where that has been done, those records are fully up to date? Even you must be aware of the excess of NI numbers issued and the fact that many of the people to whom they have been issued are not in the country any more.


----------



## andysays (Mar 10, 2021)

I always thought the Census was a subject which no one other than a few local government statisticians would have strong opinions on.

Imagine my surprise when this thread turned out to be almost as bad tempered and contentious as some of the Brexit ones...


----------



## brogdale (Mar 10, 2021)

belboid said:


> Are you seriously suggesting that every migrant over here seeks some form of documentation?  Or that, where that has been done, those records are fully up to date? Even you must be aware of the excess of NI numbers issued and the fact that many of the people to whom they have been issued are not in the country any more.


No and no, but unless you're suggesting that migrants without any form of documentation exceed 3.8m in E&W, then the totality of registration and admin data on sex would be greater.


----------



## belboid (Mar 10, 2021)

brogdale said:


> No and no, but unless you're suggesting that migrants without any form of documentation exceed 3.8m in E&W, then the totality of registration and admin data on sex would be greater.


christ almighty, its like trying to get through to wellington boot.  To repeat, very slowly....

It is not about the simple total number. It is about how those numbers are broken down in different groups. You are trying to compare apples and oranges, for some bizarre reason.   

And 6% of the English and Welsh population is 3.3 million, not 3.8.  Maybe we should just accept figures aren't your strong point.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 10, 2021)

belboid said:


> christ almighty, its like trying to get through to wellington boot.  To repeat, very slowly....
> 
> It is not about the simple total number. It is about how those numbers are broken down in different groups. You are trying to compare apples and oranges, for some bizarre reason.
> 
> And 6% of the English and Welsh population is 3.3 million, not 3.8.  Maybe we should just accept figures aren't your strong point.


Apologies, 3.4M is, as you say, the correct E&W undercount for E&W in 2011.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 10, 2021)

belboid said:


> christ almighty, its like trying to get through to wellington boot.  To repeat, very slowly....
> 
> It is not about the simple total number. It is about how those numbers are broken down in different groups. You are trying to compare apples and oranges, for some bizarre reason.


Anyone familiar with demography will tell you that sex-bias amongst migrant populations is always higher than in the resident population, so having the admin/registration data for migrants is likely to have a more significant impact on national sex balance figures than relying on the censal data that tend to undercount migrant groups for obvious reasons.


----------



## belboid (Mar 10, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Anyone familiar with demography will tell you that sex-bias amongst migrant populations is always higher than in the resident population, so having the admin/registration data for migrants is likely to have a more significant impact on national sex balance figures than relying on the censal data that tend to undercount migrant groups for obvious reasons.


So you are agreeing that simply swapping one group for the other is nonsense, and that your original argument was stupid.   Cool.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 10, 2021)

belboid said:


> So you are agreeing that simply swapping one group for the other is nonsense, and that your original argument was stupid.   Cool.


It's not a question of swapping any groups, but whether or not the state needs to ask about sex in the census.


----------



## belboid (Mar 10, 2021)

And there is, because that data isn't actually kept anywhere.  I am glad you accept that your introduction of the 6% is a complete red herring though, with absolutely nothing to do with the point you are now trying to make.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 10, 2021)

belboid said:


> And there is, because that data isn't actually kept anywhere.  I am glad you accept that your introduction of the 6% is a complete red herring though, with absolutely nothing to do with the point you are now trying to make.


Data collected but not 'kept anywhere'?


----------



## belboid (Mar 10, 2021)

It isnt collected or may well be out of date.  Do you need everything spelling out six times?


----------



## richthehat (Mar 10, 2021)

Got my Census 2021 letter. Went online and looked at the form. 

Shady lying foreign corporate interests with links to torture, demanding to know my ethnic origin to put on a list for obviously corrupt local authorities, threatening me with violence to the tune of £1,000 if I don't answer? That isn't England; that's Nazi-occupied Holland.

No. Not filling that out. This can be the last Census.


----------



## andysays (Mar 10, 2021)

richthehat said:


> Got my Census 2021 letter. Went online and looked at the form.
> 
> Shady lying foreign corporate interests with links to torture, demanding to know my ethnic origin to put on a list for obviously corrupt local authorities, threatening me with violence to the tune of £1,000 if I don't answer? That isn't England; that's Nazi-occupied Holland.
> 
> No. Not filling that out. This can be the last Census.


Looks like we've got another 





> up their own arse wanker stealing £3000 from their community


belboid


----------



## belboid (Mar 10, 2021)

andysays said:


> Looks like we've got another belboid


I might be tempted by ‘fucking idiot’ in this instance


----------



## brogdale (Mar 10, 2021)

belboid said:


> I might be tempted by ‘fucking idiot’ in this instance


You're mellowing.

Anyway, that 3.4 million X £3k...that's a big number.


----------



## Raheem (Mar 10, 2021)

richthehat said:


> That isn't England; that's Nazi-occupied Holland.


_Dear diary,

It's finally happened. After all these months, today I got a form to fill in and I might get a fine if I don't do it. I hope one day somebody finds this diary so it can serve as a warning to the people of the future.

Yours,
Anne._


----------



## belboid (Mar 10, 2021)

One report puts it at up to 22k over the ten years for everyone who succeeds in convincing the state (ie some temp worker making repeat visits) that the property is empty.  

of course if you fail to do so and are just guessed at with accessible data then the impact will be less.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 10, 2021)

belboid said:


> One report puts it at up to 22k over the ten years for everyone who succeeds in convincing the state (ie some temp worker making repeat visits) that the property is empty.
> 
> of course if you fail to do so and are just guessed at with accessible data then the impact will be less.


Good to know.


----------



## andysays (Mar 10, 2021)

belboid said:


> I might be tempted by ‘fucking idiot’ in this instance


I'm sure that would be equally persuasive.

I don't agree with everything brogdale has said on this thread, but the bombastic way you've attempted to dismiss every potential criticism of the the census, especially the way it's currently being carried out in the midst of a pandemic, hasn't been a terribly engaging experience, TBH.


----------



## belboid (Mar 10, 2021)

I completely agree with many of the criticisms of how it is being carried out this time around.

but, it’s true, I have little patience for the fucking stupid criticisms of the actual census. In the above quoted instance it’s just a random bunch of ludicrously ott, ever so vaguely related to reality, tosh that sounds like Ric in the young ones.

(e2a: I am a bit surprised that folk have only just noticed that i am a frequently rude and crotchety fucker).


----------



## andysays (Mar 10, 2021)

Have we had any discussion about the origin of the census yet?


> The censuses were initially conducted partly to ascertain the number of men able to fight in the Napoleonic Wars, and partly over population concerns stemming from the 1798 work An Essay on the Principle of Population by Reverend Thomas Robert Malthus.



Nothing to be concerned about there, surely...


----------



## belboid (Mar 10, 2021)

andysays said:


> Have we had any discussion about the origin of the census yet?
> 
> 
> Nothing to be concerned about there, surely...


Most dry stone walls (or at least ‘lots of’) in the lakes and dales were originally built by pow’s from the napoleonic war (and they're still quite groovy and useful)


----------



## Santino (Mar 10, 2021)

I've never really separated belboid and brogdale in my head because they are both shortish names starting with b, so this whole thread is a headfuck.


----------



## richthehat (Mar 10, 2021)

andysays said:


> Looks like we've got another
> up their own arse wanker stealing £3000 from their community
> belboid





belboid said:


> I might be tempted by ‘fucking idiot’ in this instance


Who do you think you are: 'We?' The police? You and your partner don't represent anybody.

And what £3,000? You know nothing about me, or my community. And what if I was stealing £3,000 from them? What are you going to do about it?


----------



## brogdale (Mar 10, 2021)

belboid said:


> I completely agree with many of the criticisms of how it is being carried out this time around.
> 
> but, it’s true, I have little patience for the fucking stupid criticisms of the actual census. In the above quoted instance it’s just a random bunch of ludicrously ott, ever so vaguely related to reality, tosh that sounds like Ric in the young ones.


That's fine; disagreement is the very fuel rods of Urban and what makes it so rewarding, but retreating into personalised attack mode rarely helps a thread.
But hey, we carry on.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 10, 2021)

Santino said:


> I've never really separated belboid and brogdale in my head because they are both shortish names starting with b, so this whole thread is a headfuck.


It's the lower case thing, I reckon


----------



## andysays (Mar 10, 2021)

richthehat said:


> Who do you think you are: 'We?' The police? You and your partner don't represent anybody.
> 
> And what £3,000? You know nothing about me, or my community. And what if I was stealing £3,000 from them? What are you going to do about it?


Apologies.

I was quoting something belboid said earlier in the thread to take the piss out of him. I wasn't intending to have a go at you particularly, though I can see how it could come across that way.


----------



## belboid (Mar 10, 2021)

richthehat said:


> Who do you think you are: 'We?' The police? You and your partner don't represent anybody.
> 
> And what £3,000? You know nothing about me, or my community. And what if I was stealing £3,000 from them? What are you going to do about it?


£3,000 per person is the total local authorities lose if you convince the census that your property is unoccupied. Others have estimated the average to actually be 22k per household over the ten years. That's money for evil things schools and housing. What if you are doing so? Well, it's a bit wanky, even before we get to the bit about you being on a list they get (guess what? They get no such list! Not even your name for 100 years). And I dare say none of us are going to do any more about it than go 'fucking idiot,' but the state might, seeing as it's a law and all that.


----------



## smokedout (Mar 10, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Timing of the judgement looks unhelpful for the ONS; there must have been a significant number of returns already done using the unlawful guidance.



They haven't won yet, they have been granted permission to go to judicial review which will likely happen next week, and the Judge made an interim order the wording should be changed until that takes place - so it could be changed back.  Whatever happens it's unlikely to change the way most trans people answer the question anyway so it all feels a bit pointless.


----------



## andysays (Mar 10, 2021)

belboid said:


> Most dry stone walls (or at least ‘lots of’) in the lakes and dales were originally built by pow’s from the napoleonic war (and they're still quite groovy and useful)


I'm not sure associating the census with state enforced labour of POWs will actually allay anyone's concerns here, but you carry on if you think this helps your argument.


----------



## richthehat (Mar 10, 2021)

belboid said:


> I completely agree with many of the criticisms of how it is being carried out this time around.
> 
> but, it’s true, I have little patience for the fucking stupid criticisms of the actual census. In the above quoted instance it’s just a random bunch of ludicrously ott, ever so vaguely related to reality, tosh that sounds like Ric in the young ones.
> 
> (e2a: I am a bit surprised that folk have only just noticed that i am a frequently rude and crotchety fucker).


The OP states that the England and Wales Census is being contracted to a number of corporate interests from outside the UK, including one owned by a US Defence contractor, whom I am not accountable to no matter how big their arsenal is. In Scotland a boycott of the Census has been recommended on account of it having been contracted to a subsidiary of US contractor CACI International, which provided interrogators during the Abu Ghraib Prison torture scandal of the Second Gulf War, in which US Defence forces and CIA operatives perpetrated physical and sexual abuse, rape, sodomy and murder against Iraqi detainees. Photographs of the incidents were published.

My ethnic origin is of no relevance to anything, and anyone who asks for it without looking me in the face can only be looking to discriminate on that basis one way or another.

Local authorities have been cutting services across the board for years, and it is an insult to human intelligence to expect anyone to believe that the Census is to help the local authorities better distribute resources, whether on an ethnic or on any other basis.

It has been made quite clear that the only reason anyone has for completing the Census is to avoid a £1,000 fine. Presumably that would be collected by violently breaking into people's homes with a warrant and seizing goods to that value.

In Nazi-occupied Holland, the Nazis organized a census of the country with the sole purpose of identifying Dutch citizens who did not fit their racial eugenics programme. The population had no idea, and everyone dutifully filled out their census forms, thereby becoming unwittingly complicit in the worst kind of discrimination.

The Census was only instituted in the first place in AD1801 in order to count the number of able-bodied men available to fight in the Napoleonic Wars, which obviously have been concluded for more than two centuries now. Even the Government hates it, and by employing shady foreign corporate entities including known suppliers of interrogators and torturers, demanding the answers to far too many impertinent questions, the Government is actively encouraging British people to boycott the Census. This should be the last census.

Finally, the last time someone dismissed a perfectly solid argument of mine with: 'that's fucking stupid', was a policeman in response to my assertions that the police are accountable to the general public when they shoot dead unarmed civilians in their own homes for no reason, and it is a civic duty to demand an explanation from them.


----------



## belboid (Mar 10, 2021)

andysays said:


> I'm not sure associating the census with state enforced labour of POWs will actually allay anyone's concerns here, but you carry on if you think this helps your argument.


It's just a vaguely interesting side note.  With the additional note that sometimes good things grow out of bad things. Cow shit is great manure, after all.

e2a: or more unarguably, _Ordnance _Survey maps.


----------



## belboid (Mar 10, 2021)

richthehat said:


> The OP states that the England and Wales Census is being contracted to a number of corporate interests from outside the UK, including one owned by a US Defence contractor, whom I am not accountable to no matter how big their arsenal is. In Scotland a boycott of the Census has been recommended on account of it having been contracted to a subsidiary of US contractor CACI International, which provided interrogators during the Abu Ghraib Prison torture scandal of the Second Gulf War, in which US Defence forces and CIA operatives perpetrated physical and sexual abuse, rape, sodomy and murder against Iraqi detainees. Photographs of the incidents were published.
> 
> My ethnic origin is of no relevance to anything, and anyone who asks for it without looking me in the face can only be looking to discriminate on that basis one way or another.
> 
> ...


Yes, been through all of these before.  There is no organised boycott this year due to a conglomerate led by Leidos being involved in printing and scanning some documents.  The only announced 'campaigns' are around writing in European or Cornish or whatever, or summat in the religion bit. Ohh, and the more vociferous campaign by the transphobic A Woman's Place et al. 

You have a write in option on ethnicity, so you can use that if you want.  The rest of that sentence, well, its just wrong but all the tea in Harrods wouldn't convince you otherwise so, whatever.  Ditto the next para, tho at least you've dropped the nazi bit now.

Nice story, ric.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 10, 2021)

smokedout said:


> They haven't won yet, they have been granted permission to go to judicial review which will likely happen next week, and the Judge made an interim order the wording should be changed until that takes place - so it could be changed back.  Whatever happens it's unlikely to change the way most trans people answer the question anyway so it all feels a bit pointless.



Quite. It's like the money being raised for judicial reviews against things that haven't even changed on the census for years, and that it won't realistically affect how some trans people will answer, could have actually been used for more constructive causes right now affecting women such as DV support, etc. and especially as women have been disproportionately affected by the pandemic too. Oh wait...

Meanwhile neoliberal governments continue to fuck people over... and some of these gender critters consider themselves socialists it seems.


----------



## richthehat (Mar 10, 2021)

belboid said:


> Yes, been through all of these before.  There is no organised boycott this year due to a conglomerate led by Leidos being involved in printing and scanning some documents.  The only announced 'campaigns' are around writing in European or Cornish or whatever, or summat in the religion bit. Ohh, and the more vociferous campaign by the transphobic A Woman's Place et al.
> 
> You have a write in option on ethnicity, so you can use that if you want.  The rest of that sentence, well, its just wrong but all the tea in Harrods wouldn't convince you otherwise so, whatever.  Ditto the next para, tho at least you've dropped the nazi bit now.
> 
> Nice story, ric.


I'm not interested in anyone's campaign. I just won't fill out ethnic monitoring forms, because to do so makes me complicit in discrimination one way or another, to an unforeseeable extent; cf. the well-established fact of the Nazi census of Holland to find out who all the Jews were so they could be exterminated.

Call me Ric one more time nonce, I will root out your whole fucking clan.


----------



## belboid (Mar 10, 2021)

richthehat said:


> Call me Ric one more time nonce, I will root out your whole fucking clan.


thank you for making me look calm and reasonable, Mr Hat


----------



## MickiQ (Mar 10, 2021)

Well I've just filled mine in, It took me about 20 minutes to do, there are currently 4 people resident in the Q household. I did consider whether or not to include my youngest daughter who has been living with her eldest sister since July last year, She will return home before she trots off to Uni in September but it probably won't be before 21 March. I suppose I had better mention it to my SiL in case he leaves her off his thinking she is on mine.
There is no information on the census that I can see that wouldn't be available to obtain from other sources in a great deal more detail if they really wanted too.


----------



## belboid (Mar 10, 2021)

MickiQ said:


> Well I've just filled mine in, It took me about 20 minutes to do, there are currently 4 people resident in the Q household. I did consider whether or not to include my youngest daughter who has been living with her eldest sister since July last year, She will return home before she trots off to Uni in September but it probably won't be before 21 March. I suppose I had better mention it to my SiL in case he leaves her off his thinking she is on mine.
> There is no information on the census that I can see that wouldn't be available to obtain from other sources in a great deal more detail if they really wanted too.


The household q (1&2) says 'usually,' so you could include her but note in Q6 on the individual she is currently elsewhere. If she is listed in the household question at her actual current address, she should say she resides more than 30 days a year elsewhere, and where that is.  There'll then be a cross-referencing of those forms so she is counted twice. As long as she is listed on one she will be counted (obvs).


----------



## wibb45 (Mar 10, 2021)

Anyone who willingly gives any information to the government is party to the abuses of that government. In a fascist dictatorship like the f(uk) I wouldn't willingly give anything to the scum in government, who should all be rooted out and ***led. Be a slave to millionaires if you choose, I don't care. I will not.


----------



## Kevbad the Bad (Mar 10, 2021)

wibb45 said:


> Anyone who willingly gives any information to the government is party to the abuses of that government. In a fascist dictatorship like the f(uk) I wouldn't willingly give anything to the scum in government, who should all be rooted out and ***led. Be a slave to millionaires if you choose, I don't care. I will not.


Boiled?


----------



## Serge Forward (Mar 10, 2021)

Bowled?


----------



## Raheem (Mar 10, 2021)

Milled. Betcha.


----------



## Serge Forward (Mar 10, 2021)

One too many letters


----------



## Serge Forward (Mar 10, 2021)

Filled


----------



## Serge Forward (Mar 10, 2021)

No, I give up. What is it?


----------



## Kevbad the Bad (Mar 10, 2021)

Peeled!


----------



## planetgeli (Mar 10, 2021)

Misled.

He wants to fuck with their minds. I like his style.


----------



## Serge Forward (Mar 10, 2021)

Sounds right. What about billed, as in, sent an itemised bill? That'll put the shits up em


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 10, 2021)

I think it’s rickrolled - the asterisks do not literally represent the amount of letters missing


----------



## Kevbad the Bad (Mar 10, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> I think it’s rickrolled - the asterisks do not literally represent the amount of letters missing


If that's true then the whole competition is invalid and fraudulent.


----------



## wemakeyousoundb (Mar 10, 2021)

Kevbad the Bad said:


> If that's true then the whole competition is invalid and fraudulent.


think you've been misled?


----------



## wemakeyousoundb (Mar 10, 2021)

boiled says I


----------



## belboid (Mar 10, 2021)

It really oughta be polled


----------



## muscovyduck (Mar 10, 2021)

Hey guys I've got an idea for a census campaign. What if we get as many people as possible to claim they live at the same address? That'd really fuck the whole thing up


----------



## Spanner (Mar 11, 2021)

muscovyduck said:


> Hey guys I've got an idea for a census campaign. What if we get as many people as possible to claim they live at the same address? That'd really fuck the whole thing up


You could just fill the form in, safe in the knowledge that the government really doesn’t give a shit about people like you. And even though you’d like to think being an active member of some backwater quasi-political forum makes you an “enemy of the state”, the reality is: you’re not important enough. Even the “top brass” HERE at Urban75  are not important enough, and for all their bluster, I’ll bet they fastidiously complete their tax returns each year. Or pay some accountant to do it for them.


----------



## Humberto (Mar 11, 2021)

Dunno man we like it. Dunno why you're here.


----------



## Humberto (Mar 11, 2021)

Don't see why a forum/social media website has to be massive to have any value. I like it better for what it is.


----------



## Spanner (Mar 11, 2021)

Humberto said:


> Dunno man we like it. Dunno why you're here.


History Lesson 1-You can’t  fuck up the status quo from the outside.


----------



## Humberto (Mar 11, 2021)

Don't really feel what you're saying there.


----------



## Spanner (Mar 11, 2021)

Humberto said:


> Don't see why a forum/social media website has to be massive to have any value. I like it better for what it is.


They don’t, they simply need to aim at the right targets in the right way. But this forum doesn’t, unfortunately, because it is it too paranoid about the “outside world” and its own peculiar habits


----------



## Humberto (Mar 11, 2021)

Thanks for the advice.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 11, 2021)

Spanner said:


> They don’t, they simply need to aim at the right targets in the right way. But this forum doesn’t, unfortunately, because it is it too paranoid about the “outside world” and its own peculiar habits


This forum is “too paranoid”?
Projection on that scale is revealing.


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 11, 2021)

Spanner said:


> You could just fill the form in, safe in the knowledge that the government really doesn’t give a shit about people like you. And even though you’d like to think being an active member of some backwater quasi-political forum makes you an “enemy of the state”, the reality is: you’re not important enough. Even the “top brass” HERE at Urban75  are not important enough, and for all their bluster, I’ll bet they fastidiously complete their tax returns each year. Or pay some accountant to do it for them.



"people like you"

"you're not important enough"

Ugh.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2021)

I’m well important.  My mum says so and everything.


----------



## rubbershoes (Mar 11, 2021)

"The top brass" 

I like the idea of Comrade FridgeMagnet being chauffeured around with a little anarchist flag fluttering on the bonnet


----------



## brogdale (Mar 11, 2021)

rubbershoes said:


> "The top brass"
> 
> I like the idea of Comrade FridgeMagnet being chauffeured around with a little anarchist flag fluttering on the bonnet


_being chauffeured around._..to their accountants_ ! _


----------



## Serge Forward (Mar 11, 2021)

Turf accountant?


----------



## Artaxerxes (Mar 11, 2021)

kabbes said:


> I’m well important.  My mum says so and everything.



Yeah your mum says I'm important to


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2021)

Artaxerxes said:


> Yeah your mum says I'm important to


Important to what?  The off-licence?


----------



## Artaxerxes (Mar 11, 2021)

kabbes said:


> Important to what?  The off-licence?



Maybe it was impotent? I was busy climbing out the window so wasn't paying much attention


----------



## muscovyduck (Mar 11, 2021)

Spanner said:


> You could just fill the form in, safe in the knowledge that the government really doesn’t give a shit about people like you. And even though you’d like to think being an active member of some backwater quasi-political forum makes you an “enemy of the state”, the reality is: you’re not important enough. Even the “top brass” HERE at Urban75  are not important enough, and for all their bluster, I’ll bet they fastidiously complete their tax returns each year. Or pay some accountant to do it for them.


Dude it was a joke, I already filled the form in,  calm down


----------



## kenny g (Mar 11, 2021)

The form shall not be filled.


----------



## Serge Forward (Mar 11, 2021)

muscovyduck said:


> Dude it was a joke, I already filled the form in,  calm down


 WAKE UP SHEEPLE!!!!!!


----------



## editor (Mar 11, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Even the “top brass” HERE at Urban75  are not important enough, and for all their bluster, I’ll bet they fastidiously complete their tax returns each year. Or pay some accountant to do it for them.


What the fuck are you on about?


----------



## andysays (Mar 11, 2021)

Never mind...


----------



## Raheem (Mar 11, 2021)

rubbershoes said:


> "The top brass"
> 
> I like the idea of Comrade FridgeMagnet being chauffeured around with a little anarchist flag fluttering on the bonnet


Birthday present idea.


----------



## Kevbad the Bad (Mar 11, 2021)

muscovyduck said:


> Hey guys I've got an idea for a census campaign. What if we get as many people as possible to claim they live at the same address? That'd really fuck the whole thing up


Or you could cunningly sprinkle your textual answers with asterisks, so they would have to guess parts of the answers (see above). This would have the added advantage that they could never be totally sure who they had to take to court.


----------



## muscovyduck (Mar 11, 2021)

Kevbad the Bad said:


> Or you could cunningly sprinkle your textual answers with asterisks, so they would have to guess parts of the answers (see above). This would have the added advantage that they could never be totally sure who they had to take to court.


fill it out in wingdings


----------



## Spanner (Mar 12, 2021)

krtek a houby said:


> "people like you"
> 
> "you're not important enough"
> 
> Ugh.



I was going to say “us” and “we”, but it didn’t seem appropriate given how far apart our opinions on most things are.


----------



## Spanner (Mar 12, 2021)

brogdale said:


> This forum is “too paranoid”?
> Projection on that scale is revealing.


You say projection, I say introspection...let’s call the whole thing off.


----------



## Spanner (Mar 12, 2021)

editor said:


> What the fuck are you on about?


[name removed] do you have an accountant and do they sort out your tax return every year?


----------



## muscovyduck (Mar 12, 2021)

I have an accountant who fills out my tax return and sprinkles it with asterisks, so HMRC have to guess part of the answers. I used to do it myself but I would put the wrong address down on there


----------



## Spanner (Mar 12, 2021)

muscovyduck said:


> I have an accountant who fills out my tax return and sprinkles it with asterisks, so HMRC have to guess part of the answers. I used to do it myself but I would put the wrong address down on there


That’s a lie


----------



## andysays (Mar 12, 2021)

Spanner said:


> ****, do you have an accountant and do they sort out your tax return every year?


On first name terms with the guvnor already?

This will go well...


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 12, 2021)

Spanner said:


> I was going to say “us” and “we”, but it didn’t seem appropriate given how far apart our opinions on most things are.



"Most things"


----------



## brogdale (Mar 12, 2021)

Spanner said:


> You say projection, I say introspection...let’s call the whole thing off.


Bye, then.


----------



## editor (Mar 12, 2021)

Spanner said:


> -- do you have an accountant and do they sort out your tax return every year?


I. Don't use real names
2. No I don't have an accountant. I don't earn enough
3. Why is this any of your fucking business?
4. Oh and what was your previous name here?


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 12, 2021)

Spanner said:


> That’s a lie


What the fuck is this?


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 12, 2021)

danny la rouge said:


> What the fuck is this?



A tool of oppression


----------



## Spanner (Mar 12, 2021)

andysays said:


> On first name terms with the guvnor already?
> 
> This will go well...


Nowhere in the results of my Google search: “who is Urban75 editor” did it say “the editor does not permit his name to be mentioned on his own forum”. Maybe it says it in the T&Cs though, because I got some kind of reprimand for it.


----------



## miss direct (Mar 12, 2021)

Sorry for another census question, but: 
living in a shared house. Only been here a few weeks and don't particularly want my housemates knowing my business. 
Was planning to get a code thing to fill in my own bit. But one housemate has taken it upon herself to complete the form the household, as her Mum told her she'd get a fine otherwise (?) and she's been knocking on my door and left a note asking for full names and giving a household code. Will the whole household be able to see what I put there if I use that code?


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 12, 2021)

miss direct said:


> Sorry for another census question, but:
> living in a shared house. Only been here a few weeks and don't particularly want my housemates knowing my business.
> Was planning to get a code thing to fill in my own bit. But one housemate has taken it upon herself to complete the form the household, as her Mum told her she'd get a fine otherwise (?) and she's been knocking on my door and left a note asking for full names and giving a household code. Will the whole household be able to see what I put there if I use that code?


I think you just need to call up and get an access code for yourself and then do it online


----------



## Spanner (Mar 13, 2021)

editor said:


> I. Don't use real names
> 2. No I don't have an accountant. I don't earn enough
> 3. Why is this any of your fucking business?
> 4. Oh and what was your previous name here?


1. Your name is in the public domain.
2. No comment
3. Didn’t realise this was EchoChamber75 forums. Have we got to agree with the opinions of the owners/most popular posters here?
4. The Scarlet Bloody Pimpernel 🙄


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Mar 13, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> I think you just need to call up and get an access code for yourself and then do it online



yes, that's what i think

and tell housemate that's what you're doing


----------



## Spanner (Mar 13, 2021)

andysays said:


> On first name terms with the guvnor already?
> 
> This will go well...


Thing is, to you “the guvnor” is someone you know and clearly revere. 
But to me,”the guvnor” is a stranger who I have no affinity with. 
That might explain our differences.


----------



## belboid (Mar 13, 2021)

miss direct said:


> Sorry for another census question, but:
> living in a shared house. Only been here a few weeks and don't particularly want my housemates knowing my business.
> Was planning to get a code thing to fill in my own bit. But one housemate has taken it upon herself to complete the form the household, as her Mum told her she'd get a fine otherwise (?) and she's been knocking on my door and left a note asking for full names and giving a household code. Will the whole household be able to see what I put there if I use that code?











						How to request a paper census - Census 2021
					






					census.gov.uk


----------



## andysays (Mar 13, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Thing is, to you “the guvnor” is someone you know and clearly revere.
> But to me,”the guvnor” is a stranger who I have no affinity with.
> That might explain our differences.


Just to make it clear, the rules here are that you don't use *anyone's *real name.

I've never met editor IRL, and while we have frequently had differences of opinion on various subjects, I am grateful to him for the online community he has created and still maintains for all of us.

I also recognise that he unfortunately has to put up with all sorts of shit, both here and IRL, precisely because of his position as the "figurehead" of Urban. So when mouthy unknowns like you turn up and start using his real name in the way you've done, alarm bells start to ring and some of us feel protective.

Maybe it's all been a terrible misunderstanding, and you're really a wonderful person who will turn out to be a valued member of our community, but up to now, from what I've seen, you're behaving like a bit of a cunt.


----------



## marty21 (Mar 13, 2021)

Mrs21 did our return , I trust she was accurate   .


----------



## brogdale (Mar 13, 2021)

Spanner said:


> But to me,”the guvnor” is a stranger who *I have no affinity with*.


Says member of U75. 

Odd, and possibly revealing, choice of vocabulary.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 13, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Thing is, to you “the guvnor” is someone you know and clearly revere.
> But to me,”the guvnor” is a stranger who I have no affinity with.
> That might explain our differences.


Everyone you know were once strangers to you.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 13, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Says member of U75.
> 
> Odd, and possibly revealing, choice of vocabulary.


Yeh but he is in Lenin's immortal phrase thick as pigshit


----------



## T & P (Mar 13, 2021)

Not having come into this thread before, I thought it strange that a subject as tedious as the census had generated 34 pages so quickly, so I decided to go straight to the last page to see what the hot topic might be. 

WTF is going on in here?


----------



## andysays (Mar 13, 2021)

T & P said:


> Not having come into this thread before, I thought it strange that a subject as tedious as the census had generated 34 pages so quickly, so I decided to go straight to the last page to see what the hot topic might be.
> 
> WTF is going on in here?


TBF, most of it is actually about the census, though I noted on page 30


andysays said:


> I always thought the Census was a subject which no one other than a few local government statisticians would have strong opinions on.
> 
> Imagine my surprise when this thread turned out to be almost as bad tempered and contentious as some of the Brexit ones...


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 13, 2021)

andysays said:


> I always thought the Census was a subject which no one other than a few local government statisticians would have strong opinions on.
> 
> Imagine my surprise when this thread turned out to be almost as bad tempered and contentious as some of the Brexit ones...


I keep forgetting you've only been with us since 2013


----------



## andysays (Mar 13, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> I keep forgetting you've only been with us since 2013


Yeah, this is the first census since I joined Urban, so I've missed any previous bad tempered and contentious census threads.


----------



## BlanketAddict (Mar 13, 2021)

I live in a converted house (2 flats). 

5 census letters through the door, not one of them correctly addressed, majority for non-existent numbers. 

This property would never have been 5 separate dwellings, quite strange. 

I might just open one and amend the address.


----------



## Kevbad the Bad (Mar 13, 2021)

andysays said:


> Yeah, this is the first census since I joined Urban, so I've missed any previous bad tempered and contentious census threads.


I'm already looking forward to Urban in 2031.


----------



## kenny g (Mar 13, 2021)

andysays said:


> Just to make it clear, the rules here are that you don't use *anyone's *real name.
> 
> I've never met editor IRL, and while we have frequently had differences of opinion on various subjects, I am grateful to him for the online community he has created and still maintains for all of us.
> 
> ...


Sorry, if someone is being a c then everyone will see so no need to write screeds of tldr to explain the obvious.


----------



## kenny g (Mar 13, 2021)

And the census letter remains like some totem to shite resplendent and unopened upon the windowsill.


----------



## Spanner (Mar 14, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Everyone you know were once strangers to you.


That’s true.



Pickman's model said:


> Yeh but he is in Lenin's immortal phrase thick as pigshit


That’s false.


----------



## Spanner (Mar 14, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Says member of U75.
> 
> Odd, and possibly revealing, choice of vocabulary.


What is?


----------



## Spanner (Mar 14, 2021)

andysays said:


> Just to make it clear, the rules here are that you don't use *anyone's *real name.
> 
> I've never met editor IRL, and while we have frequently had differences of opinion on various subjects, I am grateful to him for the online community he has created and still maintains for all of us.
> 
> ...


Yeah, I didn’t appreciate that the owner of this website has to “put up with all sorts of shit”.
Not just on the platform he created and which which he makes his living from, but “...in real life” too...unlike the rest of us, I suppose 🙄


----------



## scifisam (Mar 14, 2021)

miss direct said:


> Sorry for another census question, but:
> living in a shared house. Only been here a few weeks and don't particularly want my housemates knowing my business.
> Was planning to get a code thing to fill in my own bit. But one housemate has taken it upon herself to complete the form the household, as her Mum told her she'd get a fine otherwise (?) and she's been knocking on my door and left a note asking for full names and giving a household code. Will the whole household be able to see what I put there if I use that code?



No, if you use that code your housemate will never see what you put on the census, and your individual response will over-ride anything they put down in your name.

It's specifically designed for people who need to enter their own info even if the householder thinks otherwise.


----------



## andysays (Mar 14, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Yeah, I didn’t appreciate that the owner of this website has to “put up with all sorts of shit”.
> Not just on the platform he created and which which he makes his living from, but “...in real life” too...unlike the rest of us, I suppose 🙄


It's increasingly looking like you've picked the wrong tool to name yourself after...


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 14, 2021)

Spanner said:


> That’s false.


Yet in post after post you demonstrate its veracity


----------



## Spanner (Mar 15, 2021)

andysays said:


> It's increasingly looking like you've picked the wrong tool to name yourself after...
> 
> View attachment 258640


I’m a lot of things, but I’m not racist


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 15, 2021)

Spanner said:


> I’m a lot of things, but I’m not racist


Who said you were?


----------



## Spanner (Mar 15, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> Yet in post after post you demonstrate its veracity


Alright, big brain. Get over yourself.


----------



## Spanner (Mar 15, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Who said you were?


The picture implies “spade” would be a more appropriate username for me than “spanner”. And that I should start digging my own grave because I’ve outsmarted a few of the old-guard.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 15, 2021)

Spanner said:


> The picture implies “spade” would be a more appropriate username for me than “spanner”. And that I should start digging my own grave because I’ve upset a few of the old-guard in some backwater forum.


Interesting. So the first thing you think of is an archaic racial slur instead of the idea that you were digging yourself a deep hole. Keep on shovelling!


----------



## Raheem (Mar 15, 2021)

Spanner said:


> The picture implies “spade” would be a more appropriate username for me than “spanner”. And that I should start digging my own grave because I’ve upset a few of the old-guard in some backwater forum.


And you feel, for some reason, that this is probably because you are perceived as racist?


----------



## Spanner (Mar 15, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> Interesting. So the first thing you think of is an archaic racial slur instead of the idea that you were digging yourself a deep hole. Keep on shovelling!


So it’s archaic now. Interesting


----------



## Spanner (Mar 15, 2021)

Raheem said:


> And you feel, for some reason, that this is probably because you are perceived as racist?


No, I brought up the subject of racism to highlight the fact that you shouldn’t highlight pictures of open graves with “spades” next to them whilst implying, “hey, jump in and cover yourself over with dirt with this spade because you don’t agree with my our opinions”


----------



## Humberto (Mar 15, 2021)

Why use it at all?


----------



## Raheem (Mar 15, 2021)

Spanner said:


> No, I brought up the subject of racism simply to highlight the fact that you shouldn’t maybe highlight pictures of open graves with “spades” next to them whilst implying, “hey, jump in and cover yourself over with dirt with this spade because you need to do what I say”.


Where does you being racist come in?


----------



## Spanner (Mar 15, 2021)

Raheem said:


> Where does you being racist come in?


#1008


----------



## Spanner (Mar 15, 2021)

Humberto said:


> Why use it at all?


Good question. The answer is: “why do I need to explain my thought process to you?”


----------



## Humberto (Mar 15, 2021)

kind of the point really. Otherwise it's just jerk-offs like yourself impressing yourself and confusing and boring the rest of us.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 15, 2021)

Spanner said:


> #1008


That’s your post though, not anyone elses


----------



## Spanner (Mar 15, 2021)

Humberto said:


> kind of the point really. Otherwise it's just jerk-offs like yourself impressing yourself and confusing and boring the rest of us.



“Jerk offs like you”...


----------



## Humberto (Mar 15, 2021)

cannot be arsed with this muppet


----------



## Spanner (Mar 15, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> That’s your post though, not anyone elses


Right, my response to the racist comment.


----------



## Humberto (Mar 15, 2021)

Spanner said:


> The picture implies “spade” would be a more appropriate username for me than “spanner”. And that I should start digging my own grave because I’ve outsmarted a few of the old-guard.



Here.


----------



## Spanner (Mar 15, 2021)

Humberto said:


> cannot be arsed with this muppet


It always ends with a personal insult - e.g. muppet. If you want to fight me, do it on an intellectual level, don’t resort to name calling. Anyone can call a muppet a spade.


----------



## Humberto (Mar 15, 2021)

'name calling' how old are you? For real?


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 15, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Right, my response to the racist comment.


what racist comment?


----------



## andysays (Mar 15, 2021)

Spanner said:


> No, I brought up the subject of racism to highlight the fact that you shouldn’t highlight pictures of open graves with “spades” next to them whilst implying, “hey, jump in and cover yourself over with dirt with this spade because you don’t agree with my our opinions”



It's clearly not a grave, because it's the wrong shape
I would call the tool pictured a shovel, not a spade, but you can call it a spade if you want, though not draw the inference you appear to be drawing
My post was intended as a reference to the well known saying "When you're in a hole, stop digging" and the fact that you have continued to dig yourself ever deeper
I'm bored with this now, TBH


----------



## kabbes (Mar 15, 2021)

How do people not just stick this kind of troll straight in ignore?


----------



## Spanner (Mar 17, 2021)

kabbes said:


> How do people not just stick this kind of troll straight in ignore?



if you read this, kabbes, you have some navel-gazing to do...


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 17, 2021)

kabbes said:


> How do people not just stick this kind of troll straight in ignore?



Trolls, royalists and other assorted planks need taking down, otherwise they just keep on coming. And getting away with their nonsense. And attracting more cunts to urban, if left unchecked.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 17, 2021)

Spanner said:


> You could just fill the form in, safe in the knowledge that the government really doesn’t give a shit about people like you. And even though you’d like to think being an active member of some backwater quasi-political forum makes you an “enemy of the state”, the reality is: you’re not important enough. Even the “top brass” HERE at Urban75  are not important enough, and for all their bluster, I’ll bet they fastidiously complete their tax returns each year. Or pay some accountant to do it for them.


Shit, and I've been a member of Urban all this time because I thought the top brass here had some kind of influence.

Gutted.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 17, 2021)

Spanner said:


> [name removed] do you have an accountant and do they sort out your tax return every year?


I see the charm offensive is excellently fulfilling at least the "offensive" bit. Jolly good, well done. Your old mum would be proud of you.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 17, 2021)

krtek a houby said:


> A tool of oppression


I think it's just a tool.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 17, 2021)

Spanner said:


> The picture implies “spade” would be a more appropriate username for me than “spanner”. And that I should start digging my own grave because I’ve outsmarted a few of the old-guard.


Yep. Never seen the old guard quite as comprehensively outsmarted as you have just done. What an intellect! What rapier wit! What economy of expression! You'll be a mod in no time, at this rate.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 17, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Right, my response to the racist comment.


Suggesting that you should stop digging is calling you a racist? How's that work, then? Assume I am much thicker than you...


----------



## brogdale (Mar 17, 2021)

24 posts in this thread alone...and not one of them about the UK Census.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 17, 2021)

existentialist said:


> Suggesting that you should stop digging is calling you a racist? How's that work, then? Assume I am much thicker than you...


Such a thing could never be


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 17, 2021)

existentialist said:


> Yep. Never seen the old guard quite as comprehensively outsmarted as you have just done. What an intellect! What rapier wit! What economy of expression! You'll be a mod in no time, at this rate.


He's off his rocker but that won't make him a mod


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 17, 2021)

Spanner said:


> It always ends with a personal insult - e.g. muppet. If you want to fight me, do it on an intellectual level, don’t resort to name calling. Anyone can call a muppet a spade.


It'd be unfair to fight you on an intellectual level as you've clearly come to a battle of wits unarmed


----------



## existentialist (Mar 17, 2021)

Spanner said:


> It always ends with a personal insult - e.g. muppet. If you want to fight me, do it on an intellectual level, don’t resort to name calling. Anyone can call a muppet a spade.


(((poor misunderstood spanner)))


----------



## editor (Mar 17, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Yeah, I didn’t appreciate that the owner of this website has to “put up with all sorts of shit”.
> Not just on the platform he created and which which he makes his living from, but “...in real life” too...unlike the rest of us, I suppose 🙄


I don't make _any money from this website at all,_ you clueless, stupid, ignorant, unpleasant waft of trolling buffoonery.

Does anyone want this idiot to stay here?


----------



## existentialist (Mar 17, 2021)

editor said:


> I don't make _any money from this website at all,_ you clueless, stupid, ignorant, unpleasant waft of trolling buffoonery.
> 
> Does anyone want this idiot to stay here?


Well, it's good to have _something _to wipe our boots on...


----------



## brogdale (Mar 17, 2021)

editor said:


> I don't make _any money from this website at all,_ you clueless, stupid, ignorant, unpleasant waft of trolling buffoonery.
> 
> Does anyone want this idiot to stay here?


Get rid.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 17, 2021)

I see that _PeaceNews _have put together some "Demilitarise the census" advice for those folk willing to engage with the census, but keen to disrupt and cost Leidos as much money as possible. Their reasoning is that they don't want to undermine the accuracy of the census by a blanket boycott but believe there is a maximum to the amount Leidos will be paid by the government, however much the census actually costs. So, if lots of people increase the cost of processing their forms, that will reduce the profit Leidos makes from this operation.



_If you are okay with filling out the census, but want to minimise Leidos’s profits , we have some suggestions below – a more detailed guide from 2011 is available on the PN website.

*Our guide*

You may want to try one or more of these suggestions to reduce Leidos’s profits.

*1) A paper copy*

This is the most important step. If you fill in the census online, that reduces costs massively, and increases Leidos’s profit. So, you should ask for a paper form.

If you don’t have access to the internet, you can phone them up on 0800 328 2021. If you do have access to the internet, you can request the paper version from the census website:

www.tinyurl.com/peacenews3584

*2) Upside down*

If you write in the boxes upside down, it’s unlikely that the computer will be able to process your form, and a human will have to read those pages.

*3) Think outside the box*

Alternatively, write some or all of your answers outside the boxes they are meant to go into.

*4) Staple it*

If you give the wrong answer to a question, cross it out, then write the right answer on a bit of paper and staple it to the census form. Stapling means that page can’t be put through the computer scanner.

*5) That’s torn it*

With one or more of the pages, you might tear the page in half and then repair it with sellotape. This probably also means it can’t be put through the scanner.

*6) Solid black*

This is a bit time-consuming. Every page of the form has a unique barcode so that the form can be taken to pieces and the separate pages fed into a scanner.

If you fill in all the white space of a barcode, that page will have to be processed by a human. Don’t leave little bits of line sticking out at the top or bottom!

*7) Use your own*

Copy the Freepost address onto an envelope without a transparent window when you send back the form. This means a human has to open the envelope to start the processing.

Notes:




			Leidos was listed by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) as the 19th biggest arms and military services company in the world in 2019, with military sales of $5.3bn out of total sales of $11.1bn. www.tinyurl.com/sipri2019

Click to expand...





			Leidos won the £65m contract for ‘Census Questionnaire Management’ in 2018. www.tinyurl.com/2021-suppliers

Click to expand...





			A wholly-owned subsidiary of Leidos, Dynetics, is building a 300kW directed energy weapon and developing missile bodies for long-range hypersonic missiles, both for the US army. www.tinyurl.com/dynetics-lasers and
		
Click to expand...

_


> _www.tinyurl.com/dyn-hypersonic_


----------



## Serge Forward (Mar 17, 2021)

editor said:


> I don't make _any money from this website at all,_ you clueless, stupid, ignorant, unpleasant waft of trolling buffoonery.
> 
> Does anyone want this idiot to stay here?


Bin him off please.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Mar 17, 2021)

editor said:


> I don't make _any money from this website at all,_ you clueless, stupid, ignorant, unpleasant waft of trolling buffoonery.
> 
> Does anyone want this idiot to stay here?


Get rid please.


----------



## moochedit (Mar 17, 2021)

editor said:


> Does anyone want this idiot to stay here?



No. Obvious returner. (No idea who exactly).


----------



## Badgers (Mar 17, 2021)

editor said:


> Does anyone want this idiot to stay here?


No


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 17, 2021)

editor said:


> I don't make _any money from this website at all,_ you clueless, stupid, ignorant, unpleasant waft of trolling buffoonery.
> 
> Does anyone want this idiot to stay here?



Nah, but would like to know which returning clown it is before the ceremonial binning.


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 17, 2021)

Spanner in the works


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 17, 2021)

krtek a houby said:


> Nah, but would like to know which returning clown it is before the ceremonial binning.


yeh but it'd be like identifying who shat a turd - perhaps it can be done, but what's the point?


----------



## co-op (Mar 17, 2021)

Anyway the ONS got its arse handed to it on a plate by Fair Play For Women in court, which just goes to show that being a Stonewall "Diversity Champion" might not be all its cracked up to be.

If you want to read a couple of good, and reasonably short, threads on it you could try these


----------



## belboid (Mar 17, 2021)

Oh my god! They have to remove the word ‘passport’ from the guidance.  What a massive win, praise the lord for those brave women fighting for something really important that will make such a big difference to women’s lives.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 17, 2021)

Rookie not-read-the-thread question: are we meant to wait til 21st March to fill it in?


----------



## moochedit (Mar 17, 2021)

8ball said:


> Rookie not-read-the-thread question: are we meant to wait til 21st March to fill it in?



Thats what i thought as well but everyone else seemed to be doing it early online so i did it last weekend. Not sure if you can edit the online census if anything changes before 21st?


----------



## belboid (Mar 17, 2021)

You can fill it in and not hit submit till Sunday.  It’s changeable up to submission


----------



## moochedit (Mar 17, 2021)

belboid said:


> You can fill it in and not hit submit till Sunday.  It’s changeable up to submission



Already submitted. Still it's highly unlikely anything will change for me now before the 21st.


----------



## Boudicca (Mar 17, 2021)

I have had to request a paper copy as I have lodgers and need to know what the questions are in advance of filling it in.  No online copy, whch is an oversight I think.


----------



## co-op (Mar 17, 2021)

belboid said:


> Oh my god! They have to remove the word ‘passport’ from the guidance.  What a massive win, praise the lord for those brave women fighting for something really important that will make such a big difference to women’s lives.



Yes I'm sure you think women's concerns about the blurring of sex and gender are laughable. But this thread isn't just for you so maybe sit down and shut up if you haven't got anything interesting to add?


----------



## belboid (Mar 18, 2021)

co-op said:


> Yes I'm sure you think women's concerns about the blurring of sex and gender are laughable. But this thread isn't just for you so maybe sit down and shut up if you haven't got anything interesting to add?


I am still waiting for you to respond to the various points raised when they won round one: points concerning how and why this was an entirely hollow victory that wont make any difference in effect. It's a stunt to generate headlines. Apart from there are no headlines because 'Census removes word 'passport' from guidance' is a pretty dull one.


----------



## co-op (Mar 18, 2021)

belboid said:


> I am still waiting for you to respond to the various points raised when they won round one: points concerning how and why this was an entirely hollow victory that wont make any difference in effect. It's a stunt to generate headlines. Apart from there are no headlines because 'Census removes word 'passport' from guidance' is a pretty dull one.





I haven't found that any attempt to find compromises between feminism & transactivism has ever got anywhere constructive so I'm not sure that there's much point having the usual bunfight? 

I thought it was odd that, on a thread about the 2021 census, the result of a legal action brought against the ONS concerning the census wasn't getting discussed so I just put up a couple of links for people who wanted to know what had happened and why it matters.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 18, 2021)

co-op said:


> I haven't found that any attempt to find compromises between feminism & transactivism has ever got anywhere constructive so I'm not sure that there's much point having the usual bunfight?



This is a false dichotomy, as its not 'feminism vs transactivism', even if some feminists might want to portray it that way, and certainly a whole load of men having jumped on the bandwagon channeling their sub-glinner, meanwhile its all become very useful 'culture war' material for the right - some whom don't seem to have given much of a shit about women's and/or trans issues until the last few years. But I've written at length about this on urban in a more informed and considered manner than some of the reactionary, disingenuous stuff that has been claimed both here and elsewhere.

Besides, the (anarcha) feminist groups I've been involved in and have friends around too over the years, whilst there has been intense discussion of these issues at times, see women and trans rights as not being in oppposition but something worth fighting for together - understanding both the shared issues and the differences. And in the current climate that is impacting women - whether that be disproportionate affects of the pandemic, or especially in the events of the last week, channeling money and legal battles into issues such as wording of the census does seem to be a strange priority. That doesn't tend to get the headlines though.


----------



## Spanner (Mar 19, 2021)

editor said:


> I don't make _any money from this website at all,_ you clueless, stupid, ignorant, unpleasant waft of trolling buffoonery.
> 
> Does anyone want this idiot to stay here?


For someone who so publicly and outwardly apparently rejects bullying language, you certainly don’t mind using it yourself when someone “misrepresents” your business model:

clueless
stupid
ignorant
unpleasant
waft
trolling
buffoonery
idiot


----------



## existentialist (Mar 19, 2021)

Spanner said:


> For someone who so publicly and outwardly apparently rejects bullying language, you certainly don’t mind using it yourself when someone “misrepresents” your business model:
> 
> clueless
> stupid
> ...


Mind the door doesn't, etc..


----------



## 8ball (Mar 19, 2021)

Spanner said:


> For someone who so publicly and outwardly apparently rejects bullying language, you certainly don’t mind using it yourself when someone “misrepresents” your business model:
> 
> clueless
> stupid
> ...



I’m not sure “waft” qualifies as bullying language.

Anyway, cheers for answering the question, guys, I’ll fill the thing in early - not anticipating any change of passport or gender in the next few days.


----------



## Serge Forward (Mar 19, 2021)

(((Waft)))


----------



## muscovyduck (Mar 19, 2021)

co-op said:


> I haven't found that any attempt to find compromises between feminism & transactivism has ever got anywhere constructive so I'm not sure that there's much point having the usual bunfight?
> 
> I thought it was odd that, on a thread about the 2021 census, the result of a legal action brought against the ONS concerning the census wasn't getting discussed so I just put up a couple of links for people who wanted to know what had happened and why it matters.


You do realise most feminists and most trans people get on with one another right? It's just a tiny very vocal minority with a lot of money to throw around and/or time on their hands stirring shit.

It's not being discussed the same way you ignore anyone having a tantrum for attention. Hope that helps


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 19, 2021)

Spanner said:


> For someone who so publicly and outwardly apparently rejects bullying language, you certainly don’t mind using it yourself when someone “misrepresents” your business model:
> 
> clueless
> stupid
> ...


He's being kind and pulling his punches


----------



## existentialist (Mar 19, 2021)

Spanner said:


> For someone who so publicly and outwardly apparently rejects bullying language, you certainly don’t mind using it yourself when someone “misrepresents” your business model:
> 
> clueless
> stupid
> ...


"business model", LOL. It's almost as if you can't conceive of someone doing something for any reason other than making £££


----------



## Serge Forward (Mar 19, 2021)

I realise I'm not the only one but... pretending to work while posting on urban is my business model for my boss. Things are shaping up well, productivity (on urban) has recently increased


----------



## belboid (Mar 19, 2021)

co-op said:


> I haven't found that any attempt to find compromises between feminism & transactivism has ever got anywhere constructive so I'm not sure that there's much point having the usual bunfight?
> 
> I thought it was odd that, on a thread about the 2021 census, the result of a legal action brought against the ONS concerning the census wasn't getting discussed so I just put up a couple of links for people who wanted to know what had happened and why it matters.


I didn’t mention anything  relevant to ‘the usual bunfight’ - I simply wanted to know why you had ignored the previous replies pointing out why this particular action was largely meaningless.  You are trying to claim it as a MASSIVE win, but it really isn’t.  Which is probably why it has barely been reported upon.


----------



## co-op (Mar 19, 2021)

muscovyduck said:


> It's just a tiny very vocal minority with a lot of money to throw around and/or time on their hands stirring shit.





Why yes of course it is, it has to be otherwise trans women wouldn't be the most oppressed minority ever etc etc. 

Still it's funny how the gender identity case was being made by QCs paid for by the Office for National Statistics and the Government Legal Service (appointed by the Cabinet Office), while the case against was crowd-funded by over 2,500 people paying an average of less than £40 each. It's almost like the translobby has successfully got hugely powerful govt depts on its side and the gender critical feminists are a self-organising grass roots body. But I know appearances can be deceptive, I must have misunderstood something.


----------



## muscovyduck (Mar 19, 2021)

co-op said:


> Why yes of course it is, it has to be otherwise trans women wouldn't be the most oppressed minority ever etc etc.
> 
> Still it's funny how the gender identity case was being made by QCs paid for by the Office for National Statistics and the Government Legal Service (appointed by the Cabinet Office), while the case against was crowd-funded by over 2,500 people paying an average of less than £40 each. It's almost like the translobby has successfully got hugely powerful govt depts on its side and the gender critical feminists are a self-organising grass roots body. But I know appearances can be deceptive, I must have misunderstood something.


Go tell it to twitter no one here gives a fuck. ps the grinning emoji don't hide your insecurity as well as you think


----------



## belboid (Mar 19, 2021)

co-op said:


> Why yes of course it is, it has to be otherwise trans women wouldn't be the most oppressed minority ever etc etc.
> 
> Still it's funny how the gender identity case was being made by QCs paid for by the Office for National Statistics and the Government Legal Service (appointed by the Cabinet Office), while the case against was crowd-funded by over 2,500 people paying an average of less than £40 each. It's almost like the translobby has successfully got hugely powerful govt depts on its side and the gender critical feminists are a self-organising grass roots body. But I know appearances can be deceptive, I must have misunderstood something.


Good thing you have Priti Patel on your side then!

Still waiting for you to come back on why this ‘massive victory’ actually is one, why it’s not a tokenistic waste of time and money which will have virtually no effect.


----------



## co-op (Mar 19, 2021)

muscovyduck said:


> Go tell it to twitter no one here gives a fuck. ps the grinning emoji don't hide your insecurity as well as you think



There are quite a lot of posters on here who are GC and therefore do give a fuck, although as the TRA MO is just to shout at people until they change the subject mostly we don't post on this.

Thanks for the emotional advice though.


----------



## muscovyduck (Mar 19, 2021)

co-op said:


> There are quite a lot of posters on here who are GC and therefore do give a fuck, although as the TRA MO is just to shout at people until they change the subject mostly we don't post on this.
> 
> Thanks for the emotional advice though.


I have no idea what the TRA MO is but I'm glad you're finally getting the point that we don't want to talk about your weird obsession with trans people.


----------



## co-op (Mar 19, 2021)

muscovyduck said:


> I have no idea what the TRA MO is but I'm glad you're finally getting the point that we don't want to talk about your weird obsession with trans people.



TRA = trans rights activist

MO modus operandi

I'm well aware that any kind of discussion about anything to do with the obvious conflict between trans rights and - esp - women's rights and children's rights is something you hate. It's one of the reasons that red flags go up for me on this, if your primary technique is bullying then you kind of know that most people wouldn't buy gender identity theory if they were allowed to talk it through.


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 19, 2021)

Spanner said:


> For someone who so publicly and outwardly apparently rejects bullying language, you certainly don’t mind using it yourself when someone “misrepresents” your business model:
> 
> clueless
> stupid
> ...



Daft waft


----------



## klang (Mar 19, 2021)

disregarding Spanner, what's a waft?


----------



## klang (Mar 19, 2021)

and can I put it on my census as my religion?


----------



## muscovyduck (Mar 19, 2021)

co-op said:


> TRA = trans rights activist
> 
> MO modus operandi
> 
> I'm well aware that any kind of discussion about anything to do with the obvious conflict between trans rights and - esp - women's rights and children's rights is something you hate. It's one of the reasons that red flags go up for me on this, if your primary technique is bullying then you kind of know that most people wouldn't buy gender identity theory if they were allowed to talk it through.



I see you've gone for the typical patriarchal move of painting a woman as a bully or oppressor because they're not polite enough, but nice try.


----------



## belboid (Mar 19, 2021)

co-op said:


> TRA = trans rights activist
> 
> MO modus operandi
> 
> I'm well aware that any kind of discussion about anything to do with the obvious conflict between trans rights and - esp - women's rights and children's rights is something you hate. It's one of the reasons that red flags go up for me on this, if your primary technique is bullying then you kind of know that most people wouldn't buy gender identity theory if they were allowed to talk it through.


Still waiting for you to actually respond to the points about the census, rather than the generic gender hypocritical stuff you said there was no point discussing


----------



## xenon (Mar 19, 2021)

littleseb said:


> disregarding Spanner, what's a waft?



A fart, I reckon.
Filled in my census form online last night. Took about 10 minutes, piece of piss.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 19, 2021)

littleseb said:


> and can I put it on my census as my religion?



Can’t you put whatever you want as your religion?  Freedom of religion and all that..

Reminds me of registering at Uni in 1992 and there was a religion question on the form.  One lad yelled to his mate "Dave!  What religion are we in England?  Is it Christian?  I think it's Christian, right?".  He would have been perfectly happy to put down whatever his mate said.


----------



## muscovyduck (Mar 19, 2021)

I've got a vague notion waft is slang for something money related


----------



## Raheem (Mar 19, 2021)

littleseb said:


> disregarding Spanner, what's a waft?


Is it army slang for "what a fucking twat"?


----------



## Spanner (Mar 20, 2021)

8ball said:


> I’m not sure “waft” qualifies as bullying language.


OK, so you’re the referee I need to ask if I feel a word has been used in a deliberately hurtful way?


----------



## xenon (Mar 20, 2021)

Spanner said:


> OK, so you’re the referee I need to ask if I feel a word has been used in a deliberately hurtful way?



come on, say something interesting or fuck the fuck off. Why aren’t you posting elsewhere on this forum. If you are gonna troll, troll hard or go home.
anything but this weaseley piss week nonsense. Oh they said some mean words...


----------



## Spanner (Mar 20, 2021)

Raheem said:
			
		

> I’m not sure “waft” qualifies as bullying language.


ALL of “editor’s” words were carefully chosen to be a “show of strength”, yes including “waft” — used to demonstrate how he could blow someone so insignificant away from his forum at the push of a button.

Why hasn’t he done it then?


----------



## Spanner (Mar 20, 2021)

xenon said:


> come on, say something interesting or fuck the fuck off. Why aren’t you posting elsewhere on this forum. If you are gonna troll, troll hard or go home.
> anything but this weaseley piss week nonsense. Oh they said some mean words...


*weak


----------



## Spanner (Mar 20, 2021)

editor said:


> I don't make _any money from this website at all,_ you clueless, stupid, ignorant, unpleasant waft of trolling buffoonery.
> 
> Does anyone want this idiot to stay here?


Servers and bandwidth cost money. I assume your bills get paid, so you must make enough from this website (or some other income source) to pay the bills. That’s just how life works, mate. I don’t know why you’d be so angry about someone pointing it out


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Mar 20, 2021)




----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 20, 2021)

This is for editor


----------



## Spanner (Mar 20, 2021)

krtek a houby said:


> This is for editor


Why worship someone who is the same as you


----------



## editor (Mar 20, 2021)

Spanner said:


> For someone who so publicly and outwardly apparently rejects bullying language, you certainly don’t mind using it yourself when someone “misrepresents” your business model:
> 
> clueless
> stupid
> ...


Could you explain exactly my "business model" is please, Mr Expert, and perhaps give some insights into the kind of lolly I'm presumably rolling in every week. Where do you think the money is coming from?


Spanner said:


> Servers and bandwidth cost money. I assume your bills get paid, so you must make enough from this website (or some other income source) to pay the bills. That’s just how life works, mate. I don’t know why you’d be so angry about someone pointing it out


Not angry, just a bit baffled why you think you're qualified to rock up here and spout total bollocks from a position of supreme ignorance.

Allow me to throw some light into the dark chasms of stupidity in your mind: this site runs on a shoestring. The server costs are just met every month by the kind donations of its users, and the admin/tech stuff is taken care of by unpaid volunteers who generously help out. Whenever there's not enough money in the kitty to cover costs, I ask here and people are usually very quick to respond.

Despite the years and years I've put into running this site - and turning down many lucrative offers in the past -  I make absolutely nothing from it and never will. That's why you'll ever see advertising here.

I'm proud and humbled to have helped create such a community though and I'm grateful to the wonderful people who contribute to it.  That said, I am getting a bit fed up with you disrupting a thread about the Census, so I suggest you read the rules of the site very carefully before continuing.


----------



## editor (Mar 20, 2021)

littleseb said:


> disregarding Spanner, what's a waft?


*Waft: (*with reference to a scent, sound, etc.) pass or cause to pass gently through the air.
"the smell of stale fat wafted out from the cafe"


----------



## maomao (Mar 20, 2021)

editor said:


> Does anyone want this idiot to stay here?



No. Not even entertaining.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 20, 2021)

Spanner said:


> OK, so you’re the referee I need to ask if I feel a word has been used in a deliberately hurtful way?


Oh, get over yourself, you big waft


----------



## 8ball (Mar 20, 2021)

existentialist said:


> Oh, get over yourself, you big waft



I think this term is going to have more shelf life than editor could have envisaged.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 20, 2021)

Spanner said:


> Servers and bandwidth cost money. I assume your bills get paid, so you must make enough from this website (or some other income source) to pay the bills. That’s just how life works, mate. I don’t know why you’d be so angry about someone pointing it out


The reason you're having a hard time understanding how Urban works is because you appear to lack the ability to conceive of something being done as a common good.

Urban survives on donations from its more regular members, although I believe editor has to put some of his own money in. That's it - no global corporation, no hidden funding, just a bunch of people chipping in to run the service you're now using to have a pop at editor. Which makes YOU look like a bit of a cunt.


----------



## existentialist (Mar 20, 2021)

Oh, yes, and a +1 for binning the spanner. I never like to waste tools, and Spanner is definitely a tool, but a spanner that thinks it's bigger than it actually is, is useless.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 20, 2021)

Might not fill it in early after all - looks like the website has crashed. 

edit: working again now.


----------



## editor (Mar 20, 2021)

existentialist said:


> The reason you're having a hard time understanding how Urban works is because you appear to lack the ability to conceive of something being done as a common good.
> 
> Urban survives on donations from its more regular members, although I believe editor has to put some of his own money in. That's it - no global corporation, no hidden funding, just a bunch of people chipping in to run the service you're now using to have a pop at editor. Which makes YOU look like a bit of a cunt.


To be fair, I've easily got as much out of this site as I've put in. And I've always known if I had gone for the big money when it was offered, or taken on advertising, there's no doubt the site wouldn't exist now - so it's never been a hard thing to turn down.


----------



## kenny g (Mar 20, 2021)

editor said:


> To be fair, I've easily got as much out of this site as I've put in. And I've always known if I had gone for the big money when it was offered, or taken on advertising, there's no doubt the site wouldn't exist now - so it's never been a hard thing to turn down.


If you went for the really big money and shared it out between the active users would we have a few thousand extra in the bank?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 20, 2021)

kenny g said:


> If you went for the really big money and shared it out between the active users would we have a few thousand extra in the bank?


In ratio to their number of posts perhaps


----------



## kenny g (Mar 20, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> In ratio to their number of posts perhaps


With significant weighting to take account of the number of people who have them on ignore


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 20, 2021)




----------



## klang (Mar 20, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> In ratio to their number of posts perhaps


a score for every warning point.


----------



## xenon (Mar 20, 2021)

What if you had to pay to post. Would I have posted this.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 20, 2021)

xenon said:


> What if you had to pay to post. Would I have posted this.


Post from work and you're in effect being paid to post


----------



## savoloysam (Mar 20, 2021)

Have to admit I've always managed to avoid filling these in, does that make me wrongun (I know I already I am)

Only one time did I get a knock on the door for it and I just told him I submitted it really late because I had been away. I hadn't.

Also who's doing all the data handling for the government? Because if it's Capita they can fuck right off.


----------



## moochedit (Mar 20, 2021)

savoloysam said:


> Also who's doing all the data handling for the government? Because if it's Capita they can fuck right off.



I can set your mind at rest. The census data handling contract has been given to Facebook so you have nothing to fear!


----------



## kenny g (Mar 20, 2021)

I generally just start muttering about the weather in a belligerent manner on the rare occasion anyone unwanted knocks on our door. Has done the trick to date.


----------



## weltweit (Mar 20, 2021)

My son already did it he says. 

My letter says do it on the 21st or as soon as possible after. 

I wonder if the website will stay up ..


----------



## Duncan2 (Mar 20, 2021)

Not up to speed with this thread so this has probably been covered already but I don't see how the octogenarians and nonagenarians are supposed to comply with their legal obligation to respond to the census when very large numbers of them will not have computers or any ability to take themselves off to the centres where assistance is being made available?Isn't it likely that the 2021 census will record a whopping no-show from this segment of the population?Agreed its not technically difficult but it does seem to assume everyone has a smartphone or computer?


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Mar 20, 2021)

Duncan2 said:


> but it does seem to assume everyone has a smartphone or computer?



you can ring up and request a paper form, according to the bumf i got sent


----------



## Duncan2 (Mar 21, 2021)

Thanks Puddy Tat I must have missed that paragraph in the bumf we were sent.


----------



## ska invita (Mar 21, 2021)

Duncan2 said:


> Thanks Puddy Tat I must have missed that paragraph in the bumf we were sent.


as will many octogenarians and nonagenarians


----------



## Spanner (Mar 21, 2021)

editor said:


> Could you explain exactly my "business model" is please, Mr Expert, and perhaps give some insights into the kind of lolly I'm presumably rolling in every week. Where do you think the money is coming from?
> Not angry, just a bit baffled why you think you're qualified to rock up here and spout total bollocks from a position of supreme ignorance.
> 
> Allow me to throw some light into the dark chasms of stupidity in your mind: this site runs on a shoestring. The server costs are just met every month by the kind donations of its users, and the admin/tech stuff is taken care of by unpaid volunteers who generously help out. Whenever there's not enough money in the kitty to cover costs, I ask here and people are usually very quick to respond.
> ...



Thanks for taking the time to explain.

I apologise for my preconceptions of you, and any negative remarks I made about your motivation. 

I was out of order.


----------



## WouldBe (Mar 21, 2021)

Puddy_Tat said:


> you can ring up and request a paper form, according to the bumf i got sent


I didn't ask for a paper copy they just sent one.


----------



## ChrisD (Mar 21, 2021)

Duncan2 said:


> Not up to speed with this thread so this has probably been covered already but I don't see how the octogenarians and nonagenarians are supposed to comply with their legal obligation to respond to the census when very large numbers of them will not have computers or any ability to take themselves off to the centres where assistance is being made available?Isn't it likely that the 2021 census will record a whopping no-show from this segment of the population?Agreed its not technically difficult but it does seem to assume everyone has a smartphone or computer?


My wife sorted the return for her mum last week.  She had to remember the last paid job she did including who she worked for and nature of the job.  She used to work for a coal merchant but stopped working 66 years ago !  There was no section to indicate the historic nature of this job or what she'd been doing  for the last 65 years !


----------



## brogdale (Mar 21, 2021)

WouldBe said:


> I didn't ask for a paper copy they just sent one.


The ONS said they'd do this in a small number of areas where they suspected there'd be a lower take-up of the online default. I suppose they're thinking of areas with higher than usual older folk or lower than average access to internet?


----------



## not a trot (Mar 21, 2021)

ChrisD said:


> My wife sorted the return for her mum last week.  She had to remember the last paid job she did including who she worked for and nature of the job.  She used to work for a coal merchant but stopped working 66 years ago !  *There was no section to indicate the historic nature of this job or what she'd been doing  for the last 65 years !*



Had the same problem filling in the online forms for my elderly neighbour. She worked in the local greengrocers back in the 70s. All sorted and done our own as well.


----------



## moochedit (Mar 21, 2021)

WouldBe said:


> I didn't ask for a paper copy they just sent one.



Same here. Apparently they do that in areas they expect few people to do it online. (Someone said that earlier in the thread). I did mine online anyway.


----------



## Riklet (Mar 21, 2021)

Done ours online.

Didnt answer any of the optional questions. Didnt like the one about where you lived a year ago... maybe this is pandemic related tho?


----------



## Boudicca (Mar 21, 2021)

Help.

As someone who has used census data many times in the past, I am very happy to fill in the questionnaire.

However I have lodgers, some of the information is quite personal and I'm not comfortable collecting it from them.  Also one of them is a full on conspiraloon and will probably refuse to give her details.  I'm not sure whether to just say I live on my own or to land her in it.

Ideally I'd like to fill in my details and get links sent to the others for them to fill in their section. Does anyone know if this is possible?


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Mar 21, 2021)

Boudicca said:


> Ideally I'd like to fill in my details and get links sent to the others for them to fill in their section. Does anyone know if this is possible?



Yes, someone in the thread earlier asked the question from the viewpoint of being a house-sharer.  They should contact the census people and ask for a personal access code.  Not sure if you are supposed to record their presence in a way that says they will answer the detail for themselves


----------



## Boudicca (Mar 21, 2021)

Puddy_Tat said:


> Yes, someone in the thread earlier asked the question from the viewpoint of being a house-sharer.  They should contact the census people and ask for a personal access code.  Not sure if you are supposed to record their presence in a way that says they will answer the detail for themselves


Thank you.  The thread is 38 pages long and descended into bickering quite early on so I couldn't face reading it all.


----------



## Tankus (Mar 21, 2021)

Nothing  arrived  in the  post   ,so ,  just  went online,  got  my code , then  done  and  complete  in 5  min. 

easily accessible  form  to  fill , I thought


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Mar 21, 2021)

mum-tat did do hers a week or so back (although wondering how she would report a change of circumstances if she dropped dead before today)

i suppose i ought to do something about mine - still trying to deal with the question of visibility / concern about it being used against me if the government gets any more far-right


----------



## moochedit (Mar 21, 2021)

Tankus said:


> Nothing  arrived  in the  post   ,so ,  just  went online,  got  my code , then  done  and  complete  in 5  min.
> 
> easily accessible  form  to  fill , I thought



My mum said she did that and then her letter arrived an hour later. How do you prove you live at the address without the access code letter? Can you fill in for any address?


----------



## Tankus (Mar 21, 2021)

get  the  access  code  online



> You can request a new access code to start a new census if you have lost or not received an access code. This can be sent to you by text or post.



had  it  by txt  straight away


----------



## quiet guy (Mar 21, 2021)

Think you'd get found out if you tried filling one in for BoJo at 10 Downing Street.

How many children - don't know 
Profession - Complete arse


----------



## seeformiles (Mar 22, 2021)

“You fill up my Census....”


----------



## brogdale (Mar 24, 2021)

Any objectors been knocked up by the 'goons' yet?


----------



## belboid (Mar 24, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Any objectors been knocked up by the 'goons' yet?


I thought you said only those who are empowered to take statements are ‘goons’, now you’re back to insulting thousands of poorly paid workers.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 24, 2021)

belboid said:


> I thought you said only those who are empowered to take statements are ‘goons’, now you’re back to insulting thousands of poorly paid workers.


** waves **


----------



## belboid (Mar 24, 2021)

brogdale said:


> ** waves **


Which is it? Come on, it’s a simple question, much simpler even than the ones on the form.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 24, 2021)

belboid said:


> Which is it? Come on, it’s a simple question, much simpler even than the ones on the form.


This thread was better when you were just gratuitously abusive.


----------



## xenon (Mar 24, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Any objectors been knocked up by the 'goons' yet?



i’ll tell my friend later she’s a goon. She is the most ungoon like person you might imagine though.
by the way they are not filling in census  in on the doorstep. Rather arrange a telephone appointment for those who for whatever reason have not completed one online or paper.


----------



## belboid (Mar 24, 2021)

brogdale said:


> This thread was better when you were just gratuitously abusive.


It was never gratuitous.


----------



## xenon (Mar 24, 2021)

(QUOTE="brogdale, post: 17027007, member: 57590"]
** waves ** 
[/QUOTE]

It’s making you look a bit of an idiot.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 24, 2021)

xenon said:


> (QUOTE="brogdale, post: 17027007, member: 57590"]
> ** waves **



It’s making you look a bit of an idiot.
[/QUOTE]
OK.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 24, 2021)

belboid said:


> It was never gratuitous.


On that, we'll just have to agree to disagree, I'm afraid.
Nonetheless, it is very decent of you to concede that you have been abusive in this thread.
Nice to see the rancour fall away as the thread reaches a natural ending.


----------



## belboid (Mar 24, 2021)

So, you are still insulting thousands of workers as ‘goons’ then?


----------



## brogdale (Mar 24, 2021)

belboid said:


> So, you are still insulting thousands of workers as ‘goons’ then?


Honestly have no idea how many field staff recruited and 'specially trained' by Adecco to conduct formal interviews under caution as required by the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) there are. Do you?


----------



## Orang Utan (Mar 24, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Any objectors been knocked up by the 'goons' yet?


They don’t look like this:

more like this:


----------



## belboid (Mar 24, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Honestly have no idea how many field staff recruited and 'specially trained' by Adecco to conduct formal interviews under caution as required by the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) there are. Do you?


No. But I do know that none of them are employed yet, there are still adverts for that job up. So are you withdrawing the 'goons' insult in regard to those who are currently politely knocking on doors?


----------



## brogdale (Mar 24, 2021)

belboid said:


> No. But I do know that none of them are employed yet, there are still adverts for that job up. So are you withdrawing the 'goons' insult in regard to those who are currently politely knocking on doors?


No you're wrong about that.
None of the roles still open for application include the special training required to interview under caution.
Those role must already have been recruited and filled.


----------



## belboid (Mar 24, 2021)

Ok, I’m wrong they’re still being advertised, but they’re still not working. They’re called something like enforcement officers. 

So are you going to withdraw your slur?


----------



## brogdale (Mar 24, 2021)

belboid said:


> Ok, I’m wrong they’re still being advertised, but they’re still not working. They’re called something like enforcement officers.
> 
> So are you going to withdraw your slur?


Calling the specially trained field staff that conduct formal interviews under caution as required by the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) "goons"?
Nah.


----------



## belboid (Mar 24, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Calling the specially trained field staff that conduct formal interviews under caution as required by the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) "goons"?
> Nah.


You’re avoiding the point again.

The people currently knocking on doors do not have those powers.  So you’ll be apologising to them, no?


----------



## brogdale (Mar 24, 2021)

belboid said:


> You’re avoiding the point again.
> 
> The people currently knocking on doors do not have those powers.  So you’ll be apologising to them, no?


If I had, I would. But I haven't, so there's no need.


----------



## belboid (Mar 24, 2021)

I think you forget everyone can remember back as far as post 1137


----------



## brogdale (Mar 24, 2021)

belboid said:


> I think you forget everyone can remember back as far as post 1137


Really not sure what you're on about, tbh.
In 1137 I asked if _Any objectors been knocked up by the 'goons' yet?_
If I'd wanted to know whether anyone had been knocked up by the non-goon, good cop officers I'd have said so.


----------



## savoloysam (Mar 27, 2021)

Had a reminder today and thought fuck it might as well fill it in (after researching online if the likes of Crapita, UK govs most official busy body has access to the data and no they don't - not officially anyway but being drug addled and paranoid I gave them my spanish first name just in case)

Posty appeared to be recording the reminder as delivered so I suspect "the goons" might be less forgiving to non compliant households this time around.


----------



## belboid (Mar 27, 2021)

Reminders don't come from posties, they come from census officers whose job it is to write down where they leave reminders etc (same as every time, but more techy this year)


----------



## savoloysam (Mar 27, 2021)

I must 


belboid said:


> Reminders don't come from posties, they come from census officers whose job it is to write down where they leave reminders etc (same as every time, but more techy this year)



I must have been hallucinating the postman delivering a reminder this morning then and logging something on his hand held device. Haz I been scammed by the postman? 🤔


----------



## belboid (Mar 27, 2021)

savoloysam said:


> I must have been hallucinating the postman delivering a reminder this morning then and logging something on his hand held device. Haz I been scammed by the postman? 🤔


I am surprised it would be done by a postie, unless you live somewhere weird, the rest sounds normal (I suspect the handheld device is a phone)


----------



## Mation (Mar 28, 2021)

Apologies if this has already been covered - I've only just found the thread (39 pages of which is a bit daunting to read before posting) and only just noticed that the census is happening nowish.

Just completed it online. There was a single access code for my household, a house share of many people who haven't chosen each other, meaning we all rent our rooms from the landlord independently, via his letting agency.

I've just seen that I can view all of the information entered by everyone else in the house. This doesn't seem right.

We are a technical household in that we share a kitchen, living room, and bathrooms, but we're not family or partners.

I _am _nosey, but don't think I should be able to indulge it in this case!


----------



## belboid (Mar 28, 2021)

Individuals can get individual codes which overwrites anything input by someone else and cant be seen by anyone else.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Mar 28, 2021)

Mation said:


> I _am _nosey, but don't think I should be able to indulge it in this case!





belboid said:


> Individuals can get individual codes which overwrites anything input by someone else and cant be seen by anyone else.



that

although i'm not sure it was really made clear enough for shared houses etc


----------



## Boudicca (Mar 28, 2021)

It certainly wasn't.

Mation I filled in my section of the questionnaire, added the names of my two lodgers and gave mobile numbers for them to get sent their own access code.

It's really shortsighted that they don't make this clear as I think a lot of house sharers will be missed off.


----------



## Mation (Mar 28, 2021)

belboid said:


> Individuals can get individual codes which overwrites anything input by someone else and cant be seen by anyone else.


That's good, but how would anyone know it's possible?

I only saw the single letter for our address pinned up in the kitchen. I imagine that some of my myriad housemates who have completed the census would have wanted an individual code, if it was clear that they could have one.

I would have.


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 28, 2021)

Mation said:


> That's good, but how would anyone know it's possible?


I guess the main one-sheet letter is optimised for the most common kind of households, and if there was too much detailed information on it about less common types of household it would just be overwhelming for lots of people to take in and more likely to get binned. The info about getting filling forms in seperately was in the little "what you need to know" pamphlet that camein the envelope with the letter.

It is a balance, i guess there isn't really an ideal one-size-fits-all letter, all households are different. at least any of the reminder staff should be trained to be able to direct you to the right information.


----------



## Boudicca (Mar 28, 2021)

Well, here we go.  I'm surprised that the unrelated adults figure is so low.  Although now we have seen how the data is collected.....


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Mar 28, 2021)

Boudicca said:


> Well, here we go. I'm surprised that the unrelated adults figure is so low. Although now we have seen how the data is collected.....



depends what they mean by (or what people have thought they meant by) 'households' - in benefits terms, a 'household' is people who live as one family unit (i.e. sharing finances and shopping and so on) - people who share a property aren't necessarily a 'household'


----------



## rutabowa (Mar 29, 2021)

Boudicca said:


> View attachment 260754
> 
> Well, here we go.  I'm surprised that the unrelated adults figure is so low.  Although now we have seen how the data is collected.....


Those figures sound about right to me, at least for the area I've been doing, and I have actually been knocking on doors to ask! It would be different in eg student areas of course, not sure how well information on those could ever be captured though as they are so transitory.


----------



## NoXion (Apr 1, 2021)

I've had my third letter today. I have no political or philosophical objections to the notion of a census, I'm just a lazy and/or forgetful cunt. 

I am however distinctly unimpressed with the chosen tone of engagement. _"We have noticed you haven't filled in the census yet. Do it now or we'll smack you with a fine worth a grand"_. This paraphrased statement was in bold near the top of the letter. Leading with threats, what fucking PR genius thought that shit up? A £10 thank-you to all participants would cost less than 680 million quid, but even some paltry bullshit like a raffle or some vouchers would be better received than legalistic growling.

There's no good justification for waving the stick around. It's not like anyone's gonna die if I don't fill it in as soon as it drops on my doorstep. The information is going to have the same utility if I fill it in later.


----------



## teuchter (Apr 1, 2021)

NoXion said:


> The information is going to have the same utility if I fill it in later.


Not entirely, if the idea is to capture everyone at the same point in time and your memory is ropey.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 1, 2021)

NoXion said:


> I've had my third letter today. I have no political or philosophical objections to the notion of a census, I'm just a lazy and/or forgetful cunt.
> 
> I am however distinctly unimpressed with the chosen tone of engagement. _"We have noticed you haven't filled in the census yet. Do it now or we'll smack you with a fine worth a grand"_. This paraphrased statement was in bold near the top of the letter. Leading with threats, what fucking PR genius thought that shit up? A £10 thank-you to all participants would cost less than 680 million quid, but even some paltry bullshit like a raffle or some vouchers would be better received than legalistic growling.
> 
> There's no good justification for waving the stick around. It's not like anyone's gonna die if I don't fill it in as soon as it drops on my doorstep. The information is going to have the same utility if I fill it in later.


Type of thing...


----------



## NoXion (Apr 1, 2021)

teuchter said:


> Not entirely, if the idea is to capture everyone at the same point in time and your memory is ropey.



I'm not going to forget personal info like my age and my height, and I can consult my own records, count the number of rooms, or otherwise do something to confirm whatever trivia they ask without relying on my faulty memory.


----------



## teuchter (Apr 1, 2021)

NoXion said:


> I'm not going to forget personal info like my age and my height, and I can consult my own records, count the number of rooms, or otherwise do something to confirm whatever trivia they ask without relying on my faulty memory.


There are things like the question about how you would describe your level of health that are probably influenced by things like the day of the week or the weather at the time the question is asked.


----------



## NoXion (Apr 1, 2021)

brogdale said:


> Type of thing...
> 
> View attachment 261273



As if anarchist societies would never do such things. Sure, they'd do some of it less often, and they might call it something else when they do it, which could be helpful for maintaining the social narrative, but stuff like indoctrination will still be going on in whatever lessons kids get. Every society attempts to pass on certain values to their children.


----------



## NoXion (Apr 1, 2021)

teuchter said:


> There are things like the question about how you would describe your level of health that are probably influenced by things like the day of the week or the weather at the time the question is asked.



That's a stupid census question if it's so time-dependent. Moods change all the time.


----------



## Orang Utan (Apr 1, 2021)

NoXion said:


> That's a stupid census question if it's so time-dependent. Moods change all the time.


It is a stupid question but you’re supposed to answer in general rather than right now


----------



## teuchter (Apr 1, 2021)

NoXion said:


> That's a stupid census question if it's so time-dependent. Moods change all the time.


It's one less confounding factor you have to worry about, if you can get everyone to answer it at the same time.


----------



## NoXion (Apr 1, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> It is a stupid question but you’re supposed to answer in general rather than right now



People are going to answer it like that anyway. The census designers are incompetents if they don't take such things into account.


----------



## NoXion (Apr 1, 2021)

teuchter said:


> It's one less confounding factor you have to worry about, if you can get everyone to answer it at the same time.



Which is logistically impossible, so it's an effort doomed to failure.


----------



## teuchter (Apr 1, 2021)

NoXion said:


> Which is logistically impossible, so it's an effort doomed to failure.


If you can get everyone to answer within a two week period, rather than within a 5 year period or whatever it would be if they didn't shake a stick at people like you, that's still an improvement.


----------



## miss direct (Apr 1, 2021)

We've had a letter asking us to finish filling it in.

I'm in a shared house and got a code and did my own bit. I dont want to deal with the other members of the house. 

Are we going to get a knock on the door soon?


----------



## Raheem (Apr 1, 2021)

I'd assume if you've done your bit you haven't committed an offence and won't get fined.


----------



## rutabowa (Apr 1, 2021)

miss direct said:


> We've had a letter asking us to finish filling it in.
> 
> I'm in a shared house and got a code and did my own bit. I dont want to deal with the other members of the house.
> 
> Are we going to get a knock on the door soon?


Someone does still have to fill in the census for the house; the individual ones are for personal information, the household one is what gets the address taken off the list.


----------



## belboid (Apr 1, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> Someone does still have to fill in the census for the house; the individual ones are for personal information, the household one is what gets the address taken off the list.


Not until someone hits the submit button tho


----------



## rutabowa (Apr 1, 2021)

Yes, you have to submit it!


----------



## miss direct (Apr 1, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> Someone does still have to fill in the census for the house; the individual ones are for personal information, the household one is what gets the address taken off the list.


How does that work though in shared houses when two people refuse to engage?


----------



## rutabowa (Apr 1, 2021)

miss direct said:


> How does that work though in shared houses when two people refuse to engage?


You can just fill in the general data for the house and dummy data for the people who wont do it


----------



## kenny g (Apr 4, 2021)

Ordered a separate code. Arrived in the post. Have now ordered a paper census as a separate member of the household as wouldn't want to do online. Apparently it takes five days to arrive in the post. Surprised it is so unclear how you can order a separate paper form and the rest of the family can fill theirs in online and submit...


----------



## NoXion (Apr 6, 2021)

Finally remembered to fill in my census this morning, and I note that the black helicopters have yet to swoop down from the sky and seize me.


----------



## rutabowa (Apr 13, 2021)

The aim isn't to send in the helicoptors, it is to get people to complete the census! So thank you.

Apparently the whole operation has been massively successful as far as getting returns in this time round, ie a higher percentage of household have returned than ever before.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 29, 2021)

On this thread, we had a long-ranging discussion about how categories for things like ethnicity and gender are constructed.  In particular, we discussed _why this matters_.  Well, I have recently come across something that I think provides valuable insight into why it matters.



			https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10052610/1/Phoenix_82-Article%20Text-93-1-10-20171204.pdf
		


I would note that this paper is neither in favour nor against the construction of categories within censuses.  It  points out the nature of the power relations in play and how these can support the status quo.  It also, however, discusses how they can provide momentum for the recognition of previously unrecognised selves and ways of being.  In that latter regard, however, the last paragraph I have quoted below points out that any such challenge to power relies on categories being actively contested.  I would suggest that this includes not simply taking the questions on the census as being appropriate and useful just because the state has deemed them to be so.

Taking key segments from the section where the authors specifically discuss censuses:



> This third and final example... examines the ways in which the UK and US Censuses have been revised and analysed to consider how census categorisations illuminate everyday politics of representation. Contestation about representation matters because of its meanings for social positioning and, hence, what constitutes a ‘liveable life’*. In recent decades, contestation about the categories enumerated in the UK and US Censuses has served to highlight the ways in which social categories and representations are socially constructed and that there are sociopolitical consequences to the categorisations chosen. It is apparent, for example, that our societal landscape is structured on the basis of gender, sexual orientation, language, age, disabilities, nationality, religion etc. and that the social representations of people in census categories change as social understandings does. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the ways in which racialised and ethnicised categories are represented.  For example, in both the UK and the USA, the introduction of questions allowing the enumeration of a ‘mixed ethnicity’ category generated controversy (Owen, 2007, 2012).


*_My note here: the authors have already explained that they are using the concept of "liveable life" developed by Judith Butler, referring to how some lives are recognised as "liveable" and others "unbearable", affecting the ways in one is permitted to be within society. _

...



> The debate about racialised categorisation matters in the context of how the Census is used. On the one hand, as administrative data, census categories are used to generate policies about different groups in the population and create the official language and taxonomy of race. The categories enumerated have been pre-judged to warrant attention. In terms of racialisation, the fear of those from minoritised ethnic groups is that enumeration will be used as an instrument of control, rather than for beneficent allocation of resources. Enumeration is, therefore, always contested. On the other hand, census categories such as ‘mixed ethnicity’ have arisen because of insider struggle for recognition of mixity. The reification of the category and the availability of demographic data on those in mixed categories can, therefore, also contribute to the burgeoning of mixed identities and so to the further contestation about the naming of the categories as well as encouraging claims for political representation. The names of the categories constructed thus combine beliefs and practices that classify the population and shape the racial order. The cognitive polyphasia that is produced through the institutional and social practices the categories are rendered meaningful. These then help determine who belongs to each category and its status in relation to other groups.



... The authors then discuss the specific ways in which the categorisations have changed over time in different countries before going on to conclude...



> The point here is that census questions are not innocent, timeless or decontextualized. The questions change over time and are different in different places (as discussed above) for sociopolitical reasons. They help to illuminate the ways in which everyday social representations of racialisation and ethnicisation are conflictual and polyphasic in many societies. Contestations over identity representations fuel changes in census questions and lead to further contestation and identity change. While censuses are designed to enumerate populations in the service of social policy and population control, the dynamism and contradictory nature of categorisations that would be expected from intersectionality and positioning theories means that minoritised ethnic groups are able to use census demographic data to argue for changes in social arrangements and identity change. The contestation thus entails contradictory possibilities and, as in the case of claims to ‘mixed’ identities also allows claims to ‘liveable lives’ (Butler, 2004).





> The UK and US decennial Censuses provides important examples of the creative ways in which people use social representations, created in this case through state practices, to challenge and resist practices that limit social relationships and co-constructions of identity in their everyday lives. ... Social representations can, therefore, function as strategies that enable resistance to normative representations and protect people’s sense of self. Moscovici (1998, p.377) suggested that, ‘in the process of formation of a representation there is always both conflict and cooperation’. In critically re-evaluating social representations theory, it is important to recognise that anchoring and objectification may not operate in ways that produce settled representations. Instead, censuses (and monitoring surveys) are continually contested because social representations are continually in flux. The act of re-presenting the social world carries with it the possibility for critique, resistance and transgression.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (May 15, 2021)

Anyone been asked to do the census coverage survey?  Received a leaflet earlier in the week and the census person came round earlier.  Not too many questions - and oddly they asked my ethnicity but not other protected characteristics like disability, etc.  The census proper asked for all of these if I remember rightly.









						Census 2021
					






					census.gov.uk


----------



## Pickman's model (May 16, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> The aim isn't to send in the helicoptors, it is to get people to complete the census! So thank you.
> 
> Apparently the whole operation has been massively successful as far as getting returns in this time round, ie a higher percentage of household have returned than ever before.


All they need is a pandemic every ten years so people are super bored and will complete every similar survey in an unfulfilled quest for relief from ennui


----------



## rutabowa (May 16, 2021)

Pickman's model said:


> All they need is a pandemic every ten years so people are super bored and will complete every similar survey in an unfulfilled quest for relief from ennui


I suspect the online thing has made a big difference. It is so much easier and quicker to complete, and the vast majority of people had access to do it like that which meant the people who did have access issues could have a lot of time devoted to helping them (if they wanted it, which a lot of people did).


----------



## Orang Utan (May 16, 2021)

rutabowa said:


> I suspect the online thing has made a big difference. It is so much easier and quicker to complete, and the vast majority of people had access to do it like that which meant the people who did have access issues could have a lot of time devoted to helping them (if they wanted it, which a lot of people did).


I only ended up doing 2 hour long interviews, despite spending a day a week on duty to help people. I suspect a lot of people didn’t cooperate


----------



## rutabowa (May 16, 2021)

Orang Utan said:


> I only ended up doing 2 hour long interviews, despite spending a day a week on duty to help people. I suspect a lot of people didn’t cooperate


Well the figures for our area when I stopped were 90% target for returns, 94% actual.... and that was with a lot of paper returns still in post/yet to be processed. Very few people chose to phone I think though.


----------



## PR1Berske (Jan 6, 2023)

Gender and sexual identity maps released. 










						Sexual orientation - Census Maps, ONS
					

Census maps is an interactive tool to explore Census 2021 data across England and Wales for different topics down to a neighbourhood level.




					www.ons.gov.uk
				














						Gender identity - Census Maps, ONS
					

Census maps is an interactive tool to explore Census 2021 data across England and Wales for different topics down to a neighbourhood level.




					www.ons.gov.uk


----------



## PR1Berske (Tuesday at 8:54 PM)

Education level interactive map released:











						Census Maps - Census 2021 data interactive, ONS
					

Census maps is an interactive tool to explore Census 2021 data across England and Wales for different topics down to a neighbourhood level.




					www.ons.gov.uk


----------

