by Staff on 4/13/2010
Michael Edwards: I think we all understand, for the most part, both sides of the argument about the Census and whether or not we should fill it out.
Jeanne, you have voiced an opinion about the environmental impact of not filling it out, and Adam you have stated the importance of the census and the money it brings to areas that need it. I’d like to start off with both of you reiterating your stance and why, and Adam, please go first. Then Jeanne will write, then I will respond and write my views on it and we’ll go from there.
Adam Shake: Ok, Let me start off by saying that I consider myself a recovering Republican who finds himself a left leaning independent. After having spent over a decade in the Military, I try to acknowledge both sides of an issue.
In reference to the census.
It’s used for a number of things, and not limited to * The allocation of federal funding for education programs in states and communities.
* National social and health statistics used by a variety of agencies for policy purposes.
* The allocation of federal dollars for law enforcement, federal highway projects, aid to farmers and many other federally financed activities and programs.
* A wide variety of economic statistics that become the basis of the nation's economic policies.
These are not my own words, but gleaned from http://www.thisnation.com/question/022.html
I do agree that the process is burdensome and costly, but a lot of the cost is fed back into the economy, and I can touch on that in a bit.
Jeanne Weierheiser: Well, I'm in agreement with Adam's final statement and I think that's how I came to my overall conclusion that filling out the census immediately was the best choice for me. Since I'm not a big fan of politics or our government regardless of which party is in power, I'm sympathizing with the environment on this issue in that I believe that not filling out the form does more harm than good.
I also think that not filling out the forms could pose further negative effects on the environment in that if local communities are shorted on funding it could reduce a community's ability to start new "green" programs.
Michael Edwards: To fill out the form so as not to have all the environmental issues weigh on your conscious seems silly to me. We should essentially boycott it, not abide by it because it could be worse. It really seems like a cop out to me. We should not partake in such an environmentally damaging act because they’ll make it worse if we don’t. But I understand that that is only one of your reasons for filling it out, Jeanne.
I see this census thing as a perfect example of wasteful unnecessary spending where they don’t want it to end, they don’t want to find a better way, because there are too many jobs at stake.
I think that we have many other, probably better ways of figuring population in areas, like sales of businesses, vehicle traffic, school enrollment, hospitals, etc. I know it’s not perfect, but it costs a lot less, and gives us a BETTER idea as to where money needs to go.
Furthermore, money never seems to go where it is needed. Maybe I’m being cynical, but I don’t see roads in shambles getting repaved because of a census being filled out. The ghettos stay the same regardless of the population of a neighborhood.
Adam Shake: I see your point. But in environmental circles, one of the things that we talk about is bad, better, best. Throwing your plastic bottles in the landfill is bad. Recycling them is better and not buying them at all is best. But I don't know anyone who cares about the issue that is going to boycott recycling because there is an energy cost to recycling.
There is a cost to the environment, like both of you say, and I agree that there are better ways of doing things. Sending our millions of flyers and forms delivered by gas guzzling mail trucks is about as bad as it gets. But what are some of the alternatives?
Oh, and let’s not forget that this created about 650,000 jobs and pumped almost 8 billion dollars into the economy.
Jeanne Weierheiser: I get your point as well, Michael. I also think that this is not about funding on a federal level and more about politics in that the census results also have an impact on political representation. It's unfortunate and it's definitely being used for political gain and has been for many decades. But I still think the cons to the environment outweigh the pros for civil liberties or whatever other argument you have for boycotting.
And I also think that on a local level, many communities would be at a disadvantage if the majority of their population didn't fill out the forms.
I live just outside of Binghamton, NY where we have a PHENOMENAL mayor who has just been reelected.
He is working on many green initiatives for our city. If the people in Binghamton aren't properly accounted for, it could affect the federal funding allocated to the city and really hurt the growth of the city.
Michael Edwards: Jeanne, not every area has a great mayor, but I think I see what you are saying. But there are just plain better ways. In fact, population does not reflect how much help a community needs! This is something I am very passionate about. We should look at the community’s revenue, how they get the revenue, where it goes, and how much more they need for what.
I feel your example, Adam, about bottle water is flawed. I am refusing to buy or drink from plastic water bottles in this case.
And so if there are better ways, and we could better figure out where spending should be allocated without this wasteful census thing, shouldn’t we push for it and refuse to partake in the census?
My alternative suggestions (some already stated above) include; look at hospitals, schools, roads, and see what needs what. Look at environments to see where the land needs help. Look at education to see who needs more.
And the jobs into the market, well, that’s a nice little bump that may make us all feel ok about spending on our credit cards and acting “normal” but it’s not going to fix the real issue. We need long term jobs and education. We need to not throw billions of dollars at the economy for a temporary boast.
And, while I know this is not a mandatory question, I am really disgusted with how much the U.S. focuses on race. Why? We ask it in the census form, job applications, everything! It’s sickening to me.
Adam Shake: Consider also that the data is used by not only the Government, but by environmentalists, ngo's and impact groups to determine long range impacts on air, water and soil issues.
Michael Edwards: Sure, but population as an indicator? Why not environmental quality as the indicator for that kind of spending?
Adam Shake: Michael, the issue with the jobs that the census created. I debated this with a friend of mine and he said "Yeah, but what kind of jobs are they?" I agree with you, we need long term perm jobs. But I don't think that a lot of people who need jobs are in a position complain about the fact that instead of making nothing, they are only to make something.
As far as your ideas about looking at hospitals, schools, roads, and see what needs what, your right on target. But how do we aggregate that date, without the government waste we are already talking about.
I'm all for it, I really am. But we just need to make it happen.
Jeanne Weierheiser: There's not much of a difference between paying people unemployment wages and paying them to be a census worker...
Adam Shake: Except that being a census worker puts taxes back into the system, except sucking them out.
Jeanne Weierheiser: At least working is better for the psyche.
Michael Edwards: Jeanne , your closing argument?
Jeanne Weierheiser: Michael’s wrong and I’m right
There's my closing statement :)
Adam Shake: -laugh-
Jeanne Weierheiser: If everybody bought local it would devastate some very fragile economies and hurt people who do not deserve to be hurt.
With a little bit of research you learn that sometimes there social benefits to buying global in some cases.
I think it's the same for the census... In my community, participating in the census is important and might be for yours as well.
But you have to do the research and learn about your community more before you make that decision.
You don't want to throw out the baby with the bathwater.
Michael Edwards: Good deal. Thanks to both of you.
Adam Shake: See ya.
Jeanne Weierheiser: Bye guys! 
Adam Shake Adam Shake is founder of Twilight Earth.Com, a website dedicated to environmental issues, environmental world wide news and shared discussions. He also owns Eco Tech Daily.Com... read more
Jeanne WeierheiserJeanne Weierheiser is the digital marketing director for Spirit Voyage
Michael Edwards Michael Edwards is editor-in-chief of Green Lifestyle Magazine and Organic Lifestyle Magazine.
blog comments powered by Disqus  |
 |
 |
 |
 |
