lol Cal - los americanos are loco, no?
The mix of paranoia and misplaced "morality" sure explains more than just the purported approach to a census... And the approach to the census (if common) could explain a lot about the poor state of the country's services.
PS - no need to reply - I'm from the CIA and I already know what you think!!!
The mix of paranoia and misplaced "morality" sure explains more than just the purported approach to a census... And the approach to the census (if common) could explain a lot about the poor state of the country's services.
PS - no need to reply - I'm from the CIA and I already know what you think!!!
There is nothing wrong with a census if it's used only to determine population. But dividing the country into race-defined segments only serves politicians. There were some questions on the form that frankly I felt were none of their business. In countries like Canada and New Zealand where the population is far more homogeneous, the size of minority groups is trivial and it is of no use to exploit them politically. Race politics here is big business and personally I would prefer not to participate.
John
John
LOL - your social anthropology is many, many years out of date. NZ is far more a country of recent immigrants that the USA - not in raw numbers to be sure, but definitely in % terms.
Recently we have had large inflows from Fiji (mostly Fijian Indians escaping the various coups that have occurred there), varoius pacific island cultures seeking economic improvement, South Africans seeking a both economic and social stability, various asian ethnicities, primarily chinese and korean but also Malay, Philippine, vietnamese, thai, Indian, and a smattering of middle eastern cultures.
Estimates have the population of NZ inexorably changing through the next century with the WASPs reducing and the polynesian/maori and asian populations overtaking through both higher birth rates and immigration.
I live in the Dallas/Ft. Worth metropolitan area (which has a total population approximately that of all of New Zealand) where people of European descent make up less then half of the population. This is true for most large cities in the U.S. New Zealand, with 80% of the population European, has a long way to go, and Canada even further at 90%. The problem here is a desire by many to promote multi-culturalism which is divisive and non-productive. Most intelligent people want to look past race, which is a bogus, pseudo-scientific classification of humans anyway, and so they object to having it on the census form. Being one-quarter Indian (feather)/Mexican puts me in a position where I could take advantage of the system since I am by definition a "minority", but like I said before, it's counter productive.
John
John
Last edited:
again, your data for NZ is out of date and at present its generally considered that New Zealand born people of european descent are around 62 to 65% of the total population. This is heavily weighted to ward the south of the country. I live in Auckland and like the area where you live, its a diverse and changing mix of cultures and ethnicities.
And we need to know what ethnicities there are, since at even the simplest level it can dicate how the government (and other users of census data) choose to spend on anything from health and education to communication and marketing.
The data of itself is not capable of dividing (or uniting) a society, and the supposed misuse of data is possible only if you fail to have reasonable controls over your elected representatives. In other words, stupidity and bias will occur with or without hard data since hard data is anathema to stupidity and bias...
And we need to know what ethnicities there are, since at even the simplest level it can dicate how the government (and other users of census data) choose to spend on anything from health and education to communication and marketing.
The data of itself is not capable of dividing (or uniting) a society, and the supposed misuse of data is possible only if you fail to have reasonable controls over your elected representatives. In other words, stupidity and bias will occur with or without hard data since hard data is anathema to stupidity and bias...
I find it hard to believe that the percentage could change that much in four years, but I'll take your word for it. The data will always be misused by politicians, mostly through gerrymandering of voting districts because so-called minorities vote as a block for one party. By knowing those demographics, districts can be drawn up in such a way that a party with a membership that makes up only 40% of the population at large can dominate a legislature by insuring itself 60% of the available seats. Furthermore, voting districts for national office can be similarly constructed so that the majority of representatives sent to Washington can belong to the minority party. It was like that for many years here in Texas, where the two Senators elected at large belonged to the majority party while 60% of the representatives sent to the House were of the minority party.
Most intelligent Americans would regard this a a misuse of the data itself.
John
Most intelligent Americans would regard this a a misuse of the data itself.
John
Last edited:
yeah, you have to be a bit careful with NZ population stats. In 2001 they changed the ethnicity question to allow people to select "New Zealander" as an ethnicity. It has screwed with the stats ever since...
All covered in a document available from our Dept of Stats, but pretty dry and uninteresting if unless you ARE a social anthropologist!
The gerrymandering you speak of is real, but is the result of your oddly exclusive two-party system. Look up "Proportional Representation" for a solution. Like here, or Canada.
Odd that you would think addressing genetically specific illnesses or providing ethnically balanced education as some form of misuse. And while it is somewhat odd to me that supermarket chains can purchase the information at a grid-block level and make decisions on what to stock (or not) in particular neighborhoods, you have to agree its economically sensible.
In NZ we have a problem with a particular genetic disposition in Maori to a type of cancer. It helps to know how many people you are dealing with, and where they are. Likewise diabetes in the Pacific population.
Census questions allow this sort of information to be available. Would you build a health system on it? Certainly not - but it does help point in a direction, espeically when cross-referenced to the other socio-economic data provided through a census. Note - at a POPULATION level this information is benign.
All covered in a document available from our Dept of Stats, but pretty dry and uninteresting if unless you ARE a social anthropologist!
The gerrymandering you speak of is real, but is the result of your oddly exclusive two-party system. Look up "Proportional Representation" for a solution. Like here, or Canada.
Odd that you would think addressing genetically specific illnesses or providing ethnically balanced education as some form of misuse. And while it is somewhat odd to me that supermarket chains can purchase the information at a grid-block level and make decisions on what to stock (or not) in particular neighborhoods, you have to agree its economically sensible.
In NZ we have a problem with a particular genetic disposition in Maori to a type of cancer. It helps to know how many people you are dealing with, and where they are. Likewise diabetes in the Pacific population.
Census questions allow this sort of information to be available. Would you build a health system on it? Certainly not - but it does help point in a direction, espeically when cross-referenced to the other socio-economic data provided through a census. Note - at a POPULATION level this information is benign.
Just curious- what's the difference between an Italian derivative and a Somali derivative? Different application of the Chain Rule? And what about integrals? Do different ethnicities balance redox reactions differently? Will an Arab have a different conception of binding affinities than a Scot?
Biology is not my area of expertise, but AFAIK, humans are humans. There's smart one and there's dumb ones. Sadly, the balance seems to tip further to the latter year after year. Austin's own Mike Judge ("Office Space," "Beavis and Butthead," "King of the Hill") may have gotten it right in his superb film "Idiocracy." But then, his degree was in physics...
all true SY, but if you combine ethnicity results for a grid block (and more importantly, the change in this data) with immigration data, you have a reasonable assessment of the location of new immigrants and hence educational needs of their offspring who will often have limited prior education and/or a different home language.
It ain't rocket science, unless you think that first level analysis is overthinking the situation, and that gut feel is good enough. I certainly credit you with better than that.
It ain't rocket science, unless you think that first level analysis is overthinking the situation, and that gut feel is good enough. I certainly credit you with better than that.
Unfortunately, people are not "groups" or "blocks," they're individuals. And every individual needs the same basic tools and background knowledge to succeed. Coming from an immigrant family, I'm a bit sensitive and wary about being treated differently than people whose roots here go back a few hundred years.
Those are problems that are best dealt with on an individual basis as they come and at a local level. Since New Zealand itself is no more than what would be a largish local community here, some of your argument makes sense. A bureaucrat trying to predict the needs of a community's health issues based on the interpretation of census data isn't very efficient compared to the medical community addressing the needs as they come. The idea that people in socialist countries have that a politician has higher motives than a doctor is ludicrous.
John
Last edited:
Cal,
I thought you looked familiar.......The Group 'W' bench, yea I remember all too clearly ! Littering, wasn't it ?
Neither integral approximations nor statistical analysis can even compare to the reality that one is just another breed of 'Mutt',
Hopefully related to the halfbreed next to you only by the chain that gangs you both to that Group 'W' bench....
And the fact that your loss of freedom to authority is no other than each one's own dam apathetic fault !
I said that
I thought you looked familiar.......The Group 'W' bench, yea I remember all too clearly ! Littering, wasn't it ?
Neither integral approximations nor statistical analysis can even compare to the reality that one is just another breed of 'Mutt',
Hopefully related to the halfbreed next to you only by the chain that gangs you both to that Group 'W' bench....
And the fact that your loss of freedom to authority is no other than each one's own dam apathetic fault !
I said that
Having married into the Italian race, I still can't figure the difference between "sauce" and "gravy".
Caucasian is not an allowed choice under race this year. It was coming up in the spelling bee contest after sphygmomanometer.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Statistically you are entirely incorrect. People can be usefully classified by any number of variables including age, weight, location, gender, IQ and, yes, ethnic origin. Any of these variables could validly be applied for planning purposes. The individual's needs or desires can then be addressed at that individual level.
The outcome of John's contention on health provision is clearly visible in the American health system (here I use the words "health" and "system" in their loosest possible sense)
Still, land of the free - or at least, cheaper than next door. You make your own decisions as you tick the boxes.
I can see you believe in all of the the free medical care propaganda out there. My own experience with the healthcare system here is that it is better than excellent, easy to deal with, the doctors are always concerned and more helpful than they ought to be, and the people who work in the clinics are always helpful and friendly. The clinics are all clean and equipped with the most modern and innovative equipment. Every effort possible is always made to help prolong lives, save lives or improve the quality of life. No, it's not free, but in the words of P.J. O'Rourke, "If you think health care is expensive now, just wait until it's free."
That whole concept is anathema to any sensible and intelligent American. I mean, how in the world could you plan something for someone on the basis of his IQ?
John
Last edited:
Just to support aardvarkash10, I also live in NZ's largest city, and the "european" population by observation is certainly less than 50%. By statistics "Asian" (Chinese, Japanese,etc- not the UK definition of all east of Turkey) alone is over 13%.
Statistics are very useful, particularly in health, because of genetic sensitivity, and money can be targeted, not according to race, but to probable need. For example, an increase in Pacific population will probably result in more money being needed for diabetic treatment (and more effectively for education concerning diet and prevention), as aardvarkash10 suggests.
Also our medical care is not entirely free, but at least its affordable to all, and the standard is high. And yes, in a small country it is easier to manage.
I have visited USA, (and other counties) many times both as a tourist and to observe social aspects, particularly regarding health, education and law enforcement. USA can claim to have available the best of each of these, but unfortunately the standard is highly variable, and I suggest some of your social problems can be traced back to these three services, and how they are funded.
Statistics are very useful, particularly in health, because of genetic sensitivity, and money can be targeted, not according to race, but to probable need. For example, an increase in Pacific population will probably result in more money being needed for diabetic treatment (and more effectively for education concerning diet and prevention), as aardvarkash10 suggests.
Also our medical care is not entirely free, but at least its affordable to all, and the standard is high. And yes, in a small country it is easier to manage.
I have visited USA, (and other counties) many times both as a tourist and to observe social aspects, particularly regarding health, education and law enforcement. USA can claim to have available the best of each of these, but unfortunately the standard is highly variable, and I suggest some of your social problems can be traced back to these three services, and how they are funded.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.