TexasCHLforum.com

boomerang wrote:Can I put "NASCAR" for race?

Awesome.

Who'sJohnGalt wrote:

tacticool wrote:How can they prove you received it?

I've received two packets so far in the mail. Not certified or receipt requested. They try the mail first, then an official census employee with a plastic ID badge comes to your front door twice and then then you get bumped up to the area manager who will come by twice. It FAQ section doesn't go beyond that stage, it might be too gruesome. It also states that they will contact you by phone which is strange since they aren't supposed to have names just addresses, so how they get a phone number is beyond me. I figure that I'll just shake my head, shrug my shoulders, and shut the door.

Wow. Amazing. Especially considering no census mailings went out before March.

ninemm wrote:

SQLGeek wrote:

ninemm wrote: Note the extraneous comma after the word "apartment". Is this really the best they could do?

The comma is gramatically correct since each comma enumerates an item in the list. Removing it would structurally change the list.

I suspect you meant grammatically correct.

Really? How would it be different?

with or without the comma would be correct as long as it stayed the same throughout the paper.


As far as the getting phone numbers. That's not hard to find with a thing called a "skip trace". Not always accurate but they do work in finding people.

ninemm wrote: I suspect you meant grammatically correct.

Yes...apologies for not spell checking.

Really? How would it be different?

With the comma missing, the last two items in the list could be read to be just one list item. It is a technical difference but my point was that it is correct to include the comma.

pbwalker wrote:THIS!!! +10000!

Well said timdsmith! I sent mine back two days ago only answering question 1 and writing in American for the ethnicity. I'm anxiously awaiting a knock on the door.

Thanks pbwalker! I thought about writing in American too, but I figured since the letter I sent ranted on about them only being authorized to ask one question, I'd better only answer one.
I reckon I'll be getting a knock on the door too.

boomerang wrote:Can I put "NASCAR" for race?

My wife threatened to put "Irish" for hers and "Scandinavian" for mine. I pointed out that both were nationalities and not races.

Don't know what she actually answered.

(Ours was the "short form", too.)

LarryH wrote:My wife threatened to put "Irish" for hers and "Scandinavian" for mine. I pointed out that both were nationalities and not races.

Don't know what she actually answered.

Hopefully Celtic and Nordic.

With all the granularity for different varieties of Asian and Conquered-by-Spain, why didn't they offer the same choices for people of European heritage?

Do they all look alike to Obama?

Hoosier Daddy wrote:With all the granularity for different varieties of Asian and Conquered-by-Spain, why didn't they offer the same choices for people of European heritage?

Do they all look alike to Obama?

Seriously, that "granularity" has been used on government forms long before Ob came on the scene.

It's the first time I ever saw different varieties of Hispanics enumerated. Same for different varieties of Pacific Islanders. It wasn't on the EEOC forms I filled out when I was applying for jobs.

I just saw something on the news I had not realized. It looks like Texas has a chance of picking up 2 or 3 seats in the senate because of the census. Apparently our population is growing. Fill out those things folks. Come out from under your tin foil hats on this one. We need to get all the seats we can to fight the libs on the east and west coast.

I also thought the April Fool's date was ironic. I have no idea how many people will be living in my house in the future.

After doing quite a bit of genealogy research in years past I think they are asking for less information on this census that long ago. They did not ask for my profession. I think I remember seeing things like carpenter or miner on some old census reports.

I filled it out, but haven't gotten it back in the mail yet.

03Lightningrocks wrote:I just saw something on the news I had not realized. It looks like Texas has a chance of picking up 2 or 3 seats in the senate because of the census. Apparently our population is growing. Fill out those things folks. Come out from under your tin foil hats on this one. We need to get all the seats we can to fight the libs on the east and west coast.

They can get the information they need to pick up the House seats from the 1 question I'm going to answer.

Edited to say: The one question I did answer. It's already in the mail.

03Lightningrocks wrote:I just saw something on the news I had not realized. It looks like Texas has a chance of picking up 2 or 3 seats in the senate because of the census. Apparently our population is growing. Fill out those things folks. Come out from under your tin foil hats on this one. We need to get all the seats we can to fight the libs on the east and west coast.

The number of Senate seats is fixed at two. It's house seats that are determined by population. But it gets even better because the additional seats we get in the house will be taken away from someone else who is losing population (or growing at a lesser rate). Let's suppose we add two seats and California loses two seats. Let's then suppose a vote on something was 218 yea's to 217 nay's . After a reapportionament, it would be 219 nay's to 216 yea's (assuming the new Texas reps voted the opposite as the former CA reps). That's a swing of four votes! So, whatever reps we add have a double effect.

ninemm wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:I just saw something on the news I had not realized. It looks like Texas has a chance of picking up 2 or 3 seats in the senate because of the census. Apparently our population is growing. Fill out those things folks. Come out from under your tin foil hats on this one. We need to get all the seats we can to fight the libs on the east and west coast.

The number of Senate seats is fixed at two. It's house seats that are determined by population. But it gets even better because the additional seats we get in the house will be taken away from someone else who is losing population (or growing at a lesser rate). Let's suppose we add two seats and California loses two seats. Let's then suppose a vote on something was 218 yea's to 217 nay's . After a reapportionament, it would be 219 nay's to 216 yea's (assuming the new Texas reps voted the opposite as the former CA reps). That's a swing of four votes! So, whatever reps we add have a double effect.

That's one scenario. On the other hand, if those two seats came from another solidly red state, there would be no net change.

timdsmith72 wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:I just saw something on the news I had not realized. It looks like Texas has a chance of picking up 2 or 3 seats in the senate because of the census. Apparently our population is growing. Fill out those things folks. Come out from under your tin foil hats on this one. We need to get all the seats we can to fight the libs on the east and west coast.

They can get the information they need to pick up the House seats from the 1 question I'm going to answer.

Edited to say: The one question I did answer. It's already in the mail.

Exactly. My race and phone number have nothing to do with the number of seats Texas can pick up.