I thought it was clear that the rationale for a census was not exclusively
to obtain an exhaustive count of the population. Indeed, the census
doesn't even really attempt to do that. It aims to enumerate everyone in
the country on Census night. That means including visitors and excluding
everyone overseas, including citizens and other permanent residents.
The point is to collect rough data on a minimal set of variables that can
be disaggregated to small geographical areas and allows identification of
populations that a sample would be likely to miss. I believe most of these
data are used principally in marketting of both commodities and candidates
(if they're something other than commodities). The users have economic
clout and I doubt they'd be prepared to forego census data. But census
data also allow identification of pockets of disadvantage in unexpected
locations and small groups with special needs, e.g. for interpreters in
less widely spoken languages.
While a proportion of those who evade enumeration would be irrelevant in
terms of allocation of benefit moneys or demarcation of constituencies,
they are probably still relevant in terms of allocation of hospital beds,
schools, transport infrastructure, and other planning that relies on
statistical data.
In solidarity,
Harry
John Whittington
[log in to unmask]
.UK To
Sent by: email list [log in to unmask]
for Radical cc
Statistics
<[log in to unmask] Subject
.UK> Re: Benefit drop address [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Protective Mark
20/11/2007 11:05 PM
Please respond to
John Whittington
<[log in to unmask]
O.UK>
At 10:05 19/11/2007 +0000, R.Thomas wrote:
>"if we want a 100% census" A crucial question. We need a 100% count of
>the population every year for the allocation of centrally collected money
>to local areas.
As with so many of these discussions, I cannot help but wonder whether we
are not perhaps being unrealistically (and unnecessarily?) demanding in
terms of our expectation of precision in the estimation of such
figures. Apart from anything else, we are talking about dynamic situations
- such that even a yearly 'count', let alone a 10-yearly one, is going to
be incorrect even by the time it is 'processed and
published'. Furthermore, it's not even clear that those 'who wish to hide'
from such counts even _should_ be part of the total used for money
allocation, since their desire to hide will presumably appreciably reduce
their financial impact (e.g. they would presumably not want to claim any
'benefits').
>I suspect that the idea of a 100% census has become an anachronism. If
>people don't want to be counted they will avoid any counting mechanism.
>Growing regulation of the labour market and immigration means a growing
>proportion of the population are 'illegals' who don't want to be counted
>because they would be expected to reveal the pesonal information that
>makes them 'illegal'.
I'm not sure that 'anachronism' is necessarily the right word, since I
strongly suspect that evasion of such counts has existed since 'year
dot'. Whilst Ray cites some of the modern-day reasons for such evasion, my
understanding in that the earliest manifestations of a "100% census" were
in relation to tax collection - something which some people have presumably
been trying to evade throughout history!
Kind Regards,
John
----------------------------------------------------------------
Dr John Whittington, Voice: +44 (0) 1296 730225
Mediscience Services Fax: +44 (0) 1296 738893
Twyford Manor, Twyford, E-mail: [log in to unmask]
Buckingham MK18 4EL, UK
----------------------------------------------------------------
******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
to [log in to unmask]
Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and
cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by
subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical
Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of
our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk.
*******************************************************
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free publications and statistics available on www.abs.gov.au
******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
to [log in to unmask]
Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk.
*******************************************************
|