Ross Rants. Un-Asked Questions That Should Be Asked. Candace Owens.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Brief History of Census Taking. (See 1 below.)

And

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCxYexboSAY
+++++++++++++++
Ross,Rants again. (See 2 below.)
+++++++++++++++++
Un-asked Questions that should have been asked.(See
3 below.)
++++++++++++++++
Dick
+++++++++++++++++
1) A Short History of Census Taking

The first U.S. enumeration was in 1790, but Egypt began millennia earlier.

By  John Steele Gordon

The Supreme Court on Thursday handed down its decision in Department of Commerce v. New York, a case regarding the 2020 census. It is the latest event in the history of census taking.

The earliest known census was conducted in Egypt during the Middle Kingdom (2050-1700 B.C.). The Old Testament’s Book of Numbers refers to a census of the Israelites, and the New Testament tells us Jesus was born in Bethlehem because Joseph had to travel there to register for the Roman census. The English word comes from the Roman “censors” charged with keeping a register of citizens and watching over public morality while they were at it.

The U.S. Constitution mandated a census within three years of the First Congress and every 10 years thereafter in order to apportion the House. The first census was taken in 1790 and overseen by Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson. The 23rd took place in 2010, led by Commerce Secretary Gary Locke and Census Bureau Director Robert Groves.

The 23 censuses reveal much about U.S. history. The American population grew with enormous speed—at least a third in every census from 1800 to 1860. With the exception of the 1930s, when both immigration and the birthrate fell sharply, population growth was never below 10% a decade until 2010, when the increase was measured at 9.7. Today’s population is 84 times that of 1790.

Only three states have ever been the most populous in the Union—Virginia (1790-1800), New York (1810-1960) and California (since 1970). The biggest city has always been New York, even before the five boroughs were consolidated in 1898.

The 1790 census recorded 694,280 slaves, more than 12% of the total population. Most were in the South: South Carolina had more than 100,000, or 43% of the state’s population. But every state except Massachusetts had slaves. New York had more than 20,000, or 6% of its population. By 1860 the slave population had grown to nearly four million. By this point, the northern states had emancipated all their slaves. The Upper South had far fewer—18,337 in Virginia in 1860, down from 292,627 in 1790—but few had been emancipated. Instead most had been “sold south” to work the cotton lands of Georgia, Alabama and Mississippi.

More recently the census has marked a profound shift in the population from the Northeast to the South and West. The mid-Atlantic states have lost 30.5% of their House seats since 1950, whereas the old Confederate states have gained 30%. Florida’s delegation has more than tripled.

In the early censuses, only heads of households were named, along with the total numbers of others, including slaves, living there. Beginning in 1850 the names of everyone living in a household were listed, a bonanza for genealogists. Families moved westward, often more than once, pushing the frontier back. By 1890 the frontier had ceased to exist.

The early censuses were conducted by local U.S. Marshals, who had little if any training. Beginning in 1880 the ancestor of today’s Census Bureau began using specially trained enumerators. As both the population and the number of questions asked continued to expand rapidly, crunching the numbers became ever more time-consuming. It took eight years to complete the analysis of the 1880 census.

Then in 1889 Herman Hollerith, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, invented an electromechanical tabulating machine that used punch cards. He founded the Tabulating Machine Co., which would be an ancestor of today’s IBM . The Census Office immediately adopted the technology and was able to announce the total population in 1890 a mere six weeks after the count. The tabulating machines reduced the time needed for full data analysis by 25%. The raw data from the 1890 census, however, were lost in a 1921 warehouse fire.

The U.S. population passed 100 million in 1920, 200 million in 1970, and 300 million in 2010. Even with mechanization, the sheer mass of data was becoming unwieldy. Starting in 1950, 1 in 6 households got a long census form asking detailed economic and other questions. In 2010 the long form was replaced with the American Community Survey, conducted in the years between decennial censuses. The 2010 census used 635,000 temporary enumerators and cost $13 billion, about $42 for each person counted.

Recent decades have seen increasing political controversy regarding the census, with claims that poor urban areas are being undercounted. Conservatives have argued that the census has become too intrusive. Voluntary participation has been declining since 1970.

This week the Supreme Court ruled in favor of plaintiffs challenging the Commerce Department’s plan to ask on the census whether household members are citizens—a question that appeared on the decennial census until 1950 and has been asked on the long form and the Community Survey since. Opponents argued that aliens would be reluctant to participate in the census, resulting in undercounts in minority districts. The justices held 5-4 that Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross’s justification for the question was “contrived.”

That a matter as dry and technical as counting how many people live in the country has become politically contentious is not a good sign.

Mr. Gordon is author of “An Empire of Wealth: The Epic History of American Economic Power.”

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2)  The economy is slowing for now, and job growth is slower, but where it goes from here will depend on what really happened at the G 20. We are not likely to really know for weeks, and maybe not for three months. But the stock market will continue up for now, and the economy will still grow. Then we will see what the Fed does in two weeks. Very likely they drop rates 25 basis points, and they cut the reserve rate as well. Maybe, but unlikely, they slow the wind down. If they do cut rates the S&P will continue to new highs. It could all blow up if the China talks blow up again. If there is success with China, at that point there might be a deal with Kim possibly.

So, as most people and the markets expected , Xi and Trump agreed to agree, and not raise tariffs and to try to reach a deal. What was agreed on Huawei is not what the press and politicians are saying-actually it was a very limited list of parts, yet to be determined, that have nothing to do with security issues. The US and China will now very likely come to some type of overall deal in the next two or three months, or it will fall apart again. What that really ends up being, nobody knows, but IP will have to be addressed, or there cannot be a deal. Ignore all the talking heads- especially Rubio and other politicians who know as little as we do about what has been agreed, or not. Talking heads are paid by networks to posture and postulate, but very few know much of what is really happening. Reports from importer friends have said that smaller Chinese suppliers are asking their US customers to front them an advance payment so they can produce the goods, as there is little bank financing available in China right now for these smaller producers. That is because the Chinese government had materially reduced lending to try to get the vast over leverage in the economy back under control, and to try to have the banks deal with all of the bad loans and zombie credits on their books. It is part of why Xi was under pressure to do a deal. The flow of Chinese manufacturing to other countries has increased, and the investment in China by US companies has reduced. That is not good for the Chinese economy. There has also been a major increase in shipping goods to Vietnam and Taiwan then trans shipping to the US to get around tariffs.  There is no way to know how extensive this is, but it will help mitigate the impact of tariffs on US consumers, along with the sizable decline in the Yuan. This will all likely get sorted out over the next 60-90 days and when it does, the US economy will rebound and the stock market will hit new highs. All just as the election is ramping up. As predicted, Trump has now targeted Vietnam for possible tariffs due to their now huge growth in exports to the US.

Now we will wait to see what comes next with N Korea. Something is happening, and it is likely all part of the negotiations with Xi. It will take time to unfold completely, but it is possible Xi forced Kim to start to concede, and there will be some sort of program to do the deal with China IP, denuke N Korea and clean up that whole area.  Or maybe not. We will have to see what evolves. If Trump really pulls this off, a huge if, then it would change world history.

I will be interested to see how the Dems, and especially Biden, defend their foreign policy toward N Korea when there were nuke tests and missiles going off, and now Trump in his third meeting with Kim, and no bad things are happening. As usual the Dems condemn Trump for meeting Kim because of human rights issues.  So what should we do- go back to the failed Obama Biden policy of do nothing at all other than criticize them for human rights issues. Trump is being attacked in the media and by Dems for going to the DMZ when there are such human rights abuses in N Korea. So we could continue to pontificate about human rights, or we can have the Trump approach of dealing with reality of potential war, and try to end the nukes and threats through dialogue, and let the human rights issues wait. Kim could care less what we or anyone thinks about his prisons and murders- he does care about heavy sanctions. Obama Biden did nothing at all about Kim-they called it strategic patience- i.e. do nothing . .  Trump is being aggressive and tough, and is seeing some slow progress. Obama Biden did nothing at all about China IP theft and trade, and Trump is at least pushing back hard to get a real long term deal. The press and left screamed about tariff threats against Mexico, but it worked. They folded and acted, and the flood of illegals is slowing by 25%  already. The left says give money to the central American countries to fix their economies. We tried that for many years, and the leaders stole most of it, and accomplished nothing. Can you imagine Kamala or Warren or Budabug going to the DMZ and talking to Kim to do a deal. Never happen. Can you imagine how the Mullahs and Xi would chew up Warren or Biden and spit them out. We already have seen how they did that to Obama Biden and Kerry. We saw how the Chinese gave Hunter Biden $1.5 billion for his make believe private equity fund while Joe was there as VP, but Trump is corrupt because some foreigners stay in his hotel??  The left gave us the disaster of China stealing everything, Kim shooting off nukes, and ISIS, and terror in Iran region. You might have noted there were zero questions in the debates on any of this. I suspect that was intentional by NBC to avoid embarrassment while Trump was working on a deal with Xi. Not a single Dem has set out a policy plan specific to deal with China, Iran and N Korea other than go back to the old Iran deal, and get the EU and others to also talk to China. (they did such a good job on the Iran negotiation, and thinking if China is in the WTO they will play nice in the sandbox).

Nancy will now have to push through USMC soon despite her claiming she needs changes which Canada and Mexico already said no to. They are not likely to agree to be going back through their approvals that are already completed just to make Nancy happy. She will have to cave. Republicans and moderate Dems will get it approved in the House. The bartender will scream. If there is a China deal and USMC passes, Trump looks like he did what he said he would do, farmers and unions are happy, GDP goes up over 3%, and Trump wins big. The stock market hits new records. Meantime the Dems are tearing themselves apart over the funding of detention facilities on the border just making them more obnoxious to voters. The far left really does not get it at all.  No Wayfair mattresses, so the kids would be left to sleep on the floor??? We will see more of these employee protests started by Google employees months ago.  This is what comes of how the snowflakes were taught to act at college. Now you see the result.

The Europeans are doing almost everything they can to cave to Iran. Really stupid. However, it did not work. Iran of course said, not good enough. What did anyone expect them to say? No EU company is going to violate US sanctions just to sell a little to Iran, and then lose the US market. No bank is going to facilitate transfers, and then be locked out of the US monetary system. Barter systems need a counter party in the EU, and that company can, and will, be sanctioned by the US, so not many are likely to be part of this lunacy. This just emphasizes why Trump did not want any other country to be part of the negotiations with China.

Numerous commentators, even in the NY Times, and Dem leaning ones, all agreed the big winner from the debates was Trump. Most Dems are moderate, just like the rest of the country. Most of the debaters espoused policies that are so far left it is nuts, and would be a disaster to the country.  Free sounds great until Bernie admitted taxes would go up for everyone and, others proposed a VAT tax which hurts the low income people the worst. Giving free healthcare to illegals is a non-starter for most people. They lost the Cubans in FL which means FL goes Republican. The flood across the border is straining many school districts and cities budgets. It is costing tens of billions to care for all these illegals. That is taxpayer money going to illegals not to local American schools, police and other services. The illegals get free healthcare, but middle class Americans do not. The Dems wanted to reduce the number of beds, and claimed it was a manufactured crisis.  Now they look stupid. Immigration is a major win point for Republicans. Biden looked old and weak. Kamala is a far left Californian who espouses reparations, free healthcare, free tuition, Green New Deal, raising taxes, and many other far left ideas. She may get nominated, but is more likely Biden /Harris as VP but there is no way to predict how this ends for the Dem nomination. Harris pissed off many Dem moderates by falsely attacking Biden over busing and race, so she now faces backlash. As of now, Trump will win after the debates.  

Kalamazoo is a failed city so they decided to pay the tuition of any high school grad to go to college figuring this would better educate the kids and bring more investment to town. They aimed to help poor blacks mainly.  Result.  Only a small number of blacks participated and many dropped out of school. Only 1% more blacks went to college than before the program and earned a degree. Overall, only 38% of all high school grads earned a degree vs 34% before the program, and that increase could be a random change. Whites took more advantage of the opportunity and they had much better graduation rates. The city concluded what many of already know- but Dems seem never to learn.  It is not about cash-it is about culture. Free college being offered accomplishes very little.  It is about culture and drive to learn and succeed. All the talk of free college this election will just waste billions and accomplish little. What is needed is for schools to have skin in the game and suffer losses when the student does not graduate and cannot afford to repay due to the crappy education they got taking useless courses. The real answer to student loans is colleges need to terminate all the useless admin staffs for diversity, gender, sexual whatever, and whatever else they waste money on. These positions are only there because the schools can charge the students whatever is needed to pay for them and have the student borrow the money instead of the school having to pay for it. It is a very cynical transfer of liability to off balance sheet financing by the students from the schools liability. That is the simple explanation of much of the tuition and fees cost increases, and the student loan crisis financing it.  

Over the next ten years, 25% of the small colleges will disappear, and some larger schools will be gone. That is the objective conclusion of an independent consulting study done by a non-political, unaffiliated, top quality business consulting firm. The lower birth rates and fewer foreign students is causing a financial crisis at these small schools who are eating into their endowments now. There is also a growing understanding that many kids can do online courses, or go to community college, or vocational school, and do as well or better in life. The companion issue then created is a lot of small college towns live off the college, and the students,  since industry is gone, and these towns across the country will become even more unviable as the schools close, and the local population ages and dies off. It is a real problem which will only serve to increase the inequality issues of the 83% of counties in the US that are in decline. There is no solution for this decline. Nobody is opening a college or tech or industrial base in any of these places. There is a real crisis building in the world of academia as student debt overwhelms too many people, and cancelling the debts is the wrong answer. Long term payment plans is the right answer, and making the schools partially liable for losses. That alone will solve most of the problem quickly.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

3) Cal Thomas: 10 questions Dems should have been asked in debates – But weren’t

Posted By Ruth King

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/cal-thomas-questions-i-would-have-asked-the-democrats

The likelihood I would ever be invited to serve on a network panel questioning the Democratic presidentialcandidates is equivalent to an invitation to take the next trip to the moon.

Still, as I tortured myself watching the two “debates,” which were not really debates, but mostly a show of memorized sound bites, I thought of unasked questions that ought to have been put to them all.

Question 1: Some of you have, or had, the power to change many of the things you now say are wrong with America. Why didn’t you?

Question 2 (for Joe Biden): You and President Obama, for a time, had a Democratic majority in Congress. Why didn’t you reform immigration laws and address homelessness? Your administration deported a lot of people who were in the country illegally, so why criticize President Trump for wanting to follow your example? Do our laws mean nothing?

Question 3: During the second debate, all of you raised your hands when asked if you would provide free health care to immigrants who are here illegally. Aren’t you inviting even more to come to America with such a policy, and wouldn’t that add to our already staggering debt? Follow-up: Trump said we should take care of Americans first. Why would you use American tax dollars to pay for people who break our laws?

Question 4: Is there anything Trump has done that you could praise? Many of you talk as if unemployment hasn’t declined — especially for minorities — and wages haven’t risen. Unemployment is at, or near, record lows and wages are up.

Question 5: Some of you think raising taxes again is a good idea, but with $22 trillion in federal debt and with record amounts of revenue already coming into Washington, isn’t the real problem uncontrolled spending? Follow-up: Are there any government programs you would cut or eliminate?

Question 6: Many of you have a lot of complaints about the United States. Is there anything positive you could say?

Question 7: Many of you have criticized President Trump for confronting Iran and withdrawing from the nuclear deal. Iran is a major sponsor of terrorism in the world and its leaders say they have a religious mandate to wipe out Israel and impose Islamic law on everyone. How would you negotiate with their leaders and what is your plan for fighting terrorism?

Question 8: Some of you say Russia is the greatest existential threat and others name China. Russia has been supporting the Syrian regime of Bashar Assad and the crumbling dictatorship of Nicolas Maduro in Venezuela. Russia has also sent a warship to Cuba. How would you oppose Russia’s adventurism and China’s expansionism? How would you deal with China spying on us?

Question 9 (for Sen. Kamala Harris): You attacked Joe Biden for working with segregationist senators during his time in the Senate. He (and Lyndon Johnson, who pushed through significant civil rights legislation in the ’60s) said it was necessary in order to accomplish anything. If you were in the Senate at that time, would you have refused to work with those senators, possibly scuttling significant legislation that has led to improvements in the lives of many Americans, including African-Americans?

Question 10: There have been 60 million abortions in America since the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision in 1973. According to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, black women are more than five times as likely as white women to have an abortion. Does this trouble you? Follow-up: Some states allow babies to die if they survive an abortion and some call that infanticide. Are you opposed to that practice?

These questions and others might have provided more useful information to the public than the ones tossed at the candidates. As I say, though, it is unlikely I will ever have a chance to ask them and the network stars won’t either.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++