Thanks for the clarifications on SF2 data. There's so much information to digest when understanding census...any and all assists from more experienced users are very much appreciated (and very much needed)! I still, though, have concerns about losing the fine-geo-level of data. There's been a lot of talk about the effects of the "rule of 100" on data availability at the TAZ level, and I could see these same concerns affecting other long-form data. "Rule of 100" is currently affecting availability of 100% data on the SF2; the long-form is sample data, and will have less base N, even if totals are imputed (although I don't quite understand this methodology either). Is there room for collapsing across some of the "people categories" in order to have data for the smaller geographic levels? How much would that cost in dollars and timeliness? Data privacy is a really compelling, knotty issue; how much privacy, and for whom? From whom? Is is public data, or government data? It seems like a decade ago, we didn't have the technology or data (so widely) available to even dream of the possible complications. And there are issues, too, about the representativeness/generalizability of summary data based on small N. But I'd hate to lose the baby with the bathwater. There's so much to be gained from this incredible data source. It's one of the best things going (in my opinion), and crucial to good Planning. So, is this just a transportation issue, or do other areas (health, human services, education, academia) deal with these issues in other ways? Just thinkin', Liz Hartmann