The report in today's Star highlights a rise in the number of ethnic minorities in Sheffield. I would imagine there is a similar rise across the nation.
http://www.thestar.co.uk/headlines/Report-demonstrates-how-city-is.6539778.jp
What do you think the mood of the white population will be in so many years when it seems inevitable that they will become a minority in most people's lifetime?
Do you think it will be similar to the effect it's having on white America as they are already on the verge of becoming a minority?
Here's an interesting article by Christopher Hitchens and the overall feeling as far as I'm concerned is a country that is confused, divided and unsure of its future with all the fears and potential problems that may bring.
http://www.slate.com/id/2265515/

So far as I recall Europeans settled in the US, and rather successfully if they are still a majority.

Now alone this is not a big issue but the indigenous peoples of the UK are on the decline, and with people stupidly saying that we should have less or no kids, it is only going to get worse.
There's no problem with people proclaiming that we should not have kids but its only the English people that take it on board and are expected to not have them, everyone else coming here are knocking them out right left and centre leaving us all to have to start feeding our kids on halal food in school to make them feel welcome.
When Muslims tongue in cheekily say the flag of Islam will fly over downing street there is an air of truth in it.

You'll be happy to know that its a Europe wide theme tho and not just happening here.

Sorry, when did we become expected to not have children?

We should have less kids.

So far as I recall Europeans settled in the US, and rather successfully if they are still a majority.

..funny how they always forget that isn't it?

So far as I recall Europeans settled in the US, and rather successfully if they are still a majority.The Europeans in the US kept their population up though with the rest, we here have stalled when it comes to having kids and you only have to read the attitudes on this very forum about expanding the population to see its not getting any better.

Now alone this is not a big issue but the indigenous peoples of the UK are on the decline, and with people stupidly saying that we should have less or no kids, it is only going to get worse.
There's no problem with people proclaiming that we should not have kids but its only the English people that take it on board and are expected to not have them, everyone else coming here are knocking them out right left and centre leaving us all to have to start feeding our kids on halal food in school to make them feel welcome.
When Muslims tongue in cheekily say the flag of Islam will fly over downing street there is an air of truth in it.

You'll be happy to know that its a Europe wide theme tho and not just happening here.

That isn't true. I am pretty sure the evidence is that family size is on the decline across all groups in society. Do you have any evidence to back that up?

I notice nobody has managed to answer my question as to what the white population's reaction in this country will be when they become the minority in a country that they probably feel more strongly is theirs than Americans do who can only trace their white ancestry back a few hundred years as opposed to this country where most can probably go back over a thousand years.

That isn't true. I am pretty sure the evidence is that family size is on the decline across all groups in society. Do you have any evidence to back that up?I have seen various links about the shrinking European populations from links given on here from other topics, I have not got any one specific link to give you but it would be easy enough to Google I imagine.

Like I said it is not just the UK.

The Europeans in the US kept their population up though with the rest, we here have stalled when it comes to having kids and you only have to read the attitudes on this very forum about expanding the population to see its not getting any better.

You're not Slimsid in disguise are you? :hihi:

You're not Slimsid in disguise are you? :hihi:Is he a rapper ?

I cant rap if that helps :D

What do you think the mood of the white population will be in so many years when it seems inevitable that they will become a minority in most people's lifetime?

Populations change over time, I'm often reminded how Britain isn't racist, yet when presented with a situation that might challenge egalitarian principles, there's suddenly virtue in being afraid of people who don't look like you.

Twenty years is a long time, all kinds of things will change including the ethnic make up of the population, but why is the default reaction that it's a bad thing?

My youngest child has a totally different group of friends from an ethnic point of view than my eldest did and certainly far different to my own experiences, but so what? They don't perceive differences the same way the older generations tend to.

I'm sure my children's white granny never imagined she'd have mixed race grandchildren when she was a child in the 1930's, but she has several and loved them the same as her white ones.

My own mixed race children will probably marry white folks, so my grandchildren will look as different to me, as my children do to my in laws, great!-it's time to get over this nonsense.

If it makes anyone feel happier at least it will improve our chances of winning the World Cup in 20 years time ;)

I have seen various links about the shrinking European populations from links given on here from other topics, I have not got any one specific link to give you but it would be easy enough to Google I imagine.

Like I said it is not just the UK.

But birthrates globally are in decline not just europe...

Here is the world growth rate and projection:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:World_population_increase_history.svg

Sorry, forgot to add this link earlier.
http://www.thestar.co.uk/headlines/Report-demonstrates-how-city-is.6539778.jp

Is he a rapper ?

I cant rap if that helps :D

You just sounded like you were wishing you were young free and single in the mythical swinging sixties contributing lots of Junior hard2miss's to society.

Populations change over time, I'm often reminded how Britain isn't racist, yet when presented with a situation that might challenge egalitarian principles, there's suddenly virtue in being afraid of people who don't look like you.

Twenty years is a long time, all kinds of things will change including the ethnic make up of the population, but why is the default reaction that it's a bad thing?

My youngest child has a totally different group of friends from an ethnic point of view than my eldest did and certainly far different to my own experiences, but so what? They don't perceive differences the same way the older generations tend to.

I'm sure my children's white granny never imagined she'd have mixed race grandchildren when she was a child in the 1930's, but she has several and loved them the same as her white ones.

My own mixed race children will probably marry white folks, so my grandchildren will look as different to me, as my children do to my in laws, great!-it's time to get over this nonsense.

If it makes anyone feel happier at least it will improve our chances of winning the World Cup in 20 years time ;)

I don't think anyone can claim that the UK is not racist, but we have put into place laws to keep check on it and not make the mistakes made in Germany.

We are no more racist than any other country in the world including the places that people are immigrating from. In fact when it comes to keeping a check on it we have one of the best track records of anywhere.
Just because you pass laws about what is acceptable you cannot say people cant have the right to think what they like, and given the fact that changes in the country directly effect people here then they have a right to think what they want about it.

I don't think anyone can claim that the UK is not racist, but we have put into place laws to keep check on it and not make the mistakes made in Germany.

We are no more racist than any other country in the world including the places that people are immigrating from. In fact when it comes to keeping a check on it we have one of the best track records of anywhere.
Just because you pass laws about what is acceptable you cannot say people cant have the right to think what they like, and given the fact that changes in the country directly effect people here then they have a right to think what they want about it.

They can indeed think what they want about them, just as others can inform their thinking with evidence or make criticisms.

But birthrates globally are in decline not just europe...

Here is the world growth rate and projection:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:World_population_increase_history.svg

Very disingenuous of you. The birthrate may be forecast to fall but it will still remain above 0 which means that the population will almost certainly continue to rise.

The report in today's Star highlights a rise in the number of ethnic minorities in Sheffield. I would imagine there is a similar rise across the nation.
http://www.thestar.co.uk/headlines/Report-demonstrates-how-city-is.6539778.jp
What do you think the mood of the white population will be in so many years when it seems inevitable that they will become a minority in most people's lifetime?

So the % if ethnic minorities has gone up to 15% in the last 20 years and that means it is inevitable that whites will become a minority in most people's lifetimes? That appears to be rather a stretch...

I don't think anyone can claim that the UK is not racist, but we have put into place laws to keep check on it and not make the mistakes made in Germany.

We are no more racist than any other country in the world including the places that people are immigrating from. In fact when it comes to keeping a check on it we have one of the best track records of anywhere. Well I've consistently said we're all racist, some people tend to take offence by that, but the reality of the ethnic population increasing tends to arouse their indignation nonetheless. At least in acknowledging that fact means it's something that can be dealt with-denying you have cancer doesn't make it go away.


Just because you pass laws about what is acceptable you cannot say people cant have the right to think what they like, and given the fact that changes in the country directly effect people here then they have a right to think what they want about it.

Totally agree with that, but I'm not sure how having a neighbour with a black face directly affects the way white people live, unless he happens to be a pain in the arse.

So the % if ethnic minorities has gone up to 15% in the last 20 years and that means it is inevitable that whites will become a minority in most people's lifetimes? That appears to be rather a stretch...

I'm just going on what the situation is in America if you read the rest of the post and the Slate link.
http://www.slate.com/id/2265515/

So the % if ethnic minorities has gone up to 15% in the last 20 years and that means it is inevitable that whites will become a minority in most people's lifetimes? That appears to be rather a stretch...

..good point, and of course the figures take no account of the ethnic minorities that will be absorbed within the indigenous population over that time.

Very disingenuous of you. The birthrate may be forecast to fall but it will still remain above 0 which means that the population will almost certainly continue to rise.

How is it disingenuous, that I linked to a graph that clearly illustrates the point you are implying I was trying to hide. :huh:

I'm just going on what the situation is in America if you read the rest of the post and the Slate link.
http://www.slate.com/id/2265515/

I did read that and to be honest was rather wondering why you had put it in. It seems to be about some pathetic whinging white supremacist and hardly and indication of what is happening in vast majority of the US.

How is it disingenuous, that I linked to a graph that clearly illustrates the point you are implying I was trying to hide. :huh:


It's disingenuous, as opposed to a lie, because the thread is about the possibility of ethnic minority population becoming the majority population in the foreseeable future and not a fall in the rate of the general overall birthrate.

I did read that and to be honest was rather wondering why you had put it in. It seems to be about some pathetic whinging white supremacist and hardly and indication of what is happening in vast majority of the US.

I can't quite work out who you're talking about as being a 'pathetic whinging white supremacist'.:huh: Is it Christopher Hitchens?:confused:

It's disingenuous, as opposed to a lie, because the thread is about the possibility of ethnic minority population becoming the majority population in the foreseeable future and not a fall in the rate of the general overall birthrate.

What do you fear if that situation arose?

Populations change over time, I'm often reminded how Britain isn't racist, yet when presented with a situation that might challenge egalitarian principles, there's suddenly virtue in being afraid of people who don't look like you.

Twenty years is a long time, all kinds of things will change including the ethnic make up of the population, but why is the default reaction that it's a bad thing?

My youngest child has a totally different group of friends from an ethnic point of view than my eldest did and certainly far different to my own experiences, but so what? They don't perceive differences the same way the older generations tend to.

I'm sure my children's white granny never imagined she'd have mixed race grandchildren when she was a child in the 1930's, but she has several and loved them the same as her white ones.

My own mixed race children will probably marry white folks, so my grandchildren will look as different to me, as my children do to my in laws, great!-it's time to get over this nonsense.

If it makes anyone feel happier at least it will improve our chances of winning the World Cup in 20 years time ;)

in 1966 there were no coloured kids at our school and in 1986 there were two and in 2006 there was four and probably in 2026....we'll have the best athletics team in sheffield.....happy days

What do you fear if that situation arose?

I don't fear anything. I was asking people to put themselves in the position of a minority and to express how they might feel, especially after being in the majority for thousands of years.

I don't fear anything. I was asking people to put themselves in the position of a minority and to express how they might feel, especially after being in the majority for thousands of years.

Do not be drawn.
They are people of the devil.

Do not be drawn.
They are people of the devil.

What are you wittering on about?

in 1966 there were no coloured kids at our school and in 1986 there were two and in 2006 there was four and probably in 2026....we'll have the best athletics team in sheffield.....happy days

Lets have no more racist language please.

I don't fear anything. I was asking people to put themselves in the position of a minority and to express how they might feel, especially after being in the majority for thousands of years.

I'm sure that I'd feel anything much. It'd be funny seeing the white supremacists squirming though.

Well I've consistently said we're all racist, some people tend to take offence by that, but the reality of the ethnic population increasing tends to arouse their indignation nonetheless. At least in acknowledging that fact means it's something that can be dealt with-denying you have cancer doesn't make it go away....

Totally agree with that, but I'm not sure how having a neighbour with a black face directly affects the way white people live, unless he happens to be a pain in the arse.

The thing about racism is, it's so multifaceted. To some, it's an objection to people coming here and seeking asylum and 'taking our houses and living on benefits'. It can also mean, 'people not born here taking our jobs', and also, 'people of a different colour and/or religion (whether or not born here) having more children than I have'. And lots more in between.

The OP seems to be making a point about ethnic minorities. So, you've a problem with Irish, Scottish, Poles, Americans, Welsh, Lithuanians, Spaniards etc? Anyone who doesn't consider themselves mainstream 'British' (whatever that is) will have ticked the box that leads to the conclusions of this report or others like it.

Or is it a grumble about colour? Or race (The Scots are a race)? Or language (Not being able to speak English perfectly is a problem, ask any Icelander here on holiday!)? Or is it about religion (most of us in the UK don't actively worship any religion)?

The fact that the OP specifically mentions 'the white population' makes it racist - because presumably this thread is about the 'white population of England' being taken over by the 'non-whites'. Yet, that's not what the report says - it talks about 'ethnic minorities', not 'non-whites'.

You need to decide what you're railing against! - is it people who follow Islam? Or black people? Or non-born-here people? Or people who have more children than average?

Let's all know exactly where your prejudices lie, so we can accurately decide if we agree or not!

What are you wittering on about?

I know you from years gone by.
You and your pal are trying to draw this guy into a trap.
Grow up, and give it up.

I can't quite work out who you're talking about as being a 'pathetic whinging white supremacist'.:huh: Is it Christopher Hitchens?:confused:

I was actually talking about the Glenn Beck character...

So far as I recall Europeans settled in the US, and rather successfully if they are still a majority.

Perhaps we whiteys will end-up like the American Indians, living in trailer parks on reservations, that would be ironic.

Lets have no more racist language please.

Don't be so silly.

The thing about racism is, it's so multifaceted. To some, it's an objection to people coming here and seeking asylum and 'taking our houses and living on benefits'. It can also mean, 'people not born here taking our jobs', and also, 'people of a different colour and/or religion (whether or not born here) having more children than I have'. And lots more in between. Sage words SH, and of course you're quite right. That's why I was bold in the statement, because the objection seemed to be aroused by the fact ethnic minorities are increasing, rather than the attendant problems that might (or might not) be associated with them.

The fact that the OP specifically mentions 'the white population' makes it racist - because presumably this thread is about the 'white population of England' being taken over by the 'non-whites'. Yet, that's not what the report says - it talks about 'ethnic minorities', not 'non-whites'. Therein lies the real issue, how white folks feel about it, as though they have more of an interest in the future of this country than non whites do or their view should be pre-eminent or that non whites are a malign influence.

You need to decide what you're railing against! - is it people who follow Islam? Or black people? Or non-born-here people? Or people who have more children than average?

Let's all know exactly where your prejudices lie, so we can accurately decide if we agree or not!

Hallelujah!! :thumbsup:

We should have less kids.

Depends on the 'we'.

The white English have a TFR below replacement level and need to increase it.

Along with most other Europeans, the Chinese, Russians, Chileans, Canadians and Australians.

Everyone else needs to reduce it.

in 1966 there were no coloured kids at our school and in 1986 there were two and in 2006 there was four and probably in 2026....we'll have the best athletics team in sheffield.....happy days

..aye and all be drinking Cherry B or Red Stripe :hihi:

Depends on the 'we'.

The white English have a TFR below replacement level and need to increase it.

Along with most other Europeans, the Chinese, Russians, Chileans, Canadians and Australians.

Everyone else needs to reduce it.

Why?

Is there something inherently wrong with white people having a lower birthrate?

What's wrong with everyone else having more kids?

I was actually talking about the Glenn Beck character...

As I read the article I don't think he was a major part of the piece. I feel that this debate is about the whites becoming a minority in America

Depends on the 'we'.

The white English have a TFR below replacement level and need to increase it.

..soft lights, clean sheets, incense burning, champagne & roses-"darling, we really must do what we can to increase our ethnic birth rate".

Why? Is there something inherently wrong with white people having a lower birthrate? What's wrong with everyone else having more kids?Nothing particularly wrong with it, but there are just too many people on the world as it is. We all need to be having fewer children, not more.

We need to reduce the UK population by about 12 million at least. Life was so much less stressful when there wasn't so many of us. :)

That isn't true. I am pretty sure the evidence is that family size is on the decline across all groups in society. Do you have any evidence to back that up?

It pretty much is. But replacement level TFR=2.1, that is what we should aim for. And many countries have gone below that.

Increasing life expectancy in the 3rd world and lowering infant mortality is probably the best way to bring down (in the long term), world population. As strange as that sounds.

This website is very interesting and the active graphs are very handy.

http://www.gapminder.org/world/

Why?

Is there something inherently wrong with white people having a lower birthrate?

What's wrong with everyone else having more kids?

Not necessarily, but there is when it is below 2.1. Unless we want to commit ethnic suicide, that is.
Nothing necessarily wrong, but there is when it is above 2.1, if the aim of global society is to reduce population or keep it at a sustainable level.

Nothing particularly wrong with it, but there are just too many people on the world as it is. We all need to be having fewer children, not more.

We need to reduce the UK population by about 12 million at least. Life was so much less stressful when there wasn't so many of us. :)

Who told you that?

Why?

Is there something inherently wrong with white people having a lower birthrate?

What's wrong with everyone else having more kids?Nothing if they would stay in their country of origin. :D

The scariest thing is the white population here now will renew the Nuclear arsenal of this country only to leave it in the hands of the peoples we are trying to encourage not to have them :hihi:

Why?

Is there something inherently wrong with white people having a lower birthrate?

What's wrong with everyone else having more kids?

there is wrong when they are all like you. :suspect::help:

..soft lights, clean sheets, incense burning, champagne & roses-"darling, we really must do what we can to increase our ethnic birth rate".Followed by get off me I have a headache :hihi:

I notice nobody has managed to answer my question as to what the white population's reaction in this country will be when they become the minority in a country that they probably feel more strongly is theirs than Americans do who can only trace their white ancestry back a few hundred years as opposed to this country where most can probably go back over a thousand years.

Civil war.

Civil war is statistically very likely in nations where demographics change, often overlooked is the likelihood when the dominant group's share approaches 50%.

It can be avoided though.

Why?
Is there something inherently wrong with white people having a lower birthrate?
What's wrong with everyone else having more kids?If you're one of the hand-wringing liberal left who jumps on every opportunity to support minority groups' 'rights' over those of white people, you might see there as being nothing wrong with it.

If, however, you were a white English person who thinks it's actually a good thing for England to retain its heritage and national identity and to remain, predominantly, a white English nation, then the idea of our native race being bred into minority status within 3 or 4 generations by out of control immigration policies and disproportionate immigrant birthrates, you might disagree. You might even think it a bad thing that rapid ethnic imbalance might ruin your nation’s structure and identity – but those lickspittles of the liberal left would most likely label you racist, Nazi or worse just for wanting to preserve your nation’s identity.

You might also see it as a bad thing on a global scale as ever-increasing non-white populations tend to mean ever-increasing need for overseas aid paid by the whiter West, funding the irresponsible and socially immature nations which fail to control their birthrates.

Very disingenuous of you. The birthrate may be forecast to fall but it will still remain above 0 which means that the population will almost certainly continue to rise.

1 person dies, 1 person is born. TFR~=2.1 The population remains stable.

2 people die, 1 person is born. Exponential decay.

1 person dies, 2 people are born. Exponential increase.

Who told you that?How many people do you think we should squeeze into the UK, given that we're already one of the most over-populated nations in the world?

Civil war.

Civil war is statistically very likely in nations where demographics change, often overlooked is the likelihood when the dominant group's share approaches 50%.

It can be avoided though.Yes by integration. But most peoples have no intention of integration or leaving one iota of the life they left behind. In fact they would sooner everything else change accordingly to accept them.

My fear is it is going to get a lot worse before it gets better. :(

How many people do you think we should squeeze into the UK, given that we're already one of the most over-populated nations in the world?

I've no idea, but the idea that we need to lose 12 million seems absurd to me.

If you're one of the hand-wringing liberal left who jumps on every opportunity to support minority groups' 'rights' over those of white people, you might see there as being nothing wrong with it.

If, however, you were a white English person who thinks it's actually a good thing for England to retain its heritage and national identity and to remain, predominantly, a white English nation, then the idea of our native race being bred into minority status within 3 or 4 generations by out of control immigration policies and disproportionate immigrant birthrates, you might disagree. You might even think it a bad thing that rapid ethnic imbalance might ruin your nation’s structure and identity – but those lickspittles of the liberal left would most likely label you racist, Nazi or worse just for wanting to preserve your nation’s identity.

You might also see it as a bad thing on a global scale as ever-increasing non-white populations tend to mean ever-increasing need for overseas aid paid by the whiter West, funding the irresponsible and socially immature nations which fail to control their birthrates.

That's you sussed then.

Followed by get off me I have a headache :hihi:

..something else I say regularly ;) :D

That's you sussed then.
:D post 3 and a very opinionated response :P

Don't be so silly.

I'm not being silly. The word I highlighted has connotations of the Deep South of the United States, and slavery. An era when public signs reading 'No coloureds' (African Americans) were prevalent.

You may believe that using the language of the white supremacist is acceptable - I don't.

..something else I say regularly ;) :DIm sure mrs Friday would back up that statement :P

Was it Colonel Gadaffi who said there is no need for terrorism just outbreed the non-muslims?How true.

If you're one of the hand-wringing liberal left who jumps on every opportunity to support minority groups' 'rights' over those of white people, you might see there as being nothing wrong with it.

If, however, you were a white English person who thinks it's actually a good thing for England to retain its heritage and national identity and to remain, predominantly, a white English nation, then the idea of our native race being bred into minority status within 3 or 4 generations by out of control immigration policies and disproportionate immigrant birthrates, you might disagree. You might even think it a bad thing that rapid ethnic imbalance might ruin your nation’s structure and identity – but those lickspittles of the liberal left would most likely label you racist, Nazi or worse just for wanting to preserve your nation’s identity.

You might also see it as a bad thing on a global scale as ever-increasing non-white populations tend to mean ever-increasing need for overseas aid paid by the whiter West, funding the irresponsible and socially immature nations which fail to control their birthrates.

No doubt you hyperventilate every Ides of March?

Im sure mrs Friday would back up that statement :P

Well this ethnic minority certainly won't be troubling future population statistics :hihi:

I wonder what answer someone in Pakistan would give if they were told that in twenty years time white christians would be the majority..unless...

Was it Colonel Gadaffi who said there is no need for terrorism just outbreed the non-muslims?How true.

Was it Orville who wished he could fly?

Nothing particularly wrong with it, but there are just too many people on the world as it is. We all need to be having fewer children, not more.

We need to reduce the UK population by about 12 million at least. Life was so much less stressful when there wasn't so many of us. :)

There are 12 million pensioners.

We'd end up with the strongest economy in the world, and there would be no need for immigration. It would be outlawed, like elsewhere in the world with an abundance of people of working age.

There are 12 million pensioners.

We'd end up with the strongest economy in the world, and there would be no need for immigration. It would be outlawed, like elsewhere in the world with an abundance of people of working age.

..are you scraping the euthanasia barrel now?

Who told you that?Nobody told me. I'm not like you, you know, relying on other people for my opinions. :)

I see how much pleasanter life is in countries where there are either fewer people or more usable land. Why do you think so many of us are emigrating to Northern France, Spain or Italy? It's not just for the weather :) I also remember that in the 50s and 60s when the population was around 50 million, it was a lot easier than it is now. Even going out for the day was better, fewer people filling up every spare foot of space.

Yes by integration. But most peoples have no intention of integration or leaving one iota of the life they left behind. In fact they would sooner everything else change accordingly to accept them.

My fear is it is going to get a lot worse before it gets better. :(

People don't generally integrate though. Like for like associates and seeks to further its cause. There is a battle for power. Groups that cry out for equality for their group, don't stop at equality, they want more, positive discrimination for example. This is the nature of us all. Majority power becomes of greater importance. Just look at the Lib Dems and Conservatives forming a coalition (It would never happen unless it was in both of their interests to gain power).

If everyone wanted equality, we wouldn't have a problem.

There are 12 million pensioners.

We'd end up with the strongest economy in the world, and there would be no need for immigration. It would be outlawed, like elsewhere in the world with an abundance of people of working age.I've said frequently that it would only take 15-20 yrs of minor belt tightening and we'd all have croaked naturally. Additionally if we were to get all the idle so n soes off their backsides and into some sort of work, job's a good un!

It's not so long ago that working people in East End London regarded two weeks hop picking in Kent as a holiday. What went so badly wrong with the national character?

Nobody told me. I'm not like you, you know, relying on other people for my opinions. :)

I see how much pleasanter life is in countries where there are either fewer people or more usable land. Why do you think so many of us are emigrating to Northern France, Spain or Italy? It's not just for the weather :) I also remember that in the 50s and 60s when the population was around 50 million, it was a lot easier than it is now. Even going out for the day was better, fewer people filling up every spare foot of space.

The lower population densities are attractive to all, people with money don't live in tower blocks. It's far cheaper on the continent for land than in the UK ;)

Back in the 50s and 60s, the majority of the population was working adults, all putting into the pot.

Demography is now the major problem in the UK. It's why we encourage people to immigrate and work. It's getting increasingly more attractive to emigrate, but the only people whom can emigrate freely are those with money, or the ability to work.

Was it Orville who wished he could fly?
He did with his brother Wilbur.

People don't generally integrate though. Like for like associates and seeks to further its cause. There is a battle for power. Groups that cry out for equality for their group, don't stop at equality, they want more, positive discrimination for example. This is the nature of us all. Majority power becomes of greater importance. Just look at the Lib Dems and Conservatives forming a coalition (It would never happen unless it was in both of their interests to gain power).

If everyone wanted equality, we wouldn't have a problem.

Well said and well understood regarding the vagrancies of human nature. This seems to be the major fear in America, the fear of non whites being in the majority and introducing 'non American' values that may destroy the nation that they've come to know and understand.
Personally I think America is too diverse for that to happen and its constitution seems to be very difficult to change but these fears in themselves, added to the fear of terrorism, may have a very adverse effect on a nation that prides itself on always having a positive outlook and a specifically American Dream to reach for.

He did with his brother Wilbur.

..and their dad Keith?

The lower population densities are attractive to all, people with money don't live in tower blocks. It's far cheaper on the continent for land than in the UK ;)

Back in the 50s and 60s, the majority of the population was working adults, all putting into the pot.

Demography is now the major problem in the UK. It's why we encourage people to immigrate and work. It's getting increasingly more attractive to emigrate, but the only people whom can emigrate freely are those with money, or the ability to work.They do in Canary Wharf :)

Back in the 50s and 60s there were a lot of disabled people about, war damaged, and the majority of the population seemed to be kids! ;) But you're right, there was full employment for anyone that wanted it.

The demographic can be changed, if we just bite the bullet? We are encouraging people to come here and work but imo, we don't actually need most of them. There are too many people here already that don't work even when they're perfectly fit and capable.

The lower population densities are attractive to all, people with money don't live in tower blocks. It's far cheaper on the continent for land than in the UK ;)

Back in the 50s and 60s, the majority of the population was working adults, all putting into the pot.

Demography is now the major problem in the UK. It's why we encourage people to immigrate and work. It's getting increasingly more attractive to emigrate, but the only people whom can emigrate freely are those with money, or the ability to work.

So how bad is that for the economic state of the nation when you seem to be suggesting that it's mainly the rich or well educated that are emigrating and the poor or poorly educated that are coming into the country?
Are we suffering from a national brain drain?

So how bad is that for the economic state of the nation when you seem to be suggesting that it's mainly the rich or well educated that are emigrating and the poor or poorly educated that are coming into the country?
Are we suffering from a national brain drain?We are addressing that, we have made the exams easier so no one will notice ;)

We are addressing that, we have made the exams easier so no one will notice ;)

Lower quality teachers are better ;)

And the same topics but with different language to denote information :o (taught over longer timescales)

..and their dad Keith?
You have the wrong Orville.Think flying.

We are addressing that, we have made the exams easier so no one will notice ;)

Yes, very good.:hihi: It's amazing how evolution has managed to give us more powerful brains every year for the last 15 or so years enabling the exam results to continually improve in all that time. Imagine how stupid we all were back in the seventies and eighties when very few people received A's and A*'s. It's amazing we survived as a civilisation.:D

That's you sussed then.Eat your heart out Sherlock, fishy's able to read 40-foot wide banners.

So how bad is that for the economic state of the nation when you seem to be suggesting that it's mainly the rich or well educated that are emigrating and the poor or poorly educated that are coming into the country?
Are we suffering from a national brain drain?

There's been a brain drain going on for a while - in 2008 a research project by the OECD reported that 10% of the most highly skilled graduates and professionals had left the UK for jobs abroad. Though this has nothing to do with immigration but is to do with the fact that scientists, engineers and the like while highly valued by our competitors typically have poor pay and worse job security in the UK.

You have the wrong Orville.Think flying.

Kidorry, please-it was a joke :)

Kidorry, please-it was a joke :)

If you say so.

If you say so.He is known for his lack of humour that Boy Friday ;)



:hihi:

They do in Canary Wharf :)

Hamster cages don't count, the GIFA of those properties are half most HA/council/LHA properties. The cheap studios cost 6, 7, 8 times the average wage, and your lucky to fit a washing machine in the kitchen. There are nice penthouses for the middle class though, but you need a few million £.

Back in the 50s and 60s there were a lot of disabled people about, war damaged, and the majority of the population seemed to be kids! ;) But you're right, there was full employment for anyone that wanted it.

The demographic can be changed, if we just bite the bullet? We are encouraging people to come here and work but imo, we don't actually need most of them. There are too many people here already that don't work even when they're perfectly fit and capable.

We are inviting immigrants to increase the worker:non worker ratio (and boost our economy relative to other similarily industrialized countries). I think full employment is a dream, at least while we have our technology.

We can all eat very well and only a small percentage of the workforce are required to work in agriculture. If we didn't replace our setees, TV's, clothes te.c and redecorate every year we could eat and drink like kings working just a few weeks a year each.

80% of our economy is service based, only a small amount of work is really needed to provide the things we truly need.

But I do agree, young people no working is a problem. But as things have improved, less work has been needed and the value of labour has fallen. Some people work for effectively nothing.

As the worker:non worker ratio decreases, the value of labour will increase, and work will become economical as wages rise, youth unemployment will fall.

He is known for his lack of humour that Boy Friday ;)
:hihi:

I read that as 'black humour, it must be my default with you :hihi:

So how bad is that for the economic state of the nation when you seem to be suggesting that it's mainly the rich or well educated that are emigrating and the poor or poorly educated that are coming into the country?
Are we suffering from a national brain drain?

Currently the economic situation is bad. A natural recession has begun, the worker ratio will fall predictably. The people who know of demographics will seek to move to a place where the demographics are in their favour, higher wages and less tax, a high worker:non worker ratio.

We have racist immigration laws in place to combat this. Seeing as our quality of life is far better than that of Indians for example, we can borrow their labour for a few years at low cost. We can have temporary brain gains at low cost, they can save up and return down the line. The points based immigration system welcomes those with the brains.

It is not the end of the world, but we shall have to get used to our quality of life rather than the rate at which it improves. Not necessarily a bad thing. But it ain't good when you think were used to things improving constantly.

But I do agree, young people no working is a problem. But as things have improved, less work has been needed and the value of labour has fallen. Some people work for effectively nothing.
As the worker:non worker ratio decreases, the value of labour will increase, and work will become economical as wages rise, youth unemployment will fall.I don't know anyone that works for nothing, unless they're a volunteer. Everyone gets the minimum wage for their age group. Human beings should work regularly, especially young ones, even if they only volunteer to do something. There are loads of things that people could do if they can't find paid work to occupy their time. Youth clubs, scouts, guides, brownies, charity shops, are all crying out for people to help them. Then there are hundreds of healthy, intelligent people lounging around doing nothing and falling into depressive states.

I personally feel that many people expect to be paid too much these days, and expect a higher standard of living than their abilities can provide. We all have to cut our coat according to our cloth.

I personally feel that many people expect to be paid too much these days, and expect a higher standard of living than their abilities can provide. We all have to cut our coat according to our cloth.
I tore mine on barbed wire trying to get away ;)

I tore mine on barbed wire trying to get away ;)Was it you skulking around in my garden when I let the dogs out? :hihi:

I don't know anyone that works for nothing, unless they're a volunteer. Everyone gets the minimum wage for their age group. Human beings should work regularly, especially young ones, even if they only volunteer to do something. There are loads of things that people could do if they can't find paid work to occupy their time. Youth clubs, scouts, guides, brownies, charity shops, are all crying out for people to help them. Then there are hundreds of healthy, intelligent people lounging around doing nothing and falling into depressive states.

I personally feel that many people expect to be paid too much these days, and expect a higher standard of living than their abilities can provide. We all have to cut our coat according to our cloth.

Money minded people are considering paying to work, and even do pay to work.

http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/families/article7025668.ece

http://www.accountancystudents.co.uk/discussion/viewthr/viewthread/16511/

People should do something productive to occupy their time, but I don't think they should volunteer/work just for the sake of working.

By all means be altruistic, just don't become a slave.

Cutting our coat according to our cloth is a good idea, but it's tricky in our very-high debt-economy.

Nobody told me. I'm not like you, you know, relying on other people for my opinions. :)

I see how much pleasanter life is in countries where there are either fewer people or more usable land. Why do you think so many of us are emigrating to Northern France, Spain or Italy? It's not just for the weather :) I also remember that in the 50s and 60s when the population was around 50 million, it was a lot easier than it is now. Even going out for the day was better, fewer people filling up every spare foot of space.

Why don't they emigrate to the highlands of Scotland or Wales then?

Why don't they emigrate to the highlands of Scotland or Wales then?Perhaps the obvious answer is the weather.

(Though the presence of Scots and the Welsh may also be factors).

It's disingenuous, as opposed to a lie, because the thread is about the possibility of ethnic minority population becoming the majority population in the foreseeable future and not a fall in the rate of the general overall birthrate.

But my point wasn't about the thread in general, it was specifically about Hard2Miss's claim that European birthrates are in decline.

I do think it relevant for context and not in the slightest disingenuous to point out that the global birthrate is in decline, so the fact the European birthrate is in decline is not necessarily exceptional.

Nobody told me. I'm not like you, you know, relying on other people for my opinions. :)

I see how much pleasanter life is in countries where there are either fewer people or more usable land. Why do you think so many of us are emigrating to Northern France, Spain or Italy? It's not just for the weather :) I also remember that in the 50s and 60s when the population was around 50 million, it was a lot easier than it is now. Even going out for the day was better, fewer people filling up every spare foot of space.

Have you been supping cooking sherry with Pop Larkin, ruby? :D

Perhaps the obvious answer is the weather.

(Though the presence of Scots and the Welsh may also be factors).

Not overcrowding then...:D

Depends on the 'we'.

The white English have a TFR below replacement level and need to increase it.

Along with most other Europeans, the Chinese, Russians, Chileans, Canadians and Australians.

Everyone else needs to reduce it.
We should have less kids. By we, that means everyone.

I care no more about the demographics of race, or colour, of the population after I die than I do about the demographics of the population before I was born.

I do care about the population within my lifetime, and the very high possibility that I will witness war, famine and disease as a direct result of it, not just of my species but of many others.

(Just for the purposes of this discussion however, I will point out the mathematics of compounding birth rates. A 10% minority will become a 90% majority in a mere 6 generations by virtue of doubled birth rates.)

(Just for the purposes of this discussion however, I will point out the mathematics of compounding birth rates. A 10% minority will become a 90% majority in a mere 6 generations by virtue of doubled birth rates.)

But the 'minority' will not breed exclusively with itself over those 6 generations.

Just for the purposes of this discussion however, I will point out the mathematics of compounding birth rates. A 10% minority will become a 90% majority in a mere 6 generations by virtue of doubled birth rates.

Assuming a doubling of population A (the minority) at each generation and maintenance of population B (the majority) I make it that population A becomes a 78% majority in six generations. However this is utterly meaningless as it assumes that trends in population growth will remain constant over the six generations, there will be no interbreeding between population A and population B and finally that birth rate is the only factor in population growth.

We should have less kids. By we, that means everyone.

I care no more about the demographics of race, or colour, of the population after I die than I do about the demographics of the population before I was born.

I do care about the population within my lifetime, and the very high possibility that I will witness war, famine and disease as a direct result of it, not just of my species but of many others.

(Just for the purposes of this discussion however, I will point out the mathematics of compounding birth rates. A 10% minority will become a 90% majority in a mere 6 generations by virtue of doubled birth rates.)Words are easy, now lets see you with a banner up broom hall or page hall telling people to have less kids. The only people who will be listening will be the police taking your statement about who it was exactly put the banner over your head.

You have good intentions but you know what they say about good intentions...

But the 'minority' will not breed exclusively with itself over those 6 generations.Not totally exclusively, but not far from it either - you know full well that some religious groups (like, say, Pakistani Muslims for random example), breed almost exclusively with their own kind - they hardly like to stray beyond the family tree and disprove heartily if their offspring dilly dally with infidels.

Words are easy, now lets see you with a banner up broom hall or page hall telling people to have less kids. The only people who will be listening will be the police taking your statement about who it was exactly put the banner over your head....You seem to confirm many people's concerns that the non-white immigrant groups in our city have a propensity for violence.

Have you been supping cooking sherry with Pop Larkin, ruby? :DWell, he gets on your nerves, doesn't he, with his pernicious little one liners ... :rant:

Why don't they emigrate to the highlands of Scotland or Wales then?Why don't they, indeed? You'd better ask them, but I suppose the quality of life is still the main issue.

You seem to confirm many people's concerns that the non-white immigrant groups in our city have a propensity for violence.While others are keyboard warriors ?

I am not saying that at all, If that's the conclusion you I have given you I am sorry. I am talking about races and birth rates as is the topic. I merely say that talking about what people should do and actually asking them are different things.

i have a few things to say on this but have learned over time that it just aint worth the grief!!

i have a few things to say on this but have learned over time that it just aint worth the grief!!Oh, go on! have a punt, you know you want to really. You can take it! :)

We should have less kids. By we, that means everyone.

I care no more about the demographics of race, or colour, of the population after I die than I do about the demographics of the population before I was born.

I do care about the population within my lifetime, and the very high possibility that I will witness war, famine and disease as a direct result of it, not just of my species but of many others.

(Just for the purposes of this discussion however, I will point out the mathematics of compounding birth rates. A 10% minority will become a 90% majority in a mere 6 generations by virtue of doubled birth rates.)

How many less and why? Are you suggesting we reduce population/growth/the rate of, or to keep it constant?

You don't have to go far to witness war, famine or disease...

Changing demographics are a very good predictor of war.

i have a few things to say on this but have learned over time that it just aint worth the grief!!

Say them anyway.

I wonder what answer someone in Pakistan would give if they were told that in twenty years time white christians would be the majority..unless...
And answer there was none ..I wonder why

But the 'minority' will not breed exclusively with itself over those 6 generations.

It also ignores that the current majority are also breeding - maybe not at the same rate but mathematically it means it will take longer to come true.

It also ignores that the current majority are also breeding - maybe not at the same rate but mathematically it means it will take longer to come true.

..and by the time it does come true, we'll have more pressing things to worry about, like where we're going to find oxygen to breath.

I find these apocalyptic prophecies about whites becoming a minority quite amusing, it's unlikely to happen, and if it does it won't be like white folks wake up one morning and suddenly everyones black!

Even if it did happen over 6 generations, that's a period of over 100 years, well Britain looks a lot different now to what it did in Victorian times, from a social, cultural and technological perspective, and I don't hear anyone lamenting it's passing, unless they're grieving women being granted the vote and children being forbidden from cleaning chimneys.

I notice nobody has managed to answer my question as to what the white population's reaction in this country will be when they become the minority in a country that they probably feel more strongly is theirs than Americans do who can only trace their white ancestry back a few hundred years as opposed to this country where most can probably go back over a thousand years.

We are all immigrants, apart from the original Celts .. Romans, Anglo Saxons, Vikings, Normans until the present day immigrants from Eastern Europe. Englishness, does not exist in reality.

i have a few things to say on this but have learned over time that it just aint worth the grief!!

Have you considered it might not be what you say, but the way you say it? ;)

If it makes anyone feel happier at least it will improve our chances of winning the World Cup in 20 years time ;)

In the world cup thats just gone, there was more black players in the squad an in any other England squad.

Just saying. ;)

In the world cup thats just gone, there was more black players in the squad an in any other England squad.

Just saying. ;)

It was a joke Shy, the black players played as crap as the white ones :)

But birthrates globally are in decline not just europe...

Here is the world growth rate and projection:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:World_population_increase_history.svg

Yeah but its all about who is being born where ;)

It's disingenuous, as opposed to a lie, because the thread is about the possibility of ethnic minority population becoming the majority population in the foreseeable future and not a fall in the rate of the general overall birthrate.

What do you fear if that situation arose?

Response to Hlibut:

Im going say the un-sayable now...There is a reason why, relatively speaking, the UK is a safe, stable, healthy country with good infrastructure, and that reason is that it has been majority European forever.

But look at Jamaica, look at argentina, look at somalia, i could go on.

We are all immigrants, apart from the original Celts .. Romans, Anglo Saxons, Vikings, Normans until the present day immigrants from Eastern Europe. Englishness, does not exist in reality.

Really, where did the Celts come from were they suspended in ice?

Really, where did the Celts come from were they suspended in ice?

:hihi::hihi: like it

If you're one of the hand-wringing liberal left who jumps on every opportunity to support minority groups' 'rights' over those of white people, you might see there as being nothing wrong with it.

If, however, you were a white English person who thinks it's actually a good thing for England to retain its heritage and national identity and to remain, predominantly, a white English nation, then the idea of our native race being bred into minority status within 3 or 4 generations by out of control immigration policies and disproportionate immigrant birthrates, you might disagree. You might even think it a bad thing that rapid ethnic imbalance might ruin your nation’s structure and identity – but those lickspittles of the liberal left would most likely label you racist, Nazi or worse just for wanting to preserve your nation’s identity.

You might also see it as a bad thing on a global scale as ever-increasing non-white populations tend to mean ever-increasing need for overseas aid paid by the whiter West, funding the irresponsible and socially immature nations which fail to control their birthrates.
Dont be drawn by the trolls on here.
They will get you stopped of as sure as eggs is eggs.

Response to Hlibut:

Im going say the un-sayable now...There is a reason why, relatively speaking, the UK is a safe, stable, healthy country with good infrastructure, and that reason is that it has been majority European forever.

But look at Jamaica, look at argentina, look at somalia, i could go on.

Could you clarify the point you're making Shy talk? What are the salient differences between Jamaica, Argentina and Somalia, compared to the UK?

Assuming a doubling of population A (the minority) at each generation and maintenance of population B (the majority) I make it that population A becomes a 78% majority in six generations. However this is utterly meaningless as it assumes that trends in population growth will remain constant over the six generations, there will be no interbreeding between population A and population B and finally that birth rate is the only factor in population growth.
That is true in a simple model of doubling population (it would be 5 generations to go from 10% to 78% actually), but the impact of birth-rates on the overall population is a bit more complicated than that.

Basically I took my statement from a programme I watched a number of years ago about the weapons of warfare. (I think it was Peter Snow, but can’t remember). In one they discussed the weapon of DNA, and that the 10%/90% 6 generations rule was well understood by warlords.

I recall discussion that American Indians were fond of removing the breeding line of enemy chiefs, how rape is used as a weapon, and how simply out-breeding the enemy has been used throughout history. It’s no small coincidence that many religious sects encourage large families, polygamy, only the males marrying outside the religion, forced conversions, or the evils of contraception/abortion etc.

I didn’t believe the 10/90% statement, and being fond of maths, I simply constructed a model in Excel and proved it. I’ve still got it. Based on 3 score years and ten, two different populations A and B, both identical with the exception that A has twice the birth-rate of B, then it did indeed take just 6 generations for A to move from a 10% minority to a 90% majority. Moving the average life expectancy to 80, changes the number of generations required to just 5. In theory this could take just 150 years.

Of course this is the sort of “apocalyptic prophecy” used in those YouTube videos by people scaremongering that “teh muslims are taking over”. It doesn’t take account of inevitable breeding between the groups. But it does show how fast change can be, as boyfiday’s comparison of Victorian times highlights.

Personally, I don’t care what population looks like in 150 years. I’ll be dead. Besides, I’m a 50/50 mixture myself. But I can speak from some sort of experience of how change can cause conflict, and has to be managed. It won’t be the colour of people’s skin though, it will be ideas. My parents had to flee to the UK because in a single generation their country changed from majority secular, to minority secular, tolerant to intolerant.

I am uncomfortable with the idea of the UK population growing from 55m to 79m, and the world population growing from 6.5bn to 9.2bn, because it is predicted to do this in my lifetime. I am uncomfortable that despite this there are still sections of society that promote large families as a moral duty.

Of course, it’s not so much the idea of the population growing to 9.2bn that, in isolation, I am uncomfortable with. Just as it’s not the fall that kills you, but the sudden stop, it’s more the period when the population crashes from 9.2bn to a few million that concerns me. We seem to be intent on being witness to it. :o

Apologies for the long post.

We are all immigrants, apart from the original Celts .. Romans, Anglo Saxons, Vikings, Normans until the present day immigrants from Eastern Europe. Englishness, does not exist in reality.

I haven't mentioned Englishness up to now but obviously it exists because it has a clear identity dominated by a little something called the English language.
As for all our ancestors, historically, being immigrants what's that got to do with anything? There's a world of difference in a number of different European tribes trying to settle in a new land that has various warring factions in it and has a population of probably less than five million as opposed to a relatively secure and settled nation that is highly populated with over 60 million and forecast to go much higher.

Could you clarify the point you're making Shy talk? What are the salient differences between Jamaica, Argentina and Somalia, compared to the UK?

Draw your own conclusions,
http://www.nationmaster.com/index.php

Could you clarify the point you're making Shy talk? What are the salient differences between Jamaica, Argentina and Somalia, compared to the UK?

Mexico is a better example than Argentina. Mexico and Jamaica are out of control, practically dozens of shootings, many fatal, every day; and Somalia is Somalia...nuff said.

Western Europe isn't perfect, there is always room for improvement, like a more ethical form of capitalism perhaps, but western Europe is the best place in the world in terms of safety, stability and arguably culture.
Will it stay this way if Europeans become the biggest minority group here, rather than just the vast majority?

Well this ethnic minority certainly won't be troubling future population statistics :hihi:

No, just troubling the here and now population. :D

Nothing particularly wrong with it, but there are just too many people on the world as it is. We all need to be having fewer children, not more.

We need to reduce the UK population by about 12 million at least. Life was so much less stressful when there wasn't so many of us. :)

McDonalds, Burger King, KFC and all those Asian take aways selling trays full of very spurious excuses for food for £2.50 a shout have got it in hand. If continuous consumption of that crap doesn't kill you, nothing will. :suspect:

McDonalds, Burger King, KFC and all those Asian take aways selling trays full of very spurious excuses for food for £2.50 a shout have got it in hand. If continuous consumption of that crap doesn't kill you, nothing will. :suspect:

Nowt wrong with road kill and dead cat. :hihi::hihi:

McDonalds, Burger King, KFC and all those Asian take aways selling trays full of very spurious excuses for food for £2.50 a shout have got it in hand. If continuous consumption of that crap doesn't kill you, nothing will. :suspect:

Bring back good old Wimpy any day :)

Mexico is a better example than Argentina. Mexico and Jamaica are out of control, practically dozens of shootings, many fatal, every day; and Somalia is Somalia...nuff said.

Western Europe isn't perfect, there is always room for improvement, like a more ethical form of capitalism perhaps, but western Europe is the best place in the world in terms of safety, stability and arguably culture.
Will it stay this way if Europeans become the biggest minority group here, rather than just the vast majority?

Ironically of course, the reason mexico is a bit out of control at the moment (though only in certain areas) is because of the drugs that we as a nation help to consume.

Somalia has no government, and strictly speaking doesn't exist as a country, so not really comparable. Interestingly though, the reason that the somalian pirates exist is because western waste disposal people started dumping toxic waste into their fishing waters, because they had no government to stop them.

No, just troubling the here and now population. :D

<REMOVED>! :hihi:

Mexico and Jamaica are out of control, practically dozens of shootings

That sounds like say America - that white christian country. Nuff said...

I haven't mentioned Englishness up to now but obviously it exists because it has a clear identity dominated by a little something called the English language. So Englishness is dominated by the English language? That's true but so is Scottishness, and Welshness and Jamaicaness and Americaness etc etc.


As for all our ancestors, historically, being immigrants what's that got to do with anything? There's a world of difference in a number of different European tribes trying to settle in a new land that has various warring factions in it and has a population of probably less than five million as opposed to a relatively secure and settled nation that is highly populated with over 60 million and forecast to go much higher.

It has everything to do with it, the factions at the time wouldn't have been 'warring' otherwise if they'd all been able to get on-immigration is part of the progress of developing nations, you cant take a snapshot that suits your argument. The indigenous population probably liked immigrants less than they do now.

It seems we learn nothing from history-positive or negative. Plus ca change...

That is true in a simple model of doubling population (it would be 5 generations to go from 10% to 78% actually), but the impact of birth-rates on the overall population is a bit more complicated than that.

Depends on whether you count from zero or one ;)


Basically I took my statement from a programme I watched a number of years ago about the weapons of warfare. (I think it was Peter Snow, but can’t remember). In one they discussed the weapon of DNA, and that the 10%/90% 6 generations rule was well understood by warlords.

I recall discussion that American Indians were fond of removing the breeding line of enemy chiefs, how rape is used as a weapon, and how simply out-breeding the enemy has been used throughout history. It’s no small coincidence that many religious sects encourage large families, polygamy, only the males marrying outside the religion, forced conversions, or the evils of contraception/abortion etc.

Wouldn't this only apply if there were a concerted effort to outbreed an enemy? One could construct a sociological argument to say that immigrants who have large families predominantly come from cultures where large families are the norm but as they assimilate UK culture the size of their families, and so birthrates, will decrease?


Of course this is the sort of “apocalyptic prophecy” used in those YouTube videos by people scaremongering that “teh muslims are taking over”. It doesn’t take account of inevitable breeding between the groups. But it does show how fast change can be, as boyfiday’s comparison of Victorian times highlights.

Personally, I don’t care what population looks like in 150 years. I’ll be dead. Besides, I’m a 50/50 mixture myself. But I can speak from some sort of experience of how change can cause conflict, and has to be managed. It won’t be the colour of people’s skin though, it will be ideas. My parents had to flee to the UK because in a single generation their country changed from majority secular, to minority secular, tolerant to intolerant.

I am uncomfortable with the idea of the UK population growing from 55m to 79m, and the world population growing from 6.5bn to 9.2bn, because it is predicted to do this in my lifetime. I am uncomfortable that despite this there are still sections of society that promote large families as a moral duty.

Of course, it’s not so much the idea of the population growing to 9.2bn that, in isolation, I am uncomfortable with. Just as it’s not the fall that kills you, but the sudden stop, it’s more the period when the population crashes from 9.2bn to a few million that concerns me. We seem to be intent on being witness to it. :o

This we pretty much agree on!

That sounds like say America - that white christian country. Nuff said...

A. I was talking about western Europe

B. I wouldnt mind seeing the stats on the ethnicity of the people doing most of the "gang banging" over there.

B. I wouldnt mind seeing the stats on the ethnicity of the people doing most of the "gang banging" over there.

Their ethnicity? Probably the ethnic group known as skint & thick.

I recall discussion that American Indians were fond of removing the breeding line of enemy chiefs, how rape is used as a weapon, and how simply out-breeding the enemy has been used throughout history. It’s no small coincidence that many religious sects encourage large families, polygamy, only the males marrying outside the religion, forced conversions, or the evils of contraception/abortion etc.



This is food for thought indeed. In the case of Muslim immigration into Europe, are we seeing another atempt at a Caliphate in Europe, not by individual immigrants themselves, but by the ultra rich supremicist Saudi's doing shady deals with the useful idiot element of Europes politerati?

A. I was talking about western Europe

You seemed to be talking about Mexico, Jamaica et al...

B. I wouldnt mind seeing the stats on the ethnicity of the people doing most of the "gang banging" over there.

According to the FBI statistics from 2008 there were 16,277 homicides of which 32.8% were comitted by white felons, 36.5% by black felons, 1.7% by other race felons and 29.0% by felons of unknown race. The stats are all out there if you bother to look :)

You seemed to be talking about Mexico, Jamaica et al...

I was waxing lyrical about western Europe...Jamaica and Mexico were examples of less sophisticated societies.


According to the FBI statistics from 2008 there were 16,277 homicides of which 32.8% were comitted by white felons, 36.5% by black felons, 1.7% by other race felons and 29.0% by felons of unknown race. The stats are all out there if you bother to look :)

For a suposed "minority group", black people are doing more than their fair share according to those stats.

<REMOVED>! :hihi:

What have you said now you old devil :D:D

in 1966 there were no coloured kids at our school and in 1986 there were two and in 2006 there was four and probably in 2026....we'll have the best athletics team in sheffield.....happy days

There's nothing like stereotyping people is there?

Here are some facts.

3 years ago there were no ethnic minorities on my morning bus to work each morning. Now, 3 years later, I catch the same bus at the same time, travel the same route to work and there are at least 6 ethnic minorities on the same journey. I am partly responsible for this because I work in immigration but the thing is, the morning bus does not travel through estates of private housing and migrants are not permitted social housing until they gain ILR. This occurs after at least 5 years leave in the same category, 9 years since most enter the UK as a student and then switch to an immigration category that leads to settlement.

There's nothing like stereotyping people is there?

Here are some facts.

3 years ago there were no ethnic minorities on my morning bus to work each morning. Now, 3 years later, I catch the same bus at the same time, travel the same route to work and there are at least 6 ethnic minorities on the same journey. I am partly responsible for this because I work in immigration but the thing is, the morning bus does not travel through estates of private housing and migrants are not permitted social housing until they gain ILR. This occurs after at least 5 years leave in the same category, 9 years since most enter the UK as a student and then switch to an immigration category that leads to settlement.

Very interesting, how long does it take for a young indigenous person of whatever ethenticity, to be granted council accommodation in an area that he or she is comfortable in?

I was waxing lyrical about western Europe...Jamaica and Mexico were examples of less sophisticated societies.

Less sophistiated or poorer and more ravaged by the effects of the drug culture? The countries with the highest murder rates are frequently (though not always) central players in the drug trade.

For a suposed "minority group", black people are doing more than their fair share according to those stats.

Could that be because murder is heavily related to the gangs who recruit from the poorest, most marginalised and most dispossessed of the society who are disproportionately non white? Remember society isn't homogeneous in terms of either culture or environment.

Very interesting, how long does it take for a young indigenous person of whatever ethenticity, to be granted council accommodation in an area that he or she is comfortable in?

As Mecky was talking about the time before an imigrant could apply for social housing how does this question follow?

So Englishness is dominated by the English language? That's true but so is Scottishness, and Welshness and Jamaicaness and Americaness etc etc.

Yes and they all add a little bit of their own culture to the English language, just like us English add a bit of Englishness to the English language.

It has everything to do with it, the factions at the time wouldn't have been 'warring' otherwise if they'd all been able to get on-immigration is part of the progress of developing nations, you cant take a snapshot that suits your argument. The indigenous population probably liked immigrants less than they do now.

Sorry but I think you need to learn a little about ancient English history when most of the UK was a mixture of different warring Kingdoms that only had some kind of basic nation hood after this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egbert_of_Wessex which didn't last very long as these various tribes kept fighting for dominance for many years to come leaving the country open to invasions from Vikings and later Normans.
I also think that there was probably a much less of an indigenous population back then than there is now.

Yes and they all add a little bit of their own culture to the English language, just like us English add a bit of Englishness to the English language.



Sorry but I think you need to learn a little about ancient English history when most of the UK was a mixture of different warring Kingdoms that only had some kind of basic nation hood after this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egbert_of_Wessex which didn't last very long as these various tribes kept fighting for dominance for many years to come leaving the country open to invasions from Vikings and later Normans.
I also think that there was probably a much less of an indigenous population back then than there is now.

I think SF is a faction of warrng peoples at present. :D