|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: A misunderstood man?
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
Sorry, Sea Viper - Sea Archer was out of service before I was born, let alone when I was in the navy...
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Firenze:
I have this theory. To adopt Le Guin's terms, people are either stabiles or mobiles. One likes familiarity, stability, continuity, tradition, values the things they know because they know them. The others like novelty, experimentation, are adapters and adopters.
That's a good theory. And of course those in the former group have just as much right to campaign and vote for policies that suit them as those in the latter group.
Aye, but when those policies spill over into xenophobia it's perfectly reasonable that that is pointed out. I'm actually in the former group, believe it or not; can't imagine emigrating or even going somewhere as different to what I'm used to as That London, but I do recognise that that's just me and I can't therefore insist that the people in the next house look like me and were born this side of the English Channel, because that's none of my business.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
I would hate us to leave the EU - it would mean he'd become a German citizen.
Why would that be the case? Europeans lived in Britain before she joined the EEC. Australians, Canadians and Russians live in the UK and they aren't in the EU.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
And when you can't afford the commute, because it's 70 miles?
I know many who have to do just that
quote:
Tangential, but we have a massive problem with trying to force the population into the SE corner of the country to work in London.
Commuting is part of the problem. The road and rail networks are congested, because we now consider it perfectly reasonable to expect people to live tens of miles from where they work. It's bonkers.
I agree. Part of the problem though is not just that London is the capital but also that it is close to continental Europe and is becoming part of the "North-East France - Belgium - South Netherlands" uber-conurbation.
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Indeed many do commute distances like that. But unless your work is quite well paid, it's not going to be possible to do it. Could you do it on £14K a year?
You are correct about London's location wrt Europe - this is why I would support HS2 if it allowed through trains from Europe via HS1 to the rest of the UK.. Because it doesn't, it's just a way for the well-off to work in London whilst living in nicer parts of the country (i.e. almost anywhere), which will make the problem worse for everyone else.
[ 22. May 2014, 13:53: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
I agree. Part of the problem though is not just that London is the capital but also that it is close to continental Europe and is becoming part of the "North-East France - Belgium - South Netherlands" uber-conurbation.
That's not really true, except for the small minority of people who travel within that area. There are miles of countryside in the area described.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
la vie en rouge
Parisienne
# 10688
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
I would hate us to leave the EU - it would mean he'd become a German citizen.
Why would that be the case? Europeans lived in Britain before she joined the EEC. Australians, Canadians and Russians live in the UK and they aren't in the EU.
Presumably for the same sorts of reasons that I’ve said I would become a French citizen. Namely for the convenience of continuing to be a citizen of an EU member state.
That said, acquiring a French passport wouldn’t necessitate me giving up my British one.
--------------------
Rent my holiday home in the South of France
Posts: 3696 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
Erroneous Monk: quote:
When I see the contortions politicians from other parties get into now to side-step the question of whether Farage is a racist, whether his party are racists, whether his policies are racist, I am scared about the future of this country.
But then, I'm not white.
I am white (Celt with a dash of Viking) and it scares me too.
Maybe I could apply for Scottish citizenship (on the grounds of marriage) but that will only work if the Scots decide to leave the UK and are allowed to remain in the EU...
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
I would hate us to leave the EU - it would mean he'd become a German citizen. I see no point. A bit like the US - each country should be a 'state' of the EU imo.
So you don't want him to become German, but you're happy for him to become "European"? I fail to see the significant difference, to be honest...
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
Being completely selfish for a moment, I have no interest in losing the advantages of being a citizen of an EU member state.
That's fine, if you think easy travel around the continent is an advantage. As far as I'm concerned it's like being given a free ticket to Runcorn. Sure, it's free travel - but it's to a place where I have absolutely no interest in being, and therefore to me it's both worthless and pointless.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Firenze:
I have this theory. To adopt Le Guin's terms, people are either stabiles or mobiles. One likes familiarity, stability, continuity, tradition, values the things they know because they know them. The others like novelty, experimentation, are adapters and adopters.
That's a good theory. And of course those in the former group have just as much right to campaign and vote for policies that suit them as those in the latter group.
Sure, but campaigning to stay in the EU won't harm your ability to live in Birmingham. Whereas campaigning against it might well impair my ability to work in Paris or Plzeň.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Firenze:
I have this theory. To adopt Le Guin's terms, people are either stabiles or mobiles. One likes familiarity, stability, continuity, tradition, values the things they know because they know them. The others like novelty, experimentation, are adapters and adopters.
That's a good theory. And of course those in the former group have just as much right to campaign and vote for policies that suit them as those in the latter group.
Sure, but campaigning to stay in the EU won't harm your ability to live in Birmingham. Whereas campaigning against it might well impair my ability to work in Paris or Plzeň.
Well yes, but creating winners and losers, sometimes at quite fundamental levels, *is* sort of how democracy works....
If enough people want to espouse something that will stop you working in either of those delightful cities with your current ease, well, them's the breaks.
I happen to agree with you, but still...
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Indeed many do commute distances like that. But unless your work is quite well paid, it's not going to be possible to do it. Could you do it on £14K a year?
No, but where wages are that low, property prices are likely to be low, too. I accept though that there will exist a group of people who cannot do both.
quote:
You are correct about London's location wrt Europe - this is why I would support HS2 if it allowed through trains from Europe via HS1 to the rest of the UK.. Because it doesn't, it's just a way for the well-off to work in London whilst living in nicer parts of the country (i.e. almost anywhere), which will make the problem worse for everyone else.
Agreed. I think the PTBs* have missed a trick there.
[*ETA - or, rather, we as a country have missed a trick; the Powers That Be may have their own reasons for buggering it up like that... ![[Paranoid]](graemlins/paranoid.gif) ]
[ 22. May 2014, 16:40: Message edited by: Matt Black ]
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
Well yes, but creating winners and losers, sometimes at quite fundamental levels, *is* sort of how democracy works....
Yes, but my point was that the argument as stated created a loss for me without creating a win for Marvin, in that the supposed benefit he put forward is a benefit he can already enjoy.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
So you don't want him to become German, but you're happy for him to become "European"? I fail to see the significant difference, to be honest...
I don't mind him becoming German in the least.
But it would be a completely unnecessary faff for him. I love being able to drive down to visit him, no borders, no restrictions, shared healthcare etc.
The world is getting smaller and I like it that way.
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Well, that's interesting! I've heard of English people leaving England due to their own xenophobia regarding their changing surroundings, but not due to the xenophobia of their countrymen (or their countrymen's newspapers)!
I suppose the long and short of it is that there's always a good reason to escape from these shores, irrespective of what Nigel Farage and co. might do or say!
No - not "due to". I had other - more positive - reasons. But once I had left, I quickly appreciated just what I had left behind and how better off I was without it. There is a poisonous attitude in the UK. I had realised this for some time but it is only when you are out of it that you can begin to see more clearly just how poisonous it is and how it infects almost everything.
Farage and UKIP are not the problem. They are just more overt than normal symptoms of the problem. One might even go so far as to say that they should be respected for being open in saying what so many people clearly think, but are too ashamed to admit to thinking.
As a non-white person I'm curious to know where your racial paradise is. Just for future reference! (I'm planning to work abroad later in the year actually, but I don't really expect to find myself in a country that's more racially harmonious than this one....)
Regarding the politics, I'm not entirely convinced that leaving the EU would make things worse for the ethnic or racial minorities already entitled to be here. Ironically, it might make things better for them in the sense that there'd be less ongoing competition for the kinds of jobs that they and their children frequently have to do.
Going to the extent of voting for Mr Farage is a bit much, though I suspect that the ethnic minorities who are considering UKIP might well be doing so for the above reasons.
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
I think one of the things that skews the migration for work question is the willingness to learn a foreign language. I can earn more here (as a legal assistant) than I would doing a comparable job in London, but the reason is that I speak fluent French. To put it bluntly, very few British people achieve this kind of competency in a foreign language (‘cause everyone speaks English, innit?). [...]
I think the day is going to come when the general crapness of British language-learning is going to bite the UK in the butt, actually. When we all welcome our new Chinese overlords, I don’t reckon our utter flummoxation in the face of the Mandarin language is going to help us any (joking – but not entirely ![[Biased]](wink.gif) ).
And the British willingness to study foreign languages is actually getting worse, which is quite sad.
As a linguist myself, and someone who trained to teach languages, I find it hard to blame reluctant schoolchildren for this when the surrounding culture valorises language learning so little. Our popular culture has even less space for Francophone film and music than it did when I was a girl. Language learning here is now almost entirely a matter of inclination and ability rather than necessity or desirability.
The irony is that our society is becoming ever more multicultural, and more and more languages are represented in British playgrounds. But this doesn't seem to have led to any linguistic benefits for children as a whole. Middle class parents frequently see heavily multilingual playgrounds as a problem rather than an opportunity.
Anyway, Mr Farage has a German wife, and probably bilingual children, so he can't quite be accused of being a 'Little Englander' himself. I doubt that he's tried very hard to learn German himself, but I could be wrong.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
The irony is that our society is becoming ever more multicultural, and more and more languages are represented in British playgrounds. But this doesn't seem to have led to any linguistic benefits for children as a whole. Middle class parents frequently see heavily multilingual playgrounds as a problem rather than an opportunity.
The odd counterpoint to this is the boom in Gaelic medium education in Scotland. We can't recruit Gaelic speaking primary staff here because they can all get jobs in the central belt with the new schools opening. Middle class parents in Glasgow and Edinburgh seem to be desperate to have their kids be bilingual. And this with a language that is primarily of cultural rather than functional importance (and I say this as a Gaelic learner who fully supports efforts to sustain the language).
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
Well yes, but creating winners and losers, sometimes at quite fundamental levels, *is* sort of how democracy works....
Yes, but my point was that the argument as stated created a loss for me without creating a win for Marvin, in that the supposed benefit he put forward is a benefit he can already enjoy.
Sure, but, presumably, he's hypothecating that the overall benefits of leaving the EU to UK society outweigh the loss of freedom of movement.
It's not being advocated just because he doesn't think you shouldn't live abroad because he doesn't want to (I assume).
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Spawn
Shipmate
# 4867
|
Posted
Thank you SvitlanaV2 for that contribution to the discussion. I hope Oscar the Grouch replies to the points you make.
On the subject of teaching languages, it seems to me that this is about confidence. In extremis I could communicate in Urdu and German (and probably Latin, not that there's much call for it) but would doubt my ability to actually do so. I've always had the ability to ask for a beer and an ashtray (interestingly enough) in several other languages. As a governor of a primary school I keep looking at the issue of what makes us so useless at speaking languages in this country. I'm convinced it is something simple. Perhaps if we taught sign language at an early age - a practical subject which parents would support and encourage. - we could teach confidence to communicate.
Posts: 3447 | From: North Devon | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
Out of interest, would you be willing to share with us where in the world you now are, where life is fun again?
Canada
Life isn't perfect here (Rob Ford????) but it's a world away from the UK.
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Spawn
Shipmate
# 4867
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
Out of interest, would you be willing to share with us where in the world you now are, where life is fun again?
Canada
Life isn't perfect here (Rob Ford????) but it's a world away from the UK.
I'm sorry, Oscar it is probably the country I'm most familiar with and in terms of general attitudes it's not that different fro. Britain. I envy you because I'd quite happily live there but you are not living in a non-racist environment without its own share of little Canada issues. How amusing.
Posts: 3447 | From: North Devon | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Spawn
Shipmate
# 4867
|
Posted
Btw, Conrad Black's Canadian. And you had a go at the British media.
Posts: 3447 | From: North Devon | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Spawn:
Btw, Conrad Black's Canadian. And you had a go at the British media.
He renounced his Canadian citizenship in 2001, and as far as I know has not reclaimed it as of yet.
I'm not sure on what basis he was allowed to return to Canada after getting out of jail in the US. Wikipedia lists his wife's nationality as British, but maybe if she was still resident in Canada, that titled the weight in favour of Conrad's return. But I am speculating.
[ 23. May 2014, 00:32: Message edited by: Stetson ]
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
As for Canada Vs. the UK on racism issues, I am going to say, with a few caveats, that I think Canada probably does a little better.
Anti-immigration sentiment is a mile-wide in Canada, but an inch deep. Since the old Reform Party got collapsed into the Conservatives, there really isn't a major political party whose stock-in-trade is old-school xenophobia. The Conservatives, in fact, despite being led by an old Reformer, have made a partitally-successful effort to reach out electorally to "new stock" immigrant groups, finding particular success in southern Ontario.
Caveats...
The impression I have is that Canadian immigration policy is somewhat more restrictive than the UK's, focussed more on ensuring that people moving to the country were economically viable. So, more business-oriented immigrants, less easily stereotyped by the demagogues as impoverished riff-raff.
Canadian society, as a whole, treats First Nations people(aka Indians, natives) like absolute crap. But, obviously, they are not immigrants, so technically can't be weighed into the comparison under discussion.
--------------------
I have the power...Lucifer is lord!
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
Canada is one of the more multicultural 'Western' countries. Though Australia outstrips it. A look at the percentage of foreign born people in each country is instructive. The 2013 list on Wikipedia puts the UK at 12.4%, US at 14.3%, Canada at 20.7%, New Zealand at 25.1% and Australia at 27.7%.
Mind you, I wouldn't extol Australia as a complete bastion of racial tolerance. It's patchy. But the point is that anyone in the UK who thinks their particular country is somehow being overwhelmed by foreigners doesn't have a very firm grip on how the UK compares to other places, and is ignoring the fact that other countries seem to cope with a much greater proportion of foreigners than the UK currently has.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Spawn:
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
Out of interest, would you be willing to share with us where in the world you now are, where life is fun again?
Canada
Life isn't perfect here (Rob Ford????) but it's a world away from the UK.
I'm sorry, Oscar it is probably the country I'm most familiar with and in terms of general attitudes it's not that different fro. Britain. I envy you because I'd quite happily live there but you are not living in a non-racist environment without its own share of little Canada issues. How amusing.
I never said it was non-racist.
What I said was that the overall atmosphere was very different and in general, it is. Hugely different in my experience.
And your comment about Conrad Black is beside the point. As far as I can see, Canadian media in general is no where near as poisonous as the UK.
(I did add some other comments here but decided that I really couldn't be bothered. Why should I let Spawn try and kill my buzz?)
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
A look at the percentage of foreign born people in each country is instructive. The 2013 list on Wikipedia puts the UK at 12.4%, US at 14.3%, Canada at 20.7%, New Zealand at 25.1% and Australia at 27.7%.
An important factor to take into account is population density. All those countries have population densities in the 10s, 20s or 30s of people per square kilometre. Britain's is 262. That's going to have an effect on how keen each country is to have more people turning up.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
Yes and no. Large parts of Australia are made up of rather uninhabitable desert.
Correct. Australia is one of the world's more urbanised countries. Most people are concentrated in a narrow habitable band.
The country most similar to us in this respect is Canada.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Spawn:
Thank you SvitlanaV2 for that contribution to the discussion. I hope Oscar the Grouch replies to the points you make.
On the subject of teaching languages, it seems to me that this is about confidence. In extremis I could communicate in Urdu and German (and probably Latin, not that there's much call for it) but would doubt my ability to actually do so. I've always had the ability to ask for a beer and an ashtray (interestingly enough) in several other languages. As a governor of a primary school I keep looking at the issue of what makes us so useless at speaking languages in this country. I'm convinced it is something simple. Perhaps if we taught sign language at an early age - a practical subject which parents would support and encourage. - we could teach confidence to communicate.
I think the problem is that of "which language".
For much of the world it's an easy question to answer. English. It's the language of most of the internet, much of the entertainment industry, of the massive North American continent, and because of the Empire it's a second language across much of the world. It's a bit of an obvious choice. The Anglophone has a less clear path. Without being able to see the future when a brilliant job opens up in Milan, he doesn't know how useful Italian might be. And if that job opens up in Budapest instead, it wouldn't be any use at all. To get the same advantage as many people across the world get from learning English, the Anglophone must learn many other languages. Traditionally, we learn French. Which is useful in France, Canada and a few places in North Africa, but not in the USA, the rest of Europe, the Far East... unless at the age of 8 we already have a burning desire to work in Marseilles one day, it's hard to demonstrate the value of it. Children in Germany learning English already know the value - accessing all that English language UK and US entertainment output, if nothing else.
I think that underlies a lot of it. I gave up and learnt Welsh instead.
[ 23. May 2014, 08:30: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
Yes and no. Large parts of Australia are made up of rather uninhabitable desert.
There are some pretty hefty parts of the UK that aren't particularly suitable for large-scale habitation as well.
Not that it matters in this discussion. I get the impression that there are a few people on this thread who would still be arguing in favour of immigration if the entire country - moors, mountains and all - was full of twenty-storey tower blocks holding two families to an apartment.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Spawn
Shipmate
# 4867
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
I never said it was non-racist.
What I said was that the overall atmosphere was very different and in general, it is. Hugely different in my experience.
And your comment about Conrad Black is beside the point. As far as I can see, Canadian media in general is no where near as poisonous as the UK.
(I did add some other comments here but decided that I really couldn't be bothered. Why should I let Spawn try and kill my buzz?)
Canadian newspapers are very worthy but too boring to read. Of course the atmosphere is different in Canada. You have this feeling of space over there. The immigration policy is much more controlled than we have in crowded Europe. It's the sort of immigration policy that the UK needs.
I wish you well in enjoying the buzz of a new home country. Your elitist contempt for and stereotyping of the country you left behind is unhealthy.
Posts: 3447 | From: North Devon | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
Yes and no. Large parts of Australia are made up of rather uninhabitable desert.
There are some pretty hefty parts of the UK that aren't particularly suitable for large-scale habitation as well.
Not that it matters in this discussion. I get the impression that there are a few people on this thread who would still be arguing in favour of immigration if the entire country - moors, mountains and all - was full of twenty-storey tower blocks holding two families to an apartment.
No Marvin, not to anything LIKE the same degree. Your idea of 'hefty' is unlikely to make any sense over here.
The figures for cultivated or arable land I've found all put the percentage in the UK at around 24 or 25%. The percentage in Australia is around 6%.
EDIT: You might also find this instructive. Like anywhere else in the world, technology has helped us be more productive and make more use of the land we've got, but the practical reality is that very large parts of this continent aren't capable of sustaining significant populations in a way that has no parallel in Europe.
[ 23. May 2014, 09:10: Message edited by: orfeo ]
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
Yes and no. Large parts of Australia are made up of rather uninhabitable desert.
There are some pretty hefty parts of the UK that aren't particularly suitable for large-scale habitation as well.
Not that it matters in this discussion. I get the impression that there are a few people on this thread who would still be arguing in favour of immigration if the entire country - moors, mountains and all - was full of twenty-storey tower blocks holding two families to an apartment.
You do realise that the total built environment - houses, shops, factories and all the infrastructure takes up just 7% of the land in the UK? 10% in England? Under 2% in Scotland? That there's more land under trees than under bricks and tarmac?
I get the impression that some people on this thread have an entirely false idea of their own country, let alone anyone else's...
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
PS I don't know which reports this person is using, but they put the amount of habitable land at 10% of Australia and 70% of the UK.
You simply can't look at Australia and say 'oh, you've got a really low population density' as if we could all just spread out across the whole country.
Also instructive is the Wikipedia list of countries by real population density (which I can't link to because of the URL), which assesses population density by reference to the capacity to grow food for the population. While it does still indicate we've got more room available, the degree of difference isn't remotely like saying we can all just spread out, and the population figure that it uses is out by a factor of about 25%!
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lucia
Looking for light
# 15201
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I think the problem is that of "which language".
For much of the world it's an easy question to answer. English. It's the language of most of the internet, much of the entertainment industry, of the massive North American continent, and because of the Empire it's a second language across much of the world. It's a bit of an obvious choice. The Anglophone has a less clear path. Without being able to see the future when a brilliant job opens up in Milan, he doesn't know how useful Italian might be. And if that job opens up in Budapest instead, it wouldn't be any use at all. To get the same advantage as many people across the world get from learning English, the Anglophone must learn many other languages.
I think that underlies a lot of it. I gave up and learnt Welsh instead.
However I believe that there is some evidence that learning a second language makes it easier to learn a third and so on. So maybe if we learnt a second language well from a young age it would give us the tools and perhaps develop the parts of our brain that are needed to learn another language more easily if that became appropriate.
I speak as someone who has been trying to acquire two new languages fairly simultaneously over the last few years!
[ 23. May 2014, 09:23: Message edited by: Lucia ]
Posts: 1075 | From: Nigh golden stone and spires | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
I daresay it's of benefit. Hard sell to a 10 year old though.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
PS I don't know which reports this person is using, but they put the amount of habitable land at 10% of Australia and 70% of the UK.
So using those figures Australia has 768,685 square kilometers of habitable land, and the UK has 170,527 (243,610 x 70%).
Using the total populations given here, that results in a population density (people per square kilometer of habitable land) of 374 for the UK and 31 for Australia. Or to put it another way, it makes the UK even more overpopulated compared to Australia than I had originally said.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
it makes the UK even more overpopulated compared to Australia than I had originally said.
Dude, have you ever been to Australia? Not only is it gobsmackingly huge, it's almost completely empty in a way that England never was. These are a people who think going shopping, then taking in a dinner and a show, involves a 14 hour round trip. It's the equivalent of me driving from Tyneside to London because London is the nearest city with a theatre.
That doesn't make the UK 'overpopulated', any more than comparing the UK to Singapore makes it underpopulated. Just deal with the actual national figures as they stand.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
Dude, have you ever been to Australia?
Only Melbourne, Sydney, Surfer's Paradise (including some of the surrounding countryside) and Brisbane.
quote:
Not only is it gobsmackingly huge, it's almost completely empty in a way that England never was.
Yes, I know. That's the exact point I'm making here.
quote:
That doesn't make the UK 'overpopulated', any more than comparing the UK to Singapore makes it underpopulated.
I've been to Singapore as well. It's OK, but has far too many people in far too small an area.
quote:
Just deal with the actual national figures as they stand.
If actually quoting the national figures in my posts doesn't count as doing that, I don't know what does.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by Spawn:
Thank you SvitlanaV2 for that contribution to the discussion. I hope Oscar the Grouch replies to the points you make.
On the subject of teaching languages, it seems to me that this is about confidence. In extremis I could communicate in Urdu and German (and probably Latin, not that there's much call for it) but would doubt my ability to actually do so. I've always had the ability to ask for a beer and an ashtray (interestingly enough) in several other languages. As a governor of a primary school I keep looking at the issue of what makes us so useless at speaking languages in this country. I'm convinced it is something simple. Perhaps if we taught sign language at an early age - a practical subject which parents would support and encourage. - we could teach confidence to communicate.
I think the problem is that of "which language".
For much of the world it's an easy question to answer. English. It's the language of most of the internet, much of the entertainment industry, of the massive North American continent, and because of the Empire it's a second language across much of the world. It's a bit of an obvious choice. The Anglophone has a less clear path. Without being able to see the future when a brilliant job opens up in Milan, he doesn't know how useful Italian might be. And if that job opens up in Budapest instead, it wouldn't be any use at all. To get the same advantage as many people across the world get from learning English, the Anglophone must learn many other languages. Traditionally, we learn French. Which is useful in France, Canada and a few places in North Africa, but not in the USA, the rest of Europe, the Far East... unless at the age of 8 we already have a burning desire to work in Marseilles one day, it's hard to demonstrate the value of it. Children in Germany learning English already know the value - accessing all that English language UK and US entertainment output, if nothing else.
I think that underlies a lot of it. I gave up and learnt Welsh instead.
I agree that the choice of a second language is less obvious for children in the UK than for those in other European countries, but this doesn't really seem to imply the British are thus at a disadvantage with respect to finding foreign employment.
After all, those English-learning continentals aren't all emigrating to English-speaking countries. If the ability to speak English can help a German get that good job in Milan, the native English speaker should have even more of an advantage; and if knowing English isn't generally helpful, the German faces the same difficulty of choice that the Brit does.
Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
Just deal with the actual national figures as they stand.
If actually quoting the national figures in my posts doesn't count as doing that, I don't know what does.
But you're making comparisons against other countries which are vastly different to the UK.
You say the UK is overpopulated: okay, what figure do you think it should be, and why?
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by Spawn:
Thank you SvitlanaV2 for that contribution to the discussion. I hope Oscar the Grouch replies to the points you make.
On the subject of teaching languages, it seems to me that this is about confidence. In extremis I could communicate in Urdu and German (and probably Latin, not that there's much call for it) but would doubt my ability to actually do so. I've always had the ability to ask for a beer and an ashtray (interestingly enough) in several other languages. As a governor of a primary school I keep looking at the issue of what makes us so useless at speaking languages in this country. I'm convinced it is something simple. Perhaps if we taught sign language at an early age - a practical subject which parents would support and encourage. - we could teach confidence to communicate.
I think the problem is that of "which language".
For much of the world it's an easy question to answer. English. It's the language of most of the internet, much of the entertainment industry, of the massive North American continent, and because of the Empire it's a second language across much of the world. It's a bit of an obvious choice. The Anglophone has a less clear path. Without being able to see the future when a brilliant job opens up in Milan, he doesn't know how useful Italian might be. And if that job opens up in Budapest instead, it wouldn't be any use at all. To get the same advantage as many people across the world get from learning English, the Anglophone must learn many other languages. Traditionally, we learn French. Which is useful in France, Canada and a few places in North Africa, but not in the USA, the rest of Europe, the Far East... unless at the age of 8 we already have a burning desire to work in Marseilles one day, it's hard to demonstrate the value of it. Children in Germany learning English already know the value - accessing all that English language UK and US entertainment output, if nothing else.
I think that underlies a lot of it. I gave up and learnt Welsh instead.
I agree that the choice of a second language is less obvious for children in the UK than for those in other European countries, but this doesn't really seem to imply the British are thus at a disadvantage with respect to finding foreign employment.
After all, those English-learning continentals aren't all emigrating to English-speaking countries. If the ability to speak English can help a German get that good job in Milan, the native English speaker should have even more of an advantage; and if knowing English isn't generally helpful, the German faces the same difficulty of choice that the Brit does.
No, but learn one and you can probably pick up another one. Those children learning English for the purpose of films and rock music might find it easier to then, later in life, learn Italian or whatever.
Grow up monoglot, with no obvious-to-a-teenager reason to learn anything else, and your always trying to add one to English, not x to native plus English.
If I was interviewing only two candidates for a job in Milan for which English was useful but Italian was necessary and they were a monoglot Englishman and a German who spoke English, I would definitely (all other points being equal between them) go for the German, because I'd have more confidence that the Italian would come in time.
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
The population density argument is, to use a term regularly employed by a recently departed shipmate, bollocks. Britain lies 51st (according to Wikipedia) in the population density league, and these aren't all Singapores, Maltas and similar crowded little former colonies. At least four countries geographically larger than Britain have greater populations and population density.
What matters is the attitude people have to one another. My view, for what it's worth, is that many who live in the UK (I can't comment on Ireland), which is supposedly famed for tolerance and freedom, are just too damn choosy about their neighbors and use flimsy excuses about unchecked immigration ruining the country when they simply want people just like themselves next door.
Farage and his pals are tapping into this sentiment. I'm waiting to see what happens whjen they do get some power. Fringe parties have a record of poor performance and I don't expect UKIP to do much better, on the basis of their performance in the European Parliament.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
But you're making comparisons against other countries which are vastly different to the UK.
I'll grant you that. But I didn't start it - that would be all those who were saying "other countries have a higher percentage of immigrants, so what are you complaining about?"
If the comparison is invalid one way, it's invalid both ways. Conversely, if it's valid one way then it's valid both ways. I'm happy to go with either option.
quote:
You say the UK is overpopulated: okay, what figure do you think it should be, and why?
I think any time a country's population density gets over about 200 people per square kilometer (or per square kilometer of habitable land if you prefer, though that number will be reached far sooner) it's starting to get full. That would mean that of 244 countries or dependent territories in the world, around 60 are full (12 of which are smaller than 100 square km in size and 2 of which are Macau and Hong Kong). Source.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
The population density argument is, to use a term regularly employed by a recently departed shipmate, bollocks. Britain lies 51st (according to Wikipedia) in the population density league, and these aren't all Singapores, Maltas and similar crowded little former colonies. At least four countries geographically larger than Britain have greater populations and population density.
Yes - Vietnam, The Philippines, Japan and India. Which of those would you like the UK to turn into?
quote:
What matters is the attitude people have to one another. My view, for what it's worth, is that many who live in the UK (I can't comment on Ireland), which is supposedly famed for tolerance and freedom, are just too damn choosy about their neighbors and use flimsy excuses about unchecked immigration ruining the country when they simply want people just like themselves next door.
By all means, play the "it's because they're all filthy racists" card. I'll take it as a victory.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I think any time a country's population density gets over about 200 people per square kilometer (or per square kilometer of habitable land if you prefer, though that number will be reached far sooner) it's starting to get full. That would mean that of 244 countries or dependent territories in the world, around 60 are full (12 of which are smaller than 100 square km in size and 2 of which are Macau and Hong Kong). Source.
You realise that this is an entirely arbitrary number. London has a population density of over 5,000/km2, so clearly 200/km2 isn't at a point where people go mad and cats and dogs are doing it in the street.
Why 200?
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
You realise that this is an entirely arbitrary number.
Of course.
quote:
London has a population density of over 5,000/km2, so clearly 200/km2 isn't at a point where people go mad and cats and dogs are doing it in the street.
Maybe not, but I'd hate to live there. And I wouldn't want the whole country to be like London. Would you?
And yes, I do live in the West Midlands conurbation (pop. density just over 4k). But I've always lived on the outskirts, within very easy reach of nice open countryside where I can go if I need some space to breathe.
quote:
Why 200?
It's a nice round number that neatly divides the top quartile of countries from the rest in terms of population density. I fail to see the problem with it, given that even if it was accepted worldwide the vast majority of industrialised nations would still be very much open to new immigrantion.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
la vie en rouge
Parisienne
# 10688
|
Posted
And FWIW, Paris has a population density of 15 000 per km² i.e. approximately three times higher than London. (Which is not a widely known fact: it is the mostly densely populated city in the Western world and our apartments are all cupboards.)
[x-post]
[ 23. May 2014, 15:26: Message edited by: la vie en rouge ]
--------------------
Rent my holiday home in the South of France
Posts: 3696 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
and our apartments are all cupboards
Yet another reason to favour lower population densities.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
