Originally Posted by criodain

Some Irish guys in Sydney had a running knife fight last week. One of them was killed. Nice to see them bringing their rich and diverse cultures with them !!

what's your point motorboater?

Originally Posted by pusky123

As a number of people have already commented having a small number of people from different countries doesnt necessarily make a country more diverse.

Having a few people of ethnic chinese or polynesion origin who happen to have a range of nationalities isnt diverse.

Originally Posted by pusky123

I simply refuse to accept that London is not one of the most diverse cities in the world. I live in an outer London borough. And my immediate neighbours include: Irish, African, Afro-Caribbean, Indian (subcontinent), South American Hispanic, American (US) and Chinese. Neighbours opposite include German, Polish and South African. All in a small terrace of houses. And this is not even Central London.

So not very diverse at all then?

Originally Posted by ABCDiamond

Interesting reading here, and talk about twisting....

USA99 in his/her TWO posts has discussed the UK and its diversity, compared to other countries.
USA99 said "I won’t comment on the diversity of individual cities"

USA99's comments are being attacked because LONDON is diverse.

USA99 did not say that LONDON wasn't, it was the UK being mentioned.

Originally Posted by James516

There are some confusing elements in this discussion, many of which stem from how you define 'diversity'.

One definition is that a country's diversity is measured by the number of different countries of birth of it's residents (one part of the 'Diversity Index' mentioned earlier). On this measure, it is hard to know if the UK or Australia, or indeed London or Sydney is more diverse - once you take embassies into account, many countries in the world (including the US, Australia and the UK) would have representation from more than 150 countries.

This is why the absolute number of countries is then divided by the population, giving Australia a diversity score greater than the UK. I'm not sure how the US keeps such a high ranking but there you have it.

Another way to measure diversity would be to look at the % of foreign-born residents in a country. Australia is clearly ahead of the UK on this measure, but the Sydney/London comparison would be a lot closer.

A third way, that I suspect some posters lean towards, is to look at the % of non-caucasian residents in a country, whether foreign- or native-born. On this measure, the UK is still probably just behind Australia (I think it's about 9% vs 12% but am not sure of the statistics or indeed if they are even collected), but London is probably ahead of Sydney.

Sorry to introduce some calm explanation - lets get back to ranting now

Originally Posted by Syedney

Booooooooooooooooring....Zzzzzzzzz

Thread should be removed...

Final score:


London 1 Sydney 1

London started brightly and took an early lead but as the match was coming to a close, and with the clock showing 89th minute, Sydney levelled the game.

When the ref looked up after the final whistle, he noticed that all the spectators, some of which were of Chinese descent, some others were referred to as "POMS", and some local Ozzzzzies, all had left the ground or had fallen asleep...

Ok?

Originally Posted by Grayling

That makes it even more surprising to me if it was simply a normal sporting event.

G

Originally Posted by lionheart

As the proud holder of a BA(Hons) Degree in International Relations, my opinion on this subject is therefore bound to be right and everyone else is wrong. London is more culturally diverse than Sydney but Australia more so than the UK, mainly because of the relatively high rural population in the UK who would run a mile at the sight of a black face. Having myself an African wife, I agree with the comment about being accepted in London, but try going to a pub in rural Wales...it's like the twilight zone. As for the UAE, yes 80% are indeed expats but 75% come from India, Pakistan and Bangladesh with most of the rest from the Philipines, UK, China and Russia. Not really a cultural diversity in my view.

Originally Posted by OnTheMovvv

Top 20 Countries by Number of Languages Spoken
“While most countries have one or a handful of official or nationally recognized languages, there are typically groups of people residing in each country whose first language is something other than the nation's lingua franca. The numbers of such groups differ from country to country, and the size of these minority language "groups" can range from a single individual to millions of speakers.”


Top 20 Countries by Number of Languages Spoken
Data source: Ethnologue: Languages of the World, 15th ed. (2005)


Rank/ Country/ No. of languages spoken
1 Papua New Guinea 820
2 Indonesia 742
3 Nigeria 516
4 India 427
5 U.S.A. 311
6 Mexico 297
7 Cameroon 280
8 Australia 275
9 China 241
10 Dem. Republic of the Congo 216
11 Brazil 200
12 Philippines 180
13 Malaysia 147
14 Canada 145
15 Sudan 134
16 Chad 133
17 Russia 129
18 Tanzania 128
19 Nepal 125
20 Vanuatu 115

Balance of countries with over 50 different languages spoken

21 Myanmar 113
22 Vietnam 104
23 Côte d'Ivoire 92
24 Laos 86
25 Ethiopia 86
26 Ghana 83
27 Colombia 83
28 Thailand 83
29 Central African Republic 79
30 Pakistan 77
31 Burkina Faso 69
32 Congo 66
33 France 66
34 Kenya 64
35 Benin 55
36 Mali 54
37 Afghanistan 51

Originally Posted by pusky123

One last comment, before my rant is over. (I am calming down now). I am white Anglo Saxon, and my wife is of West African heritage. We have travelled extensively, and the only places where we have been able to walk around without being the object of excessive curiosity are Toronto and London.

The US was bad, presumably something to do with the relatively recent history of segregation. Sydney was worse. Continental Europe best not asked about, and China an absolute disgrace (I refuse to visit that country ever again on principle, and out of respect to my wife).

As anecdotal evidence only I think this gives a fair reflection of multi culturalism, diversity and tolerance.

Originally Posted by Assegai

I'll have another bash at posting this. It was deleted on page 1 because it related to the UK and not Aus. Well I see there are comparisons being made with diversity between the UK and Oz so perhaps it's not so irrelevant now.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education...hink-tank.html
Migrants from many developing nations fail to pay their way, while those from wealthy countries, such as the United States and Australia, provide a boost for the economy.

Originally Posted by lionheart

As the proud holder of a BA(Hons) Degree in International Relations, my opinion on this subject is therefore bound to be right and everyone else is wrong. London is more culturally diverse than Sydney but Australia more so than the UK, mainly because of the relatively high rural population in the UK who would run a mile at the sight of a black face. Having myself an African wife, I agree with the comment about being accepted in London, but try going to a pub in rural Wales...it's like the twilight zone. As for the UAE, yes 80% are indeed expats but 75% come from India, Pakistan and Bangladesh with most of the rest from the Philipines, UK, China and Russia. Not really a cultural diversity in my view.

Originally Posted by pgtips

Wow you dont say !!! Of course immigrants from a less privilaged background or country are going to be an initial drain on the system. They tend to be the lowest paid and get the crap jobs which no one else wants to do, so what do you expect ? Once they become established over a few years they pay their taxes just like anyone else. Just remember it is these immigrants that keep economies ticking over.