Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Except a lot of Britain's actually end up coming back.
The number of Britons in Australia is actually increasing and that ratio is extremely lopsided.
Quote:
In terms of homicides, the UK has a low rate and I don't see that as a defining factor, and in terms of average salary and average wage, such figures have been hit due to the fall in the pound in the last few years since the Brexit vote, and it will last for a while yet as we try to negotiate with the EU, as markets don't like uncertainty. Trying to measure by currency exchange at a time of economic instability in the UK is not really that reflective or accurate.
UK's homicide rate is near the high end amongst first world countries, and in terms of purchasing power (which isn't affected by currency performance), the UK's figure is a notch below Australia's and is only higher than Italy and Spain in Western Europe.
I'm not saying that the UK is hell. It's still a first world country. The thing is that Australia has been and is doing even better.
Although Ireland is not an Anglo country in the ethnic sense, neither is Scotland, Wales or Cornwall for that matter. Frisians and Jutes were also part of the Anglo-Saxon wave in settling in Britain.
Therefore we should be including modern day Ireland and to a lesser extent South Africa due to the heavy Anglo-Dutch presence in said country.
Although Ireland is not an Anglo country in the ethnic sense, neither is Scotland, Wales or Cornwall for that matter. Frisians and Jutes were also part of the Anglo-Saxon wave in settling in Britain.
Therefore we should be including modern day Ireland and to a lesser extent South Africa due to the heavy Anglo-Dutch presence in said country.
Australia and Canada have never been essentially Anglo in an ethnic sense either.
Well the settlers would've been a mix of UK's lineage i.e. Britons, Anglo-Saxons and some Viking and in the case of Canada together with some Franks. So yes at the point Canada became known as Canada and Australia became known as Australia, the main population base and founders of the modern day nations we know today were indeed from these isles.
Then came the Greeks, Jews, Italians, Portuguese followed by other territories of the British Empire, Asians, etc.
I remembered in the 1970s, when I browsed the British newspaper there were similar polls. By then the choices were: U.S., Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and Rhodesia. So the choices have been dwindling over time.
Never been to Australia and New Zealand. But have been to UK three times and traveled to Canada extensively.
Other than Montreal, Quebec is out of consideration for English speakers. For example, many residents in Quebec City can hardly speak any English, even the younger generation. It is no different from traveling to France. I got a parking ticket and it is all written in French.
And many big cities like Toronto are frigidly cold in Canada. Temperature can be down to -25 degrees F. Some years ago they even had a citywide week long blackout in Winter.
Of course, Vancouver is even warmer than many U.S. cities. But housing is very expensive. In general Canadians are very nice and you have much less chance to die in gun violence as in U.S.
I have a sibling who lives in the suburb of London. There is a manicured garden where roses bloom in late Fall. Unlike in U.S. suburbs where you may expect coyotes come by, she got foxes frequenting her garden every evening.
England's summer weather is actually fantastic. Ranged between 60s -- 70s.
The number of Britons in Australia is actually increasing and that ratio is extremely lopsided.
The total number is actually going down, though if that is due to brits returning or deaths i am not sure. A lot thoes immigrants from the UK came after WW2, and are now getting very old, the average age of British/Australians is now about 60.
Well the settlers would've been a mix of UK's lineage i.e. Britons, Anglo-Saxons and some Viking and in the case of Canada together with some Franks. So yes at the point Canada became known as Canada and Australia became known as Australia, the main population base and founders of the modern day nations we know today were indeed from these isles.
Then came the Greeks, Jews, Italians, Portuguese followed by other territories of the British Empire, Asians, etc.
In Australia the Irish, particularly Celtic southern Irish Catholics, were a very large part of the population from the earliest days of European settlement. Even back on the 1860s a sizeable proportion of immigrants were neither Anglo or Celtic Irish.
Anglo countries and Anglophone nations are different. The latter includes countries that adopt English as an official language. Many Commonwealth countries, i.e. Singapore, are Anglophone.
In Australia the Irish, particularly Celtic southern Irish Catholics, were a very large part of the population from the earliest days of European settlement. Even back on the 1860s a sizeable proportion of immigrants were neither Anglo or Celtic Irish.
Just because a "sizable" portion of European settlers accompanied the Brit-Irish lead settlement does not negate the founding peoples of the modern day nation. Also ethnically a Celtic Irish is no different to a Celtic Briton.
Same can be said about Latin America, plenty of Italian, German, Jews, Middle Eastern accompanied the early settlers but in no doubt Spain and Portugal were the main settlers and that's even with Native Americans far outnumbering Aboriginal Australians and the huge black populations, remnants of the Atlantic slave trade.
Just because a "sizable" portion of European settlers accompanied the Brit-Irish lead settlement does not negate the founding peoples of the modern day nation. Also ethnically a Celtic Irish is no different to a Celtic Briton.
Same can be said about Latin America, plenty of Italian, German, Jews, Middle Eastern accompanied the early settlers but in no doubt Spain and Portugal were the main settlers and that's even with Native Americans far outnumbering Aboriginal Australians and the huge black populations, remnants of the Atlantic slave trade.
As a proportion of the total population, native Americans don’t significantly outnumber indigenous Australians. And culturally and in terms of political leanings, Irish Celts were quite distinct from Anglo UK, and even the Scots and Welsh. In the 1860s more than a quarter of immigrants were neither Britis or Irish. But it’s the different cultural and ethnic mixes in each country that are partly responsible for their current cultural differences, which at times can be quite significant.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
