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.
That chart is completely bogus, for instance it mention that Uganda is very diverse, but here are some pictures of the three largest groups. Can you tell the difference? It is also not very diverse religiously, 85% are christian.
That chart is completely bogus, for instance it mention that Uganda is very diverse, but here are some pictures of the three largest groups. Can you tell the difference? It is also not very diverse religiously, 85% are christian.
Outside America, diversity doesn't necessarily mean racial diversity.
Outside America, diversity doesn't necessarily mean racial diversity.
I did mention religion too, and your insult towards America was unnecessary. People define diversity differently in both America and the rest of the world.
If you don't define it after race, or religion, then it becomes hard to determine. What they have done is to use official statistics, but then how diverse a country is, depends on how the government record their data.
It makes little sense to define it this way, hence the data is totally bogus.
I did mention religion too, and your insult towards America was unnecessary. People define diversity differently in both America and the rest of the world. Some look at race, some look at religion, and some look at other factors.
If you don't define it after race, then it becomes hard to determine. What they have done is to use official statistics, but then how diverse a country is, depends on how the government record their data.
It makes little sense to define it this way, hence the data is totally bogus.
I didn't insult America.
Well, if I meet a Russian and Portuguese, we are all white from a Christian background but have 3 distinct cultures. That is diversity as well.
In practice Sweden gives temporary asylum to everyone who applies. That's important, because it takes them many years to even deport obvious cases.
And their reject percentage is not 60%. Last year they rejected 19% of asylum seekers and 12% got sent to another EU country. (source) The current asylum seekers are from the "right" countries, which means they will reject fewer and since they come directly, fewer will be sent to another EU country. Hence, at least 80% will be able to stay in Sweden.
In addition, you must remember that Sweden does not have enough staff to deal with all the cases. The waiting time is already 2-3 years for current asylum seekers, and it might be 4-5 years at the end of 2016. This is just the time to process their cases, they can appeal the decision twice. It might take them 10 years to reject them, and then they can apply for asylum again.
Swedens system is on the verge of collapse. They already know that they are in trouble. It is just matter of time before they socialism system is finished. You have a bunch of people going there. Not contributing and just sitting back and collecting. Then when they can't find jobs or have no purpose, they turn to terroristm, drug selling , or worst.
Macedonia just imposed newer restrictions. They are now only allowing Syrians and Iraqi's from cities that are warzones. So if you are form Baghdad , you won't get through. If you are from Damascus , you won't get through. But if you are from Aleppo. They will let you in.
There was a nice special I watched on Youtube. There was a male refugee (with 5 children). He came to europe. Shopped around 5 countries. He went from Greece, to France, Then To Belgium, Then Germany, Then to Sweden. He finally decided to claim asylum in sweden because they pay you the most $$$$$$. Total failure of socialism.
I did mention religion too, and your insult towards America was unnecessary. People define diversity differently in both America and the rest of the world. Some look at race, some look at religion, and some look at other factors.
If you don't define it after race, or religion, then it becomes hard to determine. What they have done is to use official statistics, but then how diverse a country is, depends on how the government record their data.
It makes little sense to define it this way, hence the data is totally bogus.
If you consider his comment an insult than you are just too sensitive. Most of the world does not define diversity as it is defined in the USA what is so hard to understand.
If you consider his comment an insult than you are just too sensitive. Most of the world does not define diversity as it is defined in the USA what is so hard to understand.
No, I am not too sensitive, I am not even American.
What is insulting is that you think there is an American way of defining diversity, and there is a way the rest of the world define diversity. In reality some Americans define it like you prefer, and some define it by race. Among the rest of the world some define it like you prefer, and some define it by race.
Using US as a punching bag is insulting, especially when the statement was clearly false.
No, I am not too sensitive, I am not even American.
What is insulting is that you think there is an american way of defining diversity, and there is a way the rest of the world define diversity. In reality some Americans define it like you prefer, and some define it by race. Among Europeans some define it like you prefer, and some define it by race.
Using US as a punching bag is insulting, especially when the statement was clearly false.
As an American I did not find the statement offensive.
The USA has unique dynamics with many placing a huge emphasis on race whereas culture or social class are much more important in some other countries.
As an American I did not find the statement offensive.
Maybe because you saw it as a criticism of Republicans, while you are like the rest of the world?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AFP
The USA has unique dynamics with many placing a huge emphasis on race whereas culture or social class are much more important in some other countries.
That's not even remotely close to reality. Who do you think Europeans talk about when they criticize Muslims, bosnians or arabs/africans? And I know that in Asia, they classify people after race. If you are a white person in China, then you are a foreigner no matter what.
Maybe because you saw it as a criticism of Republicans, while you are like the rest of the world?
That's not even remotely close to reality. Who do you think Europeans talk about when they criticize Muslims, bosnians or arabs/africans? And I know that in Asia, they classify people after race. If you are a white person in China, then you are a foreigner no matter what.
1. I am not sure what you mean I don't think in those terms my thoughts don't follow in alignment with one particular party although I am a social liberal on most issues.
2. Really then how is diversity primarily classified within India, China, and the continent of Africa? There are 56 ethnic groups that are indigenous to China and my understanding is that regardless of race if you are not a member of one of those you will be seen as a foreigner regardless of your race. I think many Europeans have a dislike for Muslim ideology and don't trust these Muslim "migrants" to be near their daughters, wives, and mothers for good reason I must say.
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.
