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.
Your information (and that decade-old article from Fox News) is incorrect. "Mohammed" is not the most common name for boys in Britain. That conclusion is arrived at only when taking together all of the various spelling versions to be found in that name.
By the same token, one might say that "Lily" is the most common name for girls in Britain, but one can only reach that conclusion by taking together all of that name's various spelling versions, as well: Lilee, Lili, Lilie, Lillee, Lilley, Lilli, Lillie, and Lillye.
The reality is that the names Oliver (for boys) and Olivia (for girls) are presently the top names in Britain.
Why not consider Lily the most common name for girls of Britain then? Clearly in spite of the spelling differences that's the intention. It's the same name no matter how people spell it.
In the case of Mohammed you have the added factor that it's a name coming out of a language with a different alphabet and therefore the exact same name can simply have slightly different Anglicized versions.
Not that it's a super relevant point - the main point behind this little trivia factoid is that the Muslim presence in the UK is growing and will continue to do so. Which of course is usually brought up in a negative context, but regardless of whether one thinks of it as a good, bad or neutral thing, it's a reality either way.
EU is starting to come apart now. Once Brexit was allowed to proceed.
Other countries will start to say to themselves - this isn't a good deal anymore. Eventually the Euro will fail and the Dollar won't be reserve currency by 2030.
The reason Mohammed appears high on the list of boys names is because the Muslims call just about every one of their first born boys Mohammed! If you're not sure of a Muslim mans name my suggestion is to just call them Mohammed and there is a good chance you'll be right! Everybody else in the UK are a bit more imaginative when it comes to naming their baby boys and therefore it shows in the stats.
In pre-industrial times, a female human in Europe and elsewhere gave birth to around a dozen children, of whom maybe two or three survived into adulthood and then they in turn died, on average, around the age of 30.
In the industrial, now digital age, a female human gives birth to around 1.2 children, of whom 1.19 have a very high probability to live to around 80, maybe 84 in some European countries.
That is until industrial/digital civilization suffers a series enough setback that the cycle at least partially reverts and then at some point picks up again.
We've seen this film before.
Developments like mass in vitro fertilization, cloning, and robots could change the equation a bit as well.
In pre-industrial times, a female human in Europe and elsewhere gave birth to around a dozen children, of whom maybe two or three survived into adulthood and then they in turn died, on average, around the age of 30.
In the industrial, now digital age, a female human gives birth to around 1.2 children, of whom 1.19 have a very high probability to live to around 80, maybe 84 in some European countries.
That is until industrial/digital civilization suffers a series enough setback that the cycle at least partially reverts and then at some point picks up again.
We've seen this film before.
Developments like mass in vitro fertilization, cloning, and robots could change the equation a bit as well.
Good Luck!
Well religion also is a factor as well. An example is Quebec where it is very secular now, but in the 1950s and before the quiet revolution in the 1960s it was a highly religious society where the education, and much of society was run by the Catholic church. It was the French native speakers that were very religious catholics and contraception was taboo then. As a result the birth rates in Quebec right up to the 1950s was at least 7 or more children per woman. It was the highest birth rate in the developed world. 95% of catholics would go to church every week too. However in the 1960s when the government started to take control with the welfare and education in Quebec. It became secular. As a result the Catholic church eventually lost a lot of influence in society. With that what was taboo in the past such as contraception became widely available and abortion was forbidden, was no longer a taboo for most. Eventually the birth rates dramatically low and today the birth rates is well below replacement level. However Quebec has a extensive immigration policy since the 1960s, and before that Quebec was not a really much desired place for most immigrants to move to in Canada and instead most immigrants went to other parts of Canada like BC and cities like Toronto. Without the immigration Quebec population would really decline.
Well religion also is a factor as well. An example is Quebec where it is very secular now, but in the 1950s and before the quiet revolution in the 1960s it was a highly religious society where the education, and much of society was run by the Catholic church. It was the French native speakers that were very religious catholics and contraception was taboo then. As a result the birth rates in Quebec right up to the 1950s was at least 7 or more children per woman. It was the highest birth rate in the developed world. 95% of catholics would go to church every week too. However in the 1960s when the government started to take control with the welfare and education in Quebec. It became secular. As a result the Catholic church eventually lost a lot of influence in society. With that what was taboo in the past such as contraception became widely available and abortion was forbidden, was no longer a taboo for most. Eventually the birth rates dramatically low and today the birth rates is well below replacement level. However Quebec has a extensive immigration policy since the 1960s, and before that Quebec was not a really much desired place for most immigrants to move to in Canada and instead most immigrants went to other parts of Canada like BC and cities like Toronto. Without the immigration Quebec population would really decline.
As someone from Quebec, I agree with most of what you wrote although I think you are giving contraception too much credit.
The Quebec government didn’t just take control of education in the 1960s, it made a massive investment in it and the baby-boomer generation was a lot more likely to make it past high school. As we have seen everywhere in the world, education and economic opportunities are the big driver of birth rate declines, not so much religion although both are linked.
A Quebec-specific factor regarding religion is that Quebec’s cities developed quite a bit in the 1960s and 1970s (despite Montreal losing many Anglophones in the 1970s). What really broke the Catholic Church is this rural exodus, as the countryside was really the church’s stronghold.
Well religion also is a factor as well. An example is Quebec where it is very secular now, but in the 1950s and before the quiet revolution in the 1960s it was a highly religious society where the education, and much of society was run by the Catholic church. It was the French native speakers that were very religious catholics and contraception was taboo then. As a result the birth rates in Quebec right up to the 1950s was at least 7 or more children per woman. It was the highest birth rate in the developed world. 95% of catholics would go to church every week too. However in the 1960s when the government started to take control with the welfare and education in Quebec. It became secular. As a result the Catholic church eventually lost a lot of influence in society. With that what was taboo in the past such as contraception became widely available and abortion was forbidden, was no longer a taboo for most. Eventually the birth rates dramatically low and today the birth rates is well below replacement level. However Quebec has a extensive immigration policy since the 1960s, and before that Quebec was not a really much desired place for most immigrants to move to in Canada and instead most immigrants went to other parts of Canada like BC and cities like Toronto. Without the immigration Quebec population would really decline.
Either way, it's easier to lord over a bunch of dummies and robots than to cater to a middle class that demands rights and privileges.
My, the age of the middle class was short-lived, wasn't it.
As someone from Quebec, I agree with most of what you wrote although I think you are giving contraception too much credit.
The Quebec government didn’t just take control of education in the 1960s, it made a massive investment in it and the baby-boomer generation was a lot more likely to make it past high school. As we have seen everywhere in the world, education and economic opportunities are the big driver of birth rate declines, not so much religion although both are linked.
A Quebec-specific factor regarding religion is that Quebec’s cities developed quite a bit in the 1960s and 1970s (despite Montreal losing many Anglophones in the 1970s). What really broke the Catholic Church is this rural exodus, as the countryside was really the church’s stronghold.
Well it does not surprise me that the country side was the church strong hold. It the same with Ireland as well. Actually it the same as what Europe was where there was a time where a large majority of people lived outside the cities and the main social aspect place in the country towns was the church.
Of course I could imagine the cities in Quebec were more secular during the 1950s, and it was the Anglophones tended to be less religious and dominated the economy. It was like that in South Africa too and the Anglophones were less religious than the Africanners. The largely rural Southern States of the USA more religious than other parts of the USA.
Well religion also is a factor as well. An example is Quebec where it is very secular now, but in the 1950s and before the quiet revolution in the 1960s it was a highly religious society where the education, and much of society was run by the Catholic church. It was the French native speakers that were very religious catholics and contraception was taboo then. As a result the birth rates in Quebec right up to the 1950s was at least 7 or more children per woman. It was the highest birth rate in the developed world.
In the three generations before me there were seven children in each family. My wife and I had seven children. Of my seven (none of which are presently living) only two had seven, the others had three each.
What really broke the Catholic Church is this rural exodus, as the countryside was really the church’s stronghold.
What broke the Church was Vatican II. That was the death knell for Rome
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.
