U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > World
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
 
Old 04-22-2013, 09:51 PM
 
2,253 posts, read 3,069,980 times
Reputation: 972

Advertisements

A decade ago I'm pretty sure that NYC was well ahead of London, and I'm sure it still is. But it looks like London has gained in a relative sense, and has become a lot more diverse in the last decade. It was 37% foreign-born in 2011, up from 27% in 2001. Now "white British" are a minority - 45% and the city is now 40% nonwhite, up from 28% a decade ago.

One difference with the British census is there isn't an ancestry question like there is in the US and Canada- so a fourth-generation Londoner of Eastern European Jewish descent marks "British" on the census while someone with the same background in New York would likely write "Polish" or "Russian" (Statistics Canada includes "Jewish" an ancestry group). Obviously the white population in London is much more long-line British/Irish than is the case in NYC, but still the British census data doesn't do as good a job capturing diversity given that they merge ancestry and race (White British, White Irish, White Other, Black African, Black Caribbean, etc.) while the US and Canada do both.

Toronto is in the top tier, and L.A. deserves an honorable mention as well, particularly if you look at L.A. County rather than just the city. While the immigrant population is heavily Mexican/Salvadoran/Guatemalan, it also has very large Asian populations (including Chinese and the largest Korean and Filipino communities in North America) as well as the largest Iranian and Armenian populations in North America.

(* No foreign born % alone doesn't determine diversity...otherwise Miami would be more "diverse" than NYC!)
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-22-2013, 10:02 PM
 
Location: Miami, Florida
320 posts, read 527,954 times
Reputation: 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by King of Kensington View Post
A decade ago I'm pretty sure that NYC was well ahead of London, and I'm sure it still is. But it looks like London has gained in a relative sense, and has become a lot more diverse in the last decade. It was 37% foreign-born in 2011, up from 27% in 2001. Now "white British" are a minority - 45% and the city is now 40% nonwhite, up from 28% a decade ago.

One difference with the British census is there isn't an ancestry question like there is in the US and Canada- so a fourth-generation Londoner of Eastern European Jewish descent marks "British" on the census while someone with the same background in New York would likely write "Polish" or "Russian" (Statistics Canada includes "Jewish" an ancestry group). Obviously the white population in London is much more long-line British/Irish than is the case in NYC, but still the British census data doesn't do as good a job capturing diversity given that they merge ancestry and race (White British, White Irish, White Other, Black African, Black Caribbean, etc.) while the US and Canada do both.

Toronto is in the top tier, and L.A. deserves an honorable mention as well, particularly if you look at L.A. County rather than just the city. While the immigrant population is heavily Mexican/Salvadoran/Guatemalan, it also has very large Asian populations (including Chinese and the largest Korean and Filipino communities in North America) as well as the largest Iranian and Armenian populations in North America.

(* No foreign born % alone doesn't determine diversity...otherwise Miami would be more "diverse" than NYC!)
White British?

White Irish?

British are not "white". White is a term created in the USA to group together people from north Africa, middle east, and Europe.

British are British period, they are light skinned, and very different from a standard "white" from the USA.

Irish are Irish period.

White isn't a race. Shape of head, blood type, height, hair color, etc are very different among North Africans, Jews, and Europeans.

Apples, bananas, and lemons..
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2013, 10:48 PM
 
2,253 posts, read 3,069,980 times
Reputation: 972
People of Irish ancestry are certainly the most undercounted group in the UK!
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-23-2013, 01:31 PM
 
2,253 posts, read 3,069,980 times
Reputation: 972
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex =] View Post
British are British period, they are light skinned, and very different from a standard "white" from the USA.
"British" is not a race or an ethnic group. And how are "British" so different from a "standard white Americans the majority of whom are of Northwest European ancestry?

Yes, it's true these categories are more social than scientific.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-23-2013, 03:13 PM
 
Location: Chicago(Northside)
3,719 posts, read 6,448,071 times
Reputation: 1687
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex =] View Post
White British?

White Irish?

British are not "white". White is a term created in the USA to group together people from north Africa, middle east, and Europe.

British are British period, they are light skinned, and very different from a standard "white" from the USA.

Irish are Irish period.

White isn't a race. Shape of head, blood type, height, hair color, etc are very different among North Africans, Jews, and Europeans.

Apples, bananas, and lemons..
As much as you want to blame this on americans you cant because the OP is from canada anyway listen BRITISH ARE WHITE.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-23-2013, 03:15 PM
 
Location: Chicago(Northside)
3,719 posts, read 6,448,071 times
Reputation: 1687
My vote goes to new york for the amount of immigrants and Toronto for percentage.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-23-2013, 06:04 PM
 
2,253 posts, read 3,069,980 times
Reputation: 972
Some NYC/London comparisons:

Foreign-born: 3,042,315 in NYC (37.2%); 2,998,264 (36.7%) in London

Caribbean population:

- 603,964 West Indian origin in NYC (7.4%), including 215,294 Jamaicans (2.6%), 128,422 Haitians (1.6%) and 81,080 Trinidadians (1%).

- 344,597 "Black Caribbean" in London (4.2%), mostly of Jamaican origin.

African population:

- 160,517 of Subsaharan African ancestry (2.0%) and 89,932 Subsaharan African-born (1.1%) in NYC, Ghanaians are the largest group.

- 573,931 "Black African" in London (7.0%); 114,718 born in Nigeria (1.4%), 65,333 in Somalia (0.8%) and 62,896 in Ghana (0.8%)

South Asian population:

- 296,992 (3.6%) in NYC including 192,209 Indians (2.3%), 53,174 Bangladeshis (0.7%) and 41,887 Pakistanis (0.5%).

- 542,857 Indians (6.6%), 223,797 Pakistanis and 222,127 Bangladeshis (2.7%) each. There are also 84,542 born in Sri Lanka (1%); Sri Lankans are lumped with "Asian other".

Chinese population:

486,463 Chinese (6%) in NYC, 124,250 (1.5%) in London

There are no hard numbers for Hispanics or Latin Americans in London, obviously it is a small population compared to the large and diverse Hispanic population in NYC of 2.5 million. European ethnic groups are also hard to directly compare given the lack of an ancestry question in the UK.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-23-2013, 06:41 PM
Status: "Wishing all the best of health!" (set 12 days ago)
 
35,991 posts, read 36,244,058 times
Reputation: 16844
NYC and London are two of the most diverse cities in the world. But there are others such as L.A. Even Shanghai in China is relatively diverse.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-23-2013, 08:37 PM
 
Location: Chicago(Northside)
3,719 posts, read 6,448,071 times
Reputation: 1687
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chava61 View Post
NYC and London are two of the most diverse cities in the world. But there are others such as L.A. Even Shanghai in China is relatively diverse.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-23-2013, 10:10 PM
 
1,257 posts, read 3,267,946 times
Reputation: 1345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chava61 View Post
NYC and London are two of the most diverse cities in the world. But there are others such as L.A. Even Shanghai in China is relatively diverse.
Shanghai relatively diverse. Relative to where? Tokyo?
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
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 update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > World

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top