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.
You name the country, Canada has people from there...
walk around Toronto ....your mind will be blown
Way more diverse than NI will ever be.
USA is diverse ...no doubt on that but I think it is a little over stated,
310 million...includes about 45 million African Americans with distant link
to west Africa....and about 35 million Hispanics....mostly from Mexico,
some that have been in USA for centuries (like in New Mexico).
Canada still has an image of being mixture of mainly people from
Great Britain, France, and First Nations.
Maybe 50 or 60 years ago....not now.
You mean about 62 million Hispanics? There are 35 million Mexican-Americans. It isn't "overstated", it's a fact.
Yea, there’s no perfect fit, but Minneapolis is a pretty bad fit for a Montreal comparison. Canadian cities have some differences from US cities of similar size due to different land use policies and a far less pervasive inner city freeway construction and urban renewal efforts in the 20th century. At least Philadelphia was able to retain a significant amount of its dense pre-auto urban core which is what makes it a more fitting comparison to Montreal even though Montreal is obviously not going to be the same as it’s in Quebec. If we’re to prioritize the attributes you’ve mentioned for Minneapolis, then US cities in general would not make for the best comparisons.
Most Canadian cities developed during the automobile era, after the development of many, many American cities. They have less cities of every size with a "pre-auto" urban core than the US does. America has more railroad suburbs and more classically walkable "old" city environments than Canada does.
Again, I'm sure you know, not ever American city is Houston, Phoenix, or Minneapolis, for that matter.
Without trying to get too involved in this I just think it's interesting to note that the British Isles have been a place of immigration since before the Romans. When people talk of diversity they seem to think it only counts over the last couple of hundred years which is nothing in the history of British immigration. Just saying really.
The British population is genetically quite homogeneous, and some thousand year old, broken down ethnic classifications that are no longer recognized don't make Britain diverse.
Just out of interest are Americans generally taught about the chinese exclusion act or the 1921 immigrantion act? It just seems sometimes you get these messages about free immigration, land of the free etc quite a lot, when for the best part of almost 100 years it was far from the case.
Our own immigration restriction act is taught to us as a source of national shame, very few aussies would not know about it.
We didn't have as restrictive anti-immigration as Australia did, you arrogant, ignorant Australian.
It is not up to an Australian to tell us anti-American propaganda. It is not up to you to tell us what our country has been like for "the best part of 100 years".
That’s not quite true. Australia and New Zealand having smaller populations had a lot more to do with the relative difficulty of getting from Europe to there in the days before ubiquitous air travel as even in the age of steamships and with a Suez Canal in place it was a really rough trip compared to crossing the Atlantic. In Australia’s case, it was also a relatively unproductive hinterlands and limited water resources. For Canada, there was also a climate that not too many were particularly in love with going towards when there was the US to the south plus Canada never had a robust slave trade and plantation culture. These aren’t exactly immigration policy differences though they all, save for Singapore, were like the US in that they had restrictive immigration policies for anywhere outside of Europe up until the latter half of the 20th century.
That being said, these countries have opened up for immigration quite a bit and there are a lot of first and second generation immigrants in those countries which means they retain quite a bit of cultural and potentially linguistically distinct features while Canada also has immigration from the Francophonie and New Zealand and Singapore retain a very significant native population who have settled there well before later colonization. They all have larger percentages of foreign-born populations today than the US has and that’s not just something that only happened in recent history.
That being said, I can see the argument for the US being well made on an absolute numbers basis.
They have larger apparent "% foreign born" because they all have smaller populations. And no, they don't have much smaller populations than the US because "their climates", or whatever excuse you're trying to make. They have them because they had more restrictive immigration policies for much longer. You people constantly try to make out that there's nothing that the US does better than any country. It's just a complete failure of a nation that does everything horribly, and yet somehow, it's always received way more immigration than the commonwealth countries combined, and an Irish/New Zealand/Canadian/British/Australian citizen is 4x more likely to move to the US than an American is to move to any of these countries. Why is that? Because the US is a third world hellhole that surely isn't at all exceptional, in fact, quite inferior?
We didn't have as restrictive anti-immigration as Australia did, you arrogant, ignorant Australian.
It is not up to an Australian to tell us anti-American propaganda. It is not up to you to tell us what our country has been like for "the best part of 100 years".
Most Canadian cities developed during the automobile era, after the development of many, many American cities. They have less cities of every size with a "pre-auto" urban core than the US does. America has more railroad suburbs and more classically walkable "old" city environments than Canada does.
Again, I'm sure you know, not ever American city is Houston, Phoenix, or Minneapolis, for that matter.
You apparently didn't even bother to read the post you're quoting. No one said that there weren't many even most Canadian cities being developed during the automobile era. What was said was that "Canadian cities have some differences from US cities of similar size due to different land use policies and a far less pervasive inner city freeway construction and urban renewal efforts in the 20th century"
Where did you get that there were "less" cities of every size with a pre-auto core being the argument here? You're so set on being neurotic about anything remotely approaching critical of the US that you seem to just have such an unthinking knee-jerk reaction that it renders you functionally illiterate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by groundout
They have larger apparent "% foreign born" because they all have smaller populations. And no, they don't have much smaller populations than the US because "their climates", or whatever excuse you're trying to make. They have them because they had more restrictive immigration policies for much longer. You people constantly try to make out that there's nothing that the US does better than any country. It's just a complete failure of a nation that does everything horribly, and yet somehow, it's always received way more immigration than the commonwealth countries combined, and an Irish/New Zealand/Canadian/British/Australian citizen is 4x more likely to move to the US than an American is to move to any of these countries. Why is that? Because the US is a third world hellhole that surely isn't at all exceptional, in fact, quite inferior?
Who is you people? I'm pretty into the US as I live in the US even as I had and still have options of moving out. What is wrong with you exactly?
Also, yea, % is based on proportions rather than absolute amounts. That's the point of percentages--that's how they work. That's what they're intended to do.
Canada by Far, if you mean by ethnic diversity and amount of FOBs, also the fact that it has 2 official languages largely spoken.
Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal are extremely Diverse.
US diversity relies mostly of older wages of Immigration, post 9/11 it has been mostly mexicans (and central americans through mexico) crossing the border.
The US, then Canada, then Australia, then UK, then New Zealand.
Ireland is not part of the Anglosphere.
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.
