|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Nov 14, 2023 10:55:33 GMT
We have more than enough threads on the Izzy-Pally imbroglio on the go at the moment, I don't want this to turn into another one.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Nov 14, 2023 12:06:01 GMT
OK, back on topic, let’s return to Coleman and his projection. This was originally published in 2010 as Projections of the Ethnic Minority populations of the United Kingdom 2006- 2056 in the journal Population and Development Review Vol. 36, 3, 441 – 486, 2010. We need to turn attention back to the graphic in the original post and, in particular the red line on it. This represents Coleman’s ‘standard’ projection, so how did that come about? It turns that he uses the same assumptions for aggregate fertility, overall net migration and mortality for each of twelve ethnic groups as set out in the ONS 2008-based Principal Projection of population which covered the period 2006 to 2108. The baseline assumptions were as follows: - Net migration: 180,000 annually - Total fertility rate (national): 1.83 - Mortality*: Age-standardised rates for England and Wales *Coleman notes that despite high mortality in most of the countries of origin, the death rates of immigrants born in the New Commonwealth and other non-Western countries are little different from the general population. The overall projected outcome is given in Table 6 of the paper:  The impact of the trends projected by the ONS, and amplified by Coleman are clear to see. While the White British population is set to decline by almost 9 million over the 50 years from 2006, the ‘Other’ population – both Other White and non-white – is projected to increase by 26.4 million over the same period. Next: How did the ONS/Coleman assumptions compare to what has actually happened since 2006? |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Nov 14, 2023 12:37:56 GMT
However much you want to avoid the question, Dan, this subject is about "white british" and hence you have to define what you wish to include in each category.
So in my partners case, her mother was a war time refugee from East Prussia which may or may not mean that my children should rightly "self-identify" as other white. If they should be defined as "other white", you seem to regard that as a negative for society compared to were they to be "white british". It is a simple question. Please could you explain why?
My children currently have respectively partners of a) antipodean, b) indian and a c) mixed irish/west indian ancestry. Presumably if they have children, those children would be categorised as a) other white and the other two "mixed". Alternatively one or more of those relationships could end and a future partner may be of white english ancestry in which case perhaps their children would be rightly categorised as "white english". Again you seem to be of the opinion that the latter is preferable to the former. Please could you explain why?
|
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 14, 2023 14:16:35 GMT
I thought we might land on the 'Cock-up or Conspiracy' debate a little later during the proceedings, but I'm a little baffled by the proposition that demographic transformation is an OK sort of thing if enough of the population being replaced say it's their choice but not if it's imposed on them. I will try and be clearer. If I choose to have children with a person from a different ethnic group that is my decision and my decision alone, it should not be interfered with or deprecated in any way. The same goes for any number of people making that choice in any location of their own free will with no pressure either for or against. The complication arises in a democracy if the majority of the population clearly say they are happy with large levels of immigration then it would seem reasonable to say that is OK. However we know they have not said that at any time and in fact have repeatedly indicated that the opposite is their clear preference. So there is no democratic mandate. 'Replacement' is a loaded word and implies a deliberate policy. If replacement is a natural event then it smacks of Eugenics to try and stop it. So it is a difficult question as regards what is natural and what is a deliberate policy. I currently err on the side of it being cock up and conspiracy working in tandem sometimes with unintended consequences of some people trying to do the right thing and things not working as intended for those with different design. I hope that does not sound like fence sitting. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 14, 2023 14:17:24 GMT
I suppose the big question is does it matter? To my mind I think it does not really matter if it is a natural event and is occurring by the choice of all those involved. However it is clearly not a natural event, it has happened despite almost every government and potential government in the last 60 years saying they would not let it happen through policies and yet the policies adopted did the opposite of what they said they were going to do. So it is either gross incompetence on a criminal level or deliberate. of course it matters - at every election people say they dont want it. There is no choice except by those who do not believe in Democracy. I think I said that. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 14, 2023 14:29:46 GMT
Its hardly a red herring Dan. If you wish me to be outraged at the decline of "white britishness" you have to define what you mean by "white britishness". My kids are white skinned but ethnically 25% German through their grandmother - a wartime refugee from East Prussia. If they stay with their existing partners, as I very much hope they do and choose to have kids, there will be indian, west indian, irish and antipodean parental blood. Presumably those kids would therefore not count as "white British" for your statistics. If one or more of those relationships do not survive, perhaps their next partners might have "white British" ancestry and their kids might therefore qualify in the "white british" column. Could you explain to me why you feel that categorisation matters in respect of my kids kids. It is after all at the very centre of the question you have posed in this thread. If one of your issue was discriminated against because of race in British law you would have to categorise both the discriminator and the victim into some form of ethnic or National origin bracket to have a case. How would you do it? If one of your issue is seeking employment then their chances depend on how others see them and on how they self select their identity. These are the actualities the race laws throw up. Everyone has to be something at some point. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Nov 14, 2023 14:41:05 GMT
Considering then each of the three assumptions in turn, what has been the actual outcome to date for each?: 1. Net migration, assumed to be 180000 annually for the entire 50-year period. It’s unclear why the ONS arrived at such a conclusion since by 2006 net migration was already well in excess of this figure. The data on the Oxford Migration Observatory website show that the only year in which net migration was lower than 180,000 was 2020, when the Covid pandemic brought an almost complete stop to immigration and net migration fell to 89,000. Over the period from 2006, net migration averaged 296,000 per year, obviously well above the assumed level and peaking (so far) at 606,000 in 2022. 2. Total fertility, assumed to be 1.84. Ostensibly there is good news here, since by 2021 the national TFR had declined to 1.53, its lowest level since 2002 when it was 1.63 (see here). This does not however tell us the TFR for each ethnic group, nor the extent to which the plunge in birthrate for White British women obscures the still above-replacement level birthrate of other ethnic groups. Official statistics are extremely sparse in this area but what we do know is that only 60% of live births in 2021 were White British. As this link shows, in 2021 there were a total of 624,162 births in England and Wales, of which 367,375 (58.8%) were recorded as being of White British ethnicity. I think we can take this assumption as still valid. 3. Mortality: Recent statistical data derived from the census by the ONS shows a mixed picture here. “…The ASMR for all-cause mortality was higher for the White British population than for other ethnic groups; the White British group also had higher mortality rates than most ethnic minority groups for several types of cancers, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and dementia.” See the table with ASMR per 100,000 at the link. This confirms that there is no reason to suppose that mortality rates among ethnic minorities are the result of ‘excess’ deaths compared to the White British population. This assumption can therefore also be said to hold good. Since the predominant variable in population growth is immigration, changes in net migration, relative TFR and mortality from 2006 to the present provide no cause to nullify the ONS assumptions or Coleman’s conclusions derived from them. In a nutshell, every statistical trend is worse or, at best no better, than the assumptions used in 2008 called for. Next: 2066? |
|
|
|
Post by piglet on Nov 14, 2023 15:16:45 GMT
Its not about colour but culture, the white bit assumes christianity, democracy and fair play, which is Britains culture. I lived in the Birmingham area for 30 years, Sparkhill, sparkbrook, Small Heath, central Birmingham is not culturally British. Certainly in Sparkhill where i worked, the abuse of females was widespread, i worked in the centre there.
Needless to say those areas are black, and are culturally different. The government are flooding Britain with immigrants, it wants to see the numbers climb to out number the British, that will change everything.
This is sold to you as benefit to society. British culture is second class in its own country and is labelled racist, every other culture is elevated above it, look at the Muslims, the British were kettled and controlled, not the hate marchers.
Someone is going to say it was the British at fault, not the Muslims, this is how it works.
|
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Nov 14, 2023 16:13:27 GMT
It seems Dan is determined to ignore questions relevant to the topic.
I'll leave other readers to draw their own conclusions as to why......
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Nov 14, 2023 17:03:48 GMT
Astute readers will have noticed that Coleman’s paper includes no mention of 2066 as the date by which the native population is likely to have surrendered its majority status; in fact his projection ends at 2056 with the White British population still a majority at 56% of the total.
Time then to introduce another source. This is an article that Coleman published in Prospect Magazine in November 2010: When Britain becomes “majority minority”, subtitled ‘If current trends continue, white Britons will be in a minority in the UK in little more than 50 years – within the lifespan of most young adults alive today’.
Both much shorter and more easily readable, the Prospect article is intended to be accessible by a general audience, rather than an academic one. Additionally, it was soon picked up by most of the national press, whose reporting ranged from denunciatory (the Independent and Guardian) to the alarmist (Mail and Telegraph). It is from such reports that the date of 2066 received its notoriety, stemming from Coleman’s introduction of it:
“…In the first, “standard” projection, overall net immigration is kept to the long-term level (180,000 per year) assumed in the ONS principal projection. … On those assumptions the “white British” population would decline to 45m (59 per cent of the total) by 2051, the “other white” would increase to 7m (10 per cent) and the non-white populations to 24m (31 per cent). Were the assumptions to hold, the “white British” population of Britain would become the minority after about 2066.”
For context he adds:
“The US, by comparison, is now about 65 per cent white (non-Hispanic) and that group is projected to fall to 50 per cent by 2045.”
But is even that, 2066, too optimistic? Let’s review some current trends next.
|
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 14, 2023 17:11:31 GMT
It seems Dan is determined to ignore questions relevant to the topic. I'll leave other readers to draw their own conclusions as to why...... As are you? |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Nov 14, 2023 18:10:28 GMT
of course it matters - at every election people say they dont want it. There is no choice except by those who do not believe in Democracy. I think I said that. apologies - I didn't pick up on the overall gist of the comment.  |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 14, 2023 19:20:14 GMT
apologies - I didn't pick up on the overall gist of the comment. No probs. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Nov 15, 2023 12:47:45 GMT
Anyway, on with the show. One of the challenges in working with population statistics in the UK is that the PTB frequently and unilaterally change how people are counted and classified, often from census to census and even in-between (cif the ONS 'experimental' statistics that are being used to measure net migration currently).
The category of 'White British' was only introduced in 2001, prior to which only 'Whites' were counted. This continued for 2011 but then in 2021 (2022 in Scotland) the Micks and the Snats buggered it all up by omitting the option to identify as 'White British', no doubt for parochial political reasons.
But anyway, with a little reverse engineering and intelligent extrapolation it is still feasible to come up with reasonably accurate UK totals for 'White British' for the three census years covering the period 2001 to 2021.
Over this period, the total UK population increased by 8.1 million from 58.8 million in 2001 to 66.9 million in 2021. Over the same period, the White British population declined by around a million to 51.2 million, while the non White British (i.e. White Other and BME) population more than doubled, from 6.8 million to 15.7 million.
Extending these trends over the timeframe of Coleman's projection, how they fit the curve?
Taking the total population first, the increase of 8.1 million represents a cagr of 0.065% p.a. over the twenty years. If we extend that out to 2066 (Coleman’s ‘Year Zero) results in a total UK population of 84 million, compared to the projected 78 million for 2056. If the recent growth trend continues the population will reach 78 million in 2045, just over 20 years from now.
The White British population has been declining at the rate of around 0.1% annually, or around 1% perdecade since it stabilised in the early eighties. Coleman has that rate increasing to 0.37% annually from 2006, to reflect the plunging native birthrateand increasing emigration'
The non White-British population’s increase of 8.9 million between 2001 and 2021 represents an annual growth rate of 3% over the twenty years. Extending this growth trend over the period of Coleman’s projection sends the non White British total into the stratosphere which is clearly unrealistic. Coleman accepts that net immigration will be capped at the ONS assumed 180,000 p.a. and that ethnic fertility rates will trend down towards (but not below) the native rate (see Table 6 earlier). However if we impute a constant annual growth in the ethnic population of say 5-600,000 fuelled by historical rates of net migration as well as continuing differentials in TFR, it is quite feasible that the White British population will become a minority well before 2066. Especially so if Coleman’s projection of an increasing rate of decline in the White British population comes to pass. It’s hard to envisage any set of circumstances that would preclude happening that given the historically unprecedented low birthrate (currently 1.53 nationally, with the native rate well below that).
All things considered, and given current trends it’s hard to see Coleman’s projected date of 2066 as anything but hopelessly optimistic at this point. Should present trends continue, rather than the quite conservative trends he and the ONS assumed would be the case, then we could be looking at the Great Day happening in the 2050s rather than the 2060s.
We’ll take a look at schools next and hopefully that might provide a brighter picture.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Nov 15, 2023 17:57:50 GMT
Before schools though I wish to raise another: devolution and independence. One of the reasons it is so difficult to find accurate and consistent population statistics in the UK is because the collection and publication of such statistics has very foolishly been made a devolved matter, as mentioned earlier wrt the 2021 census.
The same applies to a simple question such as how many children of foreign descent are being educated in British schools. In order to answer this you have to navigate the labyrinthine thicket of at least four government websites, one in England and three in the devolved administrations.
It’s an impossible task and one that I won’t taking up. Instead the upcoming discussion on the ethnic composition of school population will focus only on England.
Which brings up another point wrt to Coleman’s projections. In 2010 he was analysing the demographic propsects for the United Kingdom; a decade or so later this seems an inappropriate if not a forlorn task.
The strong probability is that within the timescale he was contemplating both Scotland and Northern Ireland will have exited the Union and the six million or so White British counted by Coleman for his projections will now have to be called something else. At least they will no longer figure in Coleman's or anyone ese's demographic number-crunching. That’s around 12% of the 50 million or so White British (in 2023) ‘gone for a Burton’, and the remaining White British population in England and (perhaps) Wales will be correspondingly smaller in comparison to the ‘ethnic’ population.
That will have the effect of bringing the Great Day even closer.
Schools (English ones) next.
|
|
