I think we can trust the Daily Mail this time, but I'm not sure we can trust John Cleese! Even in my day King's Road was pretty cosmopolitan.

But, relying as I do on secondhand and third-hand information, I do think that we let too many immigrants in. How come we got all the Asians, and Australia got all the Middle Europeans? I'm not being racist.... but they do blend in better. Now when you see Bernie Tomic being interviewed, you think he's an Australian.

Australia never had colonies. Australia was a colony.

And in the spirit of the topic, around 10% of Dubai's population is Emirati. What percentage of London is Brit or English?

According to wiki about 70% of the population of London is white (which includes Irish). But there again, as was pooh-poohed before, London isn't England. It's not typical of the rest of the country.

Edit - of course the fact that some of the population isn't white doesn't mean they're not British or English. Or is that not what you meant?

And in the spirit of the topic, around 10% of Dubai's population is Emirati. What percentage of London is Brit or English?

According to wiki about 70% of the population of London is white (which includes Irish). But there again, as was pooh-poohed before, London isn't England. It's not typical of the rest of the country.

Edit - of course the fact that some of the population isn't white doesn't mean they're not British or English. Or is that not what you meant?

What I meant was that even if it were true that 100% of the population of Dubai lived in Dubai (the country is the United Arab Emirates of which Dubai is one of 7 emirates, all seven of which Naam included on his list individually), the local Emirati population is greatly outnumbered by foreigners. NOT immigrants-citizens, but non-citizen foreigners. How many places on the planet does that happen?

90% of the population of England DON'T live in London.

What on earth has that got to do with it. Tell me of anywhere that 100% of the population live in one city. Of course 90% of the population don't live in London, it would be a tad crowded if everyone did wouldn't it.

Singapore?

some of them 100%, most of them 90%:

Vatican

Liechtenstein

San Marino

Andorra

Dubai

Abu Dhabi

Bahrein

Sharjah

R'as al-Khaimah

Grenada

Ajman

Fujairah

Umm al-Quwain

sorry Mr Bo... i know this is not fair but i could not resist :jap:

It took you over a month to come up with that Naam. And no, it isn't a fair comparison e.g. Dubai, as in Koheesti's post above.

OK. The new rule is, the country can't be the same name as the main city

(the country is the United Arab Emirates of which Dubai is one of 7 emirates, all seven of which Naam included on his list individually)

this "country" does exist only on paper. different rulers with different interests are evidence for my claim. Dubai's national debt is not shouldered by Sharjah. the laws in Fujairah are different from those in Abu Dhabi, etc., etc., etc...

(the country is the United Arab Emirates of which Dubai is one of 7 emirates, all seven of which Naam included on his list individually)

this "country" does exist only on paper. different rulers with different interests are evidence for my claim. Dubai's national debt is not shouldered by Sharjah. the laws in Fujairah are different from those in Abu Dhabi, etc., etc., etc...

In any case, the population of each emirate does not reside in one city. In fact, if you have ever driven from Dubai to Fujairah on the coast at the Arabian Sea you would see small enclaves of various Emirates scattered around, sometimes one inside another. So to claim that 100% all live in one city would be inaccurate and that long list above just got cut in half.

This will give you some idea...

the laws in Fujairah are different from those in Abu Dhabi, etc., etc., etc...

But aren't there also different laws within the USA ?

How long is a piece of string?

That is what this topic reminds me of. The world is changing. So what, accept it. Very little is the same as it was 20 years ago... or even 10 years ago. John Cleese was right when he said that London is no longer an English city. So what? If he is complaining then he would be a hypocrite because he is now living in the USA. I don't have much time for hypocrites.

I take his point to mean less about demographics and more about Englishness in general. I mean I've seen people walking around with their shirt tails hanging out.

Surely that's not right?

I take his point to mean less about demographics and more about Englishness in general. I mean I've seen people walking around with their shirt tails hanging out.

Surely that's not right?

Depends whether you're in the Paki Palace just off Leicester Square or down the road shopping in Fortnum & Mason's.

I take his point to mean less about demographics and more about Englishness in general. I mean I've seen people walking around with their shirt tails hanging out.

Surely that's not right?

Depends whether you're in the Paki Palace just off Leicester Square or down the road shopping in Fortnum & Mason's.

Not enough gentlemen around nowadays.....why I see people wandering around in the evening without jackets on!

Where do they keep their handkerchiefs then??

Edit: Don't get me started on the ladies now will you....

New Amsterdam got so full of Brits theyhad to change the name to New York.

New Amsterdam got so full of Brits theyhad to change the name to New York.

Sorry whenever I hear that word my eyes glaze over and I crave some falafel or bitterballen....

How long is a piece of string?

That is what this topic reminds me of. The world is changing. So what, accept it. Very little is the same as it was 20 years ago... or even 10 years ago. John Cleese was right when he said that London is no longer an English city. So what? If he is complaining then he would be a hypocrite because he is now living in the USA. I don't have much time for hypocrites.

London was never English anyway. Its been all micks since as long as I can remember.

Maybe a couple of spoon-bashers down the East End, but...

If the government was bothered about English cities they'd have offered Bradford for the Olympics, or Wolverhampton.

SC

How long is a piece of string?

That is what this topic reminds me of. The world is changing. So what, accept it. Very little is the same as it was 20 years ago... or even 10 years ago. John Cleese was right when he said that London is no longer an English city. So what? If he is complaining then he would be a hypocrite because he is now living in the USA. I don't have much time for hypocrites.

London was never English anyway. Its been all micks since as long as I can remember.

Maybe a couple of spoon-bashers down the East End, but...

If the government was bothered about English cities they'd have offered Bradford for the Olympics, or Wolverhampton.

SC

The area for the Olympics is very much like either Bradford or Wolverhapton - full of people with a strong curry odour.

Should have put the Olympics down in Cornwall - the traffic jams around Exeter would have been phenominal.