Toronto's Ethnic Buffet

[SHiRO]

Originally Posted by Crawford

And a major problem is this continued reliance on % foreign born as a proxy for diversity. It's indicative of relative diversity, but by itself, not really a strong metric.

That's what I wrote in an earlier post.

Then there are differing relative levels of contributions to diversity. If I'm Irish and move to London, do I contribute to London's diversity as much as a Nepalese who moves to London? I would say no. Yet they make the exact same numerical contributions to the foreign-born calculation. Switzerland has a huge foreign-born population but heavily German foreign-born. If we replace the German foreign-born in Zurich with Bangledeshi or Bolivian, wouldn't that make a difference in relative diversity?

Wrong example. It are actually Americans and American cities who are most guilty of misrepresenting data like that. First by defining diversity on the basis of race (combined with other artificially constructed categories like "Hispanic" and "Asian"). You get ridiculous assertions that El Paso is more diverse than Portland with this.
And second by ignoring that for some cities "foreign born" consists mostly of Mexicans (basically what you are accusing Zurich of with Germans).

Zurich, 35% foreign born, 8% of total population born in Germany
Los Angeles, 40% foreign born, 24% of total population born in Mexico

[SHiRO]

Originally Posted by isaidso

Greater London is 37% foreign born (~3 million FBP)
Toronto CMA is 53% foreign born (~3 million FBP)

In absolute terms, London has certainly caught up to Toronto but 10 years ago Toronto was miles ahead. Today both sit at just over 3 million foreign born. If one counts southeast England vs. the Greater Golden Horseshoe it's a dead heat again: roughly 4 million foreign born in each.

In summary: in absolute numbers its a dead heat, but the makeup of the population is far more diverse in Toronto. Canadians are in a minority in Toronto. The British still outnumber foreigners 2:1 in London.

You are manipulating the data and even present us with incorrect data.


First, Greater London is London's "city proper" so if we're going to compare we should compare to the City of Toronto. The real numbers as such would be:

(2011 Census) Greater London population 8,173,941 of which 36.7% foreign born = 2,999,836

(2011 National Household Survey) City of Toronto population 2,615,060 of which 48.6% foreign born = 1,270,918

I don't know where the 53% came from, but it turns out that wasn't even true to begin with...


Second, the share of foreign born for the Toronto CMA is not 53%, it's 46%. So the number of foreign born in the Toronto CMA is: 2,537,410
Both numbers are (way) below the number of foreign born for Greater London alone!

For the record, London doesn't have an officially defined equivalent to a CMA, but it is estimated that there are over 4 million foreign born in London's "metro area". A moot point because Greater London (London proper) alone leads Toronto with a margin of 500,000!) An apples to apples comparison would have London leading by a margin of 1.5 million!!









The rest of your post is just subjective gibberish I'm not interested in. Please acknowledge you are wrong on the FACTS as shown above (and please stop telling Londoners there are less foreign born in their city as there are over TWICE as many!)

[SHiRO]

Originally Posted by Crawford

If you are of the belief that the only way one can measure diversity is by % foreign-born, then you are correct.

The discussion is then a very simple one, and we can ignore relative size of foreign born population, relative diversity of population overall (both foreign born and domestic) and relative status of city as a global destination.

So, using your preferred proxy for diversity, the most diverse city on earth is Dubai, and the most diverse city in Europe is Luxembourg, the most diverse city in Asia is Singapore.

Brussels is more diverse than Toronto like this as well!

If, however, you don't believe this to be the case (and most of the forumers, including myself, don't believe this, by itself to be a good proxy), then you may come to a very different conclusion. They may conclude that London, as one of the planet's great global gateways, is a city with perhaps one or two rivals as a truly international destination, and they may conclude that Toronto is not really in the same class.

Exactely, although I would grant Torontonians that their city is in the same class as New York and London. I would put some other cities in that class as well probably.

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by SHiRO

I don't know where the 53% came from, but it turns out that wasn't even true to begin with...

It's actually 51% rather than 53%*, but that includes foreign non-permanent residents. The 48.6% is foreign-born permanent residents, while Canadian-born permanent residents total 48.8%. Alternatively, if we're only measuring permanent residents, then it is 50.1% Canadian-born vs. 49.9% foreign born.

*I think 53% might have been the number at the 2006 census. The percentage of immigrants has actually fallen since then, even though their number have grown. Inter and intra-provincial outmigration has increased since then too. People must be having more babies, I guess.

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by SHiRO

Brussels is more diverse than Toronto like this as well!

Brussels-Capital Region is 36% foreign-born. Toronto CMA is 46% foreign-born.

Exactely, although I would grant Torontonians that their city is in the same class as New York and London. I would put some other cities in that class as well probably.

That's how I see it as well. Much like city population dick measuring contests, such declarations of who has the most or best of something are usually dubious at best (and ultimately serve no purpose other than boastfulness) as there are too many variables at work. And as with that, when it comes to measuring diversity or any other possible metric that a city could be ranked by, it's much easier - and more productive - to work within general groupings. In which case, the first tier of "most diverse cities" would probably consist of London, New York, Toronto, Los Angeles, Paris, Amsterdam, and maybe Sydney.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by muppet

Cockney has died out, now replaced in the current generation in all races and schools with what's termed as 'Multicultural London English' (MLE). It's more a Jamaican patois but peppered with American, Bengali and even Vietnamese slang -originally from the East End but then spreading to the South, the north and now into the West.

Interestingly, the equivalent of Cockney in Paris has also died out, but I think earlier than in London. It was already moribund by the 1980s, and, like London, it was replaced by a multicultural French accent called the "banlieue accent", which I find quite ugly to be honest. This happened towards the end of the 1980s. The banlieue accent is now universally used by all young people in the northern, eastern, and southern suburbs of Paris, by young people of immigrant descent but also by young people of French descent. Central Paris and many western suburbs still keep a more upper-middle-class French accent, which is the standard French accent used on French television (it's also the accent I use). Some western suburbs like Versailles have kept the upper-upper-class accent of the old aristocracy, which can sound a bit ridiculous.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

Brussels-Capital Region is 36% foreign-born. Toronto CMA is 46% foreign-born.

I don't know where you draw that figure from, given that there (regrettably) exists no statistics by country of birth in Belgium. All we have are statistics by citizenship (which miss the many Moroccan-born and French-born inhabitants of Brussels who have become Belgian citizens).

[dc_denizen]

^ interesting, does the upper upper class french of the old aristocracy sound as "uppity" as the cut-glass English accent--or even more so?

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by dc_denizen

^ interesting, does the upper upper class french of the old aristocracy sound as "uppity" as the cut-glass English accent--or even more so?

Yes, it's a bit the same. They have the same sort of accent as Prince Charles and the likes, but in French. And it can sound as equally funny as it does in England I guess. Also, they often have stereotypical given names that other people make fun of, like "Charles-Edouard", or "Marie-Constance". Last week I met a guy from such an upper-upper-class family from Versailles (practicing Catholics and all). His name was "Stanislas". Only some Versailles upper-class people would call their son "Stanislas".

Stanislas told me he was now praying for me. How sweet. (to understand the irony: in the US, it's frequent that people pray for other people, but in secular France it's very very rare, and slightly odd)

[rousseau]

I'd love to see some Youtube videos showing the different accents in French.

[SHiRO]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

It's actually 51% rather than 53%*, but that includes foreign non-permanent residents. The 48.6% is foreign-born permanent residents, while Canadian-born permanent residents total 48.8%. Alternatively, if we're only measuring permanent residents, then it is 50.1% Canadian-born vs. 49.9% foreign born.

*I think 53% might have been the number at the 2006 census. The percentage of immigrants has actually fallen since then, even though their number have grown. Inter and intra-provincial outmigration has increased since then too. People must be having more babies, I guess.

It doesn't matter even if it is 53%, London would still have over TWICE the number. I also would imagen that London has magnitudes more of foreign non permanent residents than Toronto. Anyway I used official 2011 figures for both cities, if we are going to use different/more recent numbers for Toronto we should also for London.

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

Brussels-Capital Region is 36% foreign-born. Toronto CMA is 46% foreign-born.

Brussels Capital Region is the "city proper" of Brussels so you should rather compare it to the City of Toronto, not the CMA.

I don't know where you got 36% , but that's closer to the city's FOREIGN RESIDENTS (as in non Belgian citizens) not the foreign born population which next to foreign citizens includes naturalised Belgians who were born abroad. 36% are the foreign diplomats and employees of the numerous international organisations located in Brussels, as well as non naturalised residents. Another 15% or so are naturalised (which brings the total to around 50%) and would not show in the statistics since Belgium doesn't keep statistics on country of birth (or race/ethnicity).

[WhipperSnapper]

Holy Crap. I never would have expected a Toronto vs London thread popping up.

[Beedok]

I hope Hamilton can start getting more of the immigration that goes to the GTA, it's rather fallen behind in immigration draw.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by rousseau

I'd love to see some Youtube videos showing the different accents in French.

I tried earlier to find that upper-upper-class French accent on youtube, but couldn't find any video that showed it properly. Actress Charlotte de Turckheim can make that accent perfectly (and hilariously), but no video of her on Youtube shows her with that accent.

This is the closest I could find, although it's a bit old (but the way Jacqueline Maillan does the long "aaaa" is typical of the French aristocracy and upper bourgeoisie):

• Video Link

As for the banlieue accent, here it is (from the look of it, it's from the late 1990s):

• Video Link

And this is the French Parisian working-class accent (the woman, not the man), equivalent of Cockney in London, which died out in the late 1980s and was replaced by the banlieue accent:

• Video Link

Today only a few people still have that Parisian working-class accent, such as the former leader of the Communist French union CGT (one of the largest unions in France), but it's rare, as it has been mostly replaced by the banlieue accent:

• Video Link

Here it's the standard French accent, which is the accent of the educated classes of Central Paris, a bit like BBC English in England (in this video, it's the colloquial use of the standard French accent, as opposed to the formal use that can be heard on television):

• Video Link

And then of course there are many different regional accents in France and beyond (Europe, Africa, North America, Middle East, Pacific). Here for example it's a hilarious comic show from Toulouse in which they speak with the typical accent of the Toulouse area:

• Video Link

[muppet]

I've noticed alot of the French (in England) now say "oueh" instead of "oui", not just the young but the middle aged too. Is that a new thing, or one that's been around for ages (equivalent to 'yeah' and 'yes'?)

[muppet]

A real sign of aristocracy and old money in UK is having a double-barrelled name such as James Sloane-Whittaker. A sign of a step up, country house living, generation-upon-generation of old money is having a Germanic / Dutch name in there, such as Anastasia De Witt-Palmer, Elliot Alexander Nassau de Zuluystein. Or Adelaide Schyte-Temperr. (Schyte is pronounced 'shitty' btw).

The Queen's name is Elizabeth Alexandra Mary Saxe-Coburg Gotha. Her royal House is German ever since they invited the duke of Hanover over in the accession crisis to become King, who couldn't and wouldn't speak a word of English, but started the Hanoverian line nevertheless. Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha was changed to the more Anglo sounding House of Windsor during WWII (where their royal castle was based in the small town of Windlesora).

Also French if your lineage is even older, such as James Dudley Fitzgerald-De Ros, or Charles David Devereaux-Gascoyne, Saskia Jane Petty-FitzMaurice De l'Isle.

French also works I hear in Scandinavia, where royal lineage also stems. Names such as Sophia dì Chanel Carlsson, or Hedvig Ulrika De la Gardie.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by muppet

I've noticed alot of the French (in England) now say "oueh" instead of "oui", not just the young but the middle aged too. Is that a new thing, or one that's been around for ages (equivalent to 'yeah' and 'yes'?)

"Ouais" has been around for ages, but it was mostly lower class before. I don't know whether they use it in Canada.

[MolsonExport]

Some of those banlieues (banlieuex) in Paris are incredibly wretched. And then you visit Marseille (I work there for spells), and they are worse still. La Savine is quite horrible.

Toronto has some pretty shitty parts (Jane and Finch, Rexdale, parts of Etobicoke [Ford Nation]), but it has nothing on Marseille.

"Ouais" is very, very common Joual (Quebecois street dialect) expression in Quebec. Also "Ouash!"

[PFloyd]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

Interestingly, the equivalent of Cockney in Paris has also died out, but I think earlier than in London. It was already moribund by the 1980s, and, like London, it was replaced by a multicultural French accent called the "banlieue accent", which I find quite ugly to be honest. This happened towards the end of the 1980s. The banlieue accent is now universally used by all young people in the northern, eastern, and southern suburbs of Paris, by young people of immigrant descent but also by young people of French descent. Central Paris and many western suburbs still keep a more upper-middle-class French accent, which is the standard French accent used on French television (it's also the accent I use). Some western suburbs like Versailles have kept the upper-upper-class accent of the old aristocracy, which can sound a bit ridiculous.

Interesting. I always wondered what the French thought of French-Canadian (Quebecois/Joual) accent found in Quebec. I personally thinks it sounds awful. I find it almost unintelligible.

[Martin Mtl]

Originally Posted by PFloyd

Interesting. I always wondered what the French thought of French-Canadian (Quebecois/Joual) accent found in Quebec. I personally thinks it sounds awful. I find it almost unintelligible.

Gee, thanks.

Just like in France, there is wide variety of accents within the french langage spoken in Quebec, ranging from almost-like-Paris accent to very provincial joual.

In my case, for exemple, I don't change my accent at all when I'M in France and I have never had any problem being understood, even though they can detect the accent. Nobody in France never told me that my accent was awful and unintelligible. I guess I have to go to Toronto to get that. Ironic to read such a comment in a thread that celebrates Toronto's multi ethnicity