-
Posts
-
How can you have a lower population density for the uk than England ffs… dear lord. You think that scotland has a more densely populated area than England lol?
I was saying that the original source I used for population density had the wrong numbers.
Does anyone actually believe Daily Mail articles? 📰
They are about as accurate as any other newspaper.
If you trust any of them then you have very major problems in terms of understanding what is true.
The UK’s budget contribution isn’t part of its bargaining cards. The contribution is ended as soon as Brexit takes place. There may well be interim payments made after Brexit, but that’s because the UK govt has such a weak hand. Unless we leave without a deal (not really an option for any but the hardest of brexiteers who would put up wiht economic chaos so they can fly the flag), then an interim arrangement is going to be necessary. May is already talking of having to pay for this.
So you’re saying that the EU will continue to fuction as normal with a large chunk of their budget gone? This is complete lunacy Scep.
Their attempt to play the military card has fallen flat on its face. They’ve had to back off from that.
What are you talking about? The only other developed military in the EU is France’s, which is weaker than the UK’s, and its entirely possible that France leaves too.
Le Pen’s victory could certainly happen, but it won’t lead to a Frexit, or even a French withdrawal form the euro. I feel pretty certain the EU would survive such a victory. I can elaborate on this in a separate thread for anyone interested.
Those things are Le Pen’s main campaign promises
.If Le Pen wins then the EU is dead, this a certainty. There is no way it could survive the loss of both Britain and France. I don’t even think it will survive more than a few years if just Britain leaves.
That’s bizarre. I doubt that UKIP’s decline will be halted now. Your wish doesn’t make it real, drac.
UKIP’s voter base is still there, and will grow if the Tories fail at effective negotiation with the EU. And it isn’t want I want, I would prefer to vote for Lib Dem if they actually had the political position their party is suppose to have. The Australian Lib Dem party are a good example of this I think, but I haven’t looked too much into their policies.
So, in one breathe we have the Brexit right wing slyly and deceitfully producing figures for densely populated cities in England rather than the UK as a whole, to falsely claim the UK is overcrowded, to support their anti immigration rhetoric.
You don’t seem to understand what population per square kilometer means, it’s nothing to do with cities. Go back and look at the map that I posted, that should give you an idea of the density compared to other places in the world.
I calculated it to be 420.53, which means for every square Km of land in England, there has to be 421 people living on it. For the UK as a whole, it is 268.5, which means that 269 people have to live on each square Km of land.
Lets compare this to another European country, I will choose spain. Spain has a population density of 91.746 per square Km.
This means that the UK is 3x more densely populated than Spain is.
-
This reply was modified 7 years, 6 months ago by
draculina. Reason: Added explanation of population density with example
Drac, you talk about reading between the lines and assessing newspaper reports without fully believing them. You should try it.
First, I stand by my argument that the UK contr9bution isn’t a bargaining card. That doesn’t mean that the UK contribution is nothing. It will hurt the EU badly, and they know it. But it’s not a bargaining card. The reason is that the UK is leaving the EU – the contribution is ending, the EU is going to get hurt, end of. It would only be a bargaining card if the UK was threatening to leave. The Uk can’t bargain with their contribution, because it’s going to be kaput. You can’t say that if the EU gives this, we will keep our contribution; or if the EU takes that we will end our contribution. The contribution is ff the table.
The military option is off the table too. That doesn’t mean it’s unimportant. The UK is the biggest military power apart form the US, just as it’s policing is a crucial part of Europol; in tracking down terrorists and crims. But neither are a bargaining chip. They tried that,. and it fell on its face. may had to back off because of the political storm it would arouse, not least in this country. Read what happened when it was even hinted at.
I used to think le pen would give the EU the heart attack which may kill it. I now doubt this, for a number of reasons. She is committed to a referendum on the euro and on leaving the EU. She won’t do it without a referendum, and was denounced by the Far Right for this in the recent debate. The majority of the French people are pro-EU and pro-euro (apart from the economic shock of leaving the euro, which would make brexit look like economic sanity). They’ll vote against ending the EU and euro – if the referendum is ever held!
A second reason is that the general election which would follow the presidential election is very very unlikely to be won by her national Front – at the constituency level, it’s very unorganised compared with the main parties, and the mass of abstentions which is the only way she’ll win the Presidency would be returning to the polling booth. She’s be faced wiht a hostile parliament, which she would need to work with.
Tinks is right – the Daily Beast (Waugh’s accurate name for it) is an awful newspaper, working on innuendo and prejudice.
There are a number of broadsheets which are more trustworthy. You can’t trust any of them, but some are more trustworthy than others. I know which is my preferred paper.
You don’t seem to understand what population per square kilometer means, it’s nothing to do with cities. Go back and look at the map that I posted, that should give you an idea of the density compared to other places in the world. I calculated it to be 420.53, which means for every square Km of land in England, there has to be 421 people living on it. For the UK as a whole, it is 268.5, which means that 269 people have to live on each square Km of land. Lets compare this to another European country, I will choose spain. Spain has a population density of 91.746 per square Km. This means that the UK is 3x more densely populated than Spain is.
It occoured to me that there is a better way to demonstrate what population density means. I will use the two following values in my calculations;
The population of the UK is 65,110,000.
The land area of the UK is 242,495 Km2
If we evenly distribute land evenly to each person (242,495 / 65,110,000) then we get 0.003724389 square kilometer per person. I will convert this into meters to make it easier to visualise, which means that each person would recieve 3,724 square metres of land. In reality the useful land would be less because some of this land would be on the side of mountains or inside of lakes and rivers. To visualise what this looks like we need to calculate the square root of 3,724, which is 61.025.This means that if you stood in the centre of the land you owned then it would extend 61 meters from you in all directions.
This is mostly likely more land than most people on here currently own, me included. But it is not really all that much land, so saying that the ‘land owning class’ is responsible for population density doesn’t seem to hold up to examination.
Edit:
My calcuation does not provide any land for farming, factories, roads, shops or any other infrastructure that a country needs to function properly.
-
This reply was modified 7 years, 6 months ago by draculina.
I calculated it to be 420.53, which means for every square Km of land in England, there has to be 421 people living on it. For the UK as a whole, it is 268.5, which means that 269 people have to live on each square Km of land.
Not quite. That is the average figure, although I’m sure that’s what you meant. Some km2 will have 0 people living there, whereas others will have as many as 13,875. I do actually know a thing or two about population density, as I come from Islington in North London which is, and has historically been, THE most densely populated local authority district in the UK, and as of today possibly Europe. A square kilometre of Islington has 13,875 residents. That smashes the England’s average by 13x. And smashes the UK’s average by 50x
I have also spent many years in Norway too, which will have one of the lowest population densities in Europe, if not the lowest at about 15 km2. But as Norway are not in the EU (sort of) I’m not sure how that relates to the point.
Anyone who has travelled around Europe can see how densely populated we the UK are. However, what constitutes “over-crowding” is subjective and surely relative. For some, 3 is a crowd. Ask a Norwegian what is over crowding, and ask someone from Islington what is over-crowding, we will get 2 very different answers.
Islington is 867 times more densely populated than Norway.
Islington is the 2nd smallest district in the UK.
Islington, incredibly, has half the population today as it did 100 years ago. It was twice as densely populated as it is now.
Islington is the most “white” of all London boroughs at about 75%
Islington North is Jeremy Corbyns’s Constituency.
Islington North is home to the world famous Arsenal FC, I was born there, as well as a long list of other celebrities :)
Not quite. That is the average figure, although I’m sure that’s what you meant. Some km2 will have 0 people living there, whereas others will have as many as 13,875. I do actually know a thing or two about population density, as I come from Islington in North London which is, and has historically been, THE most densely populated local authority district in the UK, and as of today possibly Europe. A square kilometre of Islington has 13,875 residents. That smashes the England’s average by 13x. And smashes the UK’s average by 50x
I know I was talking about average density, I don’t see how talking about anything else would be useful. Look at my last post where I demonstrate what this number would actually mean if you visualised it.
Quoting Mr Scep…… You can’t trust any of them, but some are more trustworthy than others. I know which is my preferred paper.
Andrex? 😉
Sorry folks please carry on 💛
1 member liked this post.
-
This reply was modified 7 years, 6 months ago by
Get involved in this discussion! Log in or register now to have your say!