They were all in the same boat

and also the difference between us and France and Germany is probably a couple of thousand square miles.we are an island and a small 1 at that.
It isn't the size of the land that is important, it's the population density and UK is way off the most densely populated, and only fractionally higher than Germany.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Area_and_population_of_European_countries

Just adding a little personal experience to Noseall's comment:
in my experience, migrants prefer urban living due to the increased opportunities for work (in addition to noseall's observation). It's only when people become sufficiently affluent that they can choose and afford to live in urban environments.

Another facet of the population debate is the change, or rate of change, of the population.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-growth-in-europe-over-past-year-8751929.html
No doubt the racists amongst you will find data to support your particular ideology, but my interpretation is that of the 400,000 increase in the past year, approximately 345,000 of those were due to improved living and medical standards, partly no doubt, due to the effects of the migrants contribution (health, medical, social workers, etc.).
 
Sponsored Links
Englands population density is 413 per sq kilometre.
That's because its full of coloureds and foreigners.

That's double Germany and nearly four times larger than france.
 
No doubt the racists amongst you will find data to support your particular ideology,
Aaah, I should have said "...../ will invent some data /....."
Englands population density is 413 per sq kilometre.
That's because its full of coloureds and foreigners.

That's double Germany and nearly four times larger than france.

Check the figures again, Nocon.
 
Sponsored Links
England - 413
Germany - 233
France - 111

Yes I'm spot on.
 
"approximately 345,000 of those were due to improved living and medical standards"

What do you mean by that? It sounds like your usual tosh.
 
England - 413
Germany - 233
France - 111

Yes I'm spot on.
I would, when talking to a normal person, ask you to explain, but I know I'm wasting my time. So, no explanation needed, we can guess; You're talking about the points awarded in the Eurovision Song Contest!
 
No I'm talking about the numbers in your link numbnuts.
Haven't you even read your own link?
 
"approximately 345,000 of those were due to improved living and medical standards"

What do you mean by that? It sounds like your usual tosh.
Peruse, comprehend and analyse the information contained in the links, you know, the web pages that open when you click on the links, that's the links to the original source data, that you can never seem to find.
 
"approximately 345,000 of those were due to improved living and medical standards"

What do you mean by that? It sounds like your usual tosh.
Peruse, comprehend and analyse the information contained in the links, you know, the web pages that open when you click on the links, that's the links to the original source data, that you can never seem to find.

Yes you should try that sometime.

In the mean time what do you mean by this...
"approximately 345,000 of those were due to improved living and medical standards"

?
 
No I'm talking about the numbers in your link numbnuts.
Haven't you even read your own link?
You're making a bigger ass of yourself than normal. Stop it before I split my sides.

I see. So you post a link giving facts and figures and then don't believe whats written in them.
Idiot.

I know you don't like accepting that England is a small densely populated area.
Probably one of the most densely populated areas in the world.
 
"approximately 345,000 of those were due to improved living and medical standards"

What do you mean by that? It sounds like your usual tosh.
Peruse, comprehend and analyse the information contained in the links, you know, the web pages that open when you click on the links, that's the links to the original source data, that you can never seem to find.

Yes you should try that sometime.

In the mean time what do you mean by this...
"approximately 345,000 of those were due to improved living and medical standards"

?
This paragraph alone explains 250,000:
The UK's population increase can be tracked back to the fact that there were 254,400 more births than deaths ......../
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...in-europe-over-past-year-8751929.html[/QUOTE]
How the fchuk do you manage to put a written quotation together if you can't understand simple arithmetic.
 
No I'm talking about the numbers in your link numbnuts.
Haven't you even read your own link?
You're making a bigger ass of yourself than normal. Stop it before I split my sides.

I see. So you post a link giving facts and figures and then don't believe whats written in them.
Idiot.

I know you don't like accepting that England is a small densely populated area.
Probably one of the most densely populated areas in the world.
You have a misconception between believing and comprehending.
I believe, that you can't comprehend!
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top