Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Unless you have evidence that all ‘liberals’ are rich, or that it was a distinctly ‘liberal’ strategy, I think that we can safely say that the distribution was in the interest of the well-off, both brexiteer and pro-EU.
I would say that most progressives are middle class, although I don’t have much hard evidence to support that, but most of the population is liberal.
Don’t squabble with me please Drac :) draculina wrote: for every square Km of land in England, there has to be 421 people living on it. It means nothing of the sort. It means, many square kilometres have to have 0 peoples, and mininal numbers to offset all the 13,000’s to bring the average to a few hundred. That’s a hell of a lot of empty(ish) kilometres we have too. Maybe as rudeboy said many of it is uninhabitable, but thats a different argument.. Sorry, maybe Im being too pedantic.
If I did say that it was poor wording, I didn’t mean it to be taken literally that every Km2 of land has 421 people living on it.
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.
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 9 years, 1 month ago by
draculina.
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 9 years, 1 month ago by draculina. Reason: Added explanation of population density with example
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.
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.
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.
The ONS statistics are showing a lower population density for England than the ones I had for the whole uk, interesting.
I just calculated the population density for England myself, I came out with 420.530553658 people per Km2, which is just slightly higher than the ONS figures.
1 member liked this post.
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160105160709/http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/compendiums/compendium-of-uk-statistics/population-and-migration/index.html
The ONS statistics are showing a lower population density for England than the ones I had for the whole uk, interesting.
-
This reply was modified 9 years, 1 month ago by
.