|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
Zurich15362 Posts
On September 26 2016 22:38 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2016 22:01 Clonester wrote:
Still, the amount of acceptions does not matter, as no accepted seekers do not get removed. The amount of yearly removals to total amount of non accepted is arround 2-4%.
I am living in Duisburg Hochfeld, Muslim Population: >50%.
City of Pforzheim: Foreign backgroung: 50%, 35-40%. Under 3 year olds foreign descent: over 70%
These numbers are from 2010. That's not a city. That's a neighbourhood. Duisburg is the city. It has ~19% foreigners. That there are neighbourhoods with a majority is unsurprising. And I guess autochtonous Hochfelders might not feel all that happy about that. However, I will compare it to Bos en Lommer in Amsterdam (49,8% foreigner), which I am more familiar with (in fact, Schilderswijk in The Hague, is a better example. It has about 90% inhabitants of foreign descent, and I assume there are neighbourhoods like this in Germany too). This is seen as a troubled, poor neighbourhood. People who live there tend to have bigger problems than whether their neighbour was born in the country or not. I am assuming Hochfeld is mostly the same. That doesn't stop people from the outside peering in mixing up cause and correlation, though (that neighbourhood is poor because it is filled with foreigners. No. The neighbourhood is bad, which means lower housing prices, which means poor people can afford to live there. Immigrants from non-Western nations tend to be poor. This in turn puts a stigma on the neighbourhood, which causes lower housing prices... etc). As for Pforzheim, I'm going to ask for a source. I cannot find anything about Ausserzahl in German, and the only reference I see for demographics is this: http://www.urbistat.it/AdminStat/en/de/demografia/dati-sintesi/pforzheim,-kreisfreie-stadt/8231/4which doesn't support your claim at all.
Like I wrote above, he is freely fabricating number based on his perception from where he happens to live. Here is a 90 page report on the population of Pforzheim, which also goes completely against what he was saying (as would be, you know, walking through Pforzheim .... ). http://www.pforzheim.de/fileadmin/user_upload/statistik/Bevoelkerung_2012.pdf
|
On September 26 2016 22:38 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2016 22:01 Clonester wrote:
Still, the amount of acceptions does not matter, as no accepted seekers do not get removed. The amount of yearly removals to total amount of non accepted is arround 2-4%.
I am living in Duisburg Hochfeld, Muslim Population: >50%.
City of Pforzheim: Foreign backgroung: 50%, 35-40%. Under 3 year olds foreign descent: over 70%
These numbers are from 2010. That's not a city. That's a neighbourhood. Duisburg is the city. It has ~19% foreigners. That there are neighbourhoods with a majority is unsurprising. And I guess autochtonous Hochfelders might not feel all that happy about that. However, I will compare it to Bos en Lommer in Amsterdam (49,8% foreigner), which I am more familiar with (in fact, Schilderswijk in The Hague, is a better example. It has about 90% inhabitants of foreign descent, and I assume there are neighbourhoods like this in Germany too). This is seen as a troubled, poor neighbourhood. People who live there tend to have bigger problems than whether their neighbour was born in the country or not. I am assuming Hochfeld is mostly the same. That doesn't stop people from the outside peering in mixing up cause and correlation, though (that neighbourhood is poor because it is filled with foreigners. No. The neighbourhood is bad, which means lower housing prices, which means poor people can afford to live there. Immigrants from non-Western nations tend to be poor. This in turn puts a stigma on the neighbourhood, which causes lower housing prices... etc). As for Pforzheim, I'm going to ask for a source. I cannot find anything about Ausserzahl in German, and the only reference I see for demographics is this: http://www.urbistat.it/AdminStat/en/de/demografia/dati-sintesi/pforzheim,-kreisfreie-stadt/8231/4which doesn't support your claim at all.
For Pforzheim, numbers of 2010:
https://web.archive.org/web/20110312052659/http://www.pz-news.de/Home/Nachrichten/Pforzheim/Pforzheims-Zukunft-gehoert-den-Migranten-_arid,172201_puid,1_pageid,17.html
(German obviously)
Over 70% of the 3 year olds have been of foreign background over the complete city. Parts of the city have a total foreign background of more then 50%: Oststad (61,9%), Au (60,8), Innenstadt (59,2), Weststadt (59,6) und Buckenberg (56,7) – davon Haidach: 66,1 Prozent.
You can now argue that these dont have to be muslims, but Pforzheim has never been a center of russian (german russian backgroun) and polnish immigration, the other 2 major immigration groups next to turk-arab.
You showed that people in Germany percepted that the total amount of muslims is arround 19%, where it is in reality only 6%. Now I showed you (and some of you showed yourself to counterfact me) that muslim population is over the percepted 19% in large cities and goes up to 50% in part of the cities.
Germany has no Chinatowns, no little Italies, no little anatolia. And if it gets these places, then not out of historic growing, but because the native population moves away thanks to the changing factor. The growing of little anatolia is üart of the problem.
|
The exact same thing happens when joe schmo sees a black lady buying soda with her food stamps and then assumes that most people receiving food stamps are doing the same thing.
|
Norway28747 Posts
On September 26 2016 22:35 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2016 20:04 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 26 2016 08:57 TheDwf wrote:On September 26 2016 08:29 FiWiFaKi wrote:
Now to some people it isn't troubling, that's fine, but when I look at Europe, and how rapidly their Muslim population has been rising... Rose so rapidly that there is now a terrifying proportion of... 6% Muslims in Europe (factoring in the countries with a majority of Muslim in South East Europe). Guess we'll have to wait a few centuries before wearing turbans, uh? But medias did such a nice propaganda job that they managed to convince millions of people of the existence of an unstoppable force: ![[image loading]](http://www.levif.be/medias/3483/1783681.jpg) I'm not really up to date on the thread, just got to this post now, but I just have to quote this post because that picture is fucking beautiful and it should be present on more pages. Thank you. I can believe perception is higher than reality. And why the hell does it say public estimates of Muslim population "%, 2014." Those numbers look like they're from 2010. Which would make more academic sense since it would be ludicrous to compare actual muslim representation in 2010 to public perceptions in 2014. ![[image loading]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/80/Map_of_the_European_Migrant_Crisis_2015.png)
Perception being higher than reality makes total sense to me too. It's just that the discrepancies are so high - 5% compare to 0.1%? 3-4 times higher than reality for most countries? I'm also with you that the numbers of muslims from 2010 doesn't perfectly match up with the numbers from 2014, but I'd be very surprised if the numbers actually changed all that significantly. (If it was perception from 2016 with real numbers from 2010, that'd be different - migrant crisis did for some countries, like germany and sweden, lead to a big increase, but then even for sweden, we're looking at real numbers moving from like 5% to like 7% - nothing near justifying the 17% impression. )
I basically don't think this is really a case of deliberate misleading or obtuseness - it's just that there aren't necessarily good data for every year. 2010 was apparently a year where pew researched this, so they have good numbers for immigrants for 2010, then 2014 they have good numbers for what the impression is. Then the actual numbers hardly changed from 2010 until 2014 - I'd be very surprised if real numbers changed by more than 2% for any surveyed country, and I think it's more likely they changed by 0.5% or less.
edit: The reason why I wanted to highlight this was also to showcase how the narratives matter, and for that reason, perception poll being after reality poll makes some sense, even independently of practical matters. Perceptions are shaped over time and much more volatile than the actual numbers are. I would have loved to see perception numbers from 2010 - if they are significantly lower than 2014 numbers, I'd argue this is because of the islam-unfriendly narrative having successfully been pushed and changing people's impressions over a 4 year period of time.
Also gotta highlight that I by no means want to attack people for having had the wrong impressions, I just hope that people who thought there were 30% muslims living in france can actually accept that this is not the reality after seeing this picture. (I remember having a debate with a friend who argued that there were 20% muslims living in sweden, and it literally took me 30 minutes of finding him like 4-5 different sources all arguing that it was around the 5% area and definitely no more than 8% before he accepted that maybe his initial source was wrong rather than all the other ones. There first narrative people hear tends to stick with them far longer than counter-narratives do.
|
On September 26 2016 22:48 farvacola wrote:
The exact same thing happens when joe schmo sees a black lady buying soda with her food stamps and then assumes that most people receiving food stamps are doing the same thing.
The poor are more likely to be obese than the wealthy in the US.
Hardly a stretch to suggest people on food stamps will choose calorie rich cheap processed food and not expensive fresh foods.
|
On September 26 2016 22:48 farvacola wrote:
The exact same thing happens when joe schmo sees a black lady buying soda with her food stamps and then assumes that most people receiving food stamps are doing the same thing.
Section 8 house(subsidized housing in the US) has to do PR just to remind the public that the majority of people using Section 8 are elderly and cannot afford housing without it. Because otherwise people will just assume it is used by “drug dealers and deadbeats that don’t want to work”. But section 8 has a very low abuse rate for a federal subsidy and most housing authorities actively police its use because the waiting list is so long. But no one wants to hear that part. They just want to get rid of the system because it makes them angry that some “deadbeat” out there is getting cheap housing.
|
On September 26 2016 22:12 Silvanel wrote:As mentioned above immigrants tend to cluster in large cities while more rural areas remain mostly unafected by recent immigration. Also i would guess that people polled come mostly from big cities (but since i dont have any data on polling i amsimply guessing), but if thats the case than overperception isnt surprising see here for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_in_the_European_Union_by_Muslim_population
Well, I'm assuming pollsters also know about pesky things like demographics. Also, the main base for right-wing parties is actually not the cities where immigrants might be a problem. It is the countryside. So if anything, I would expect inhabitants of cities to have a more realistic view of the number of immigrants, as opposed to people in the countryside, whose main interaction with immigrants is from watching the 5 o'clock news. However, the actual research can be found here: https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3466/Perceptions-are-not-reality-Things-the-world-gets-wrong.aspx
It uses an online research panel, so I don't think there is any way of teasing out subgroups of city vs. countryside. It was also not directly focused on the perception of immigrants, but rather the ignorance of people on lots of things (it's fun to go through their questions: I was quite wrong on a number of things).
|
Well, I'm assuming pollsters also know about pesky things like demographics. Also, the main base for right-wing parties is actually not the cities where immigrants might be a problem. It is the countryside.So if anything, I would expect inhabitants of cities to have a more realistic view of the number of immigrants, as opposed to people in the countryside
Is this just because white people have fled the cities and moved somewhere without migrants.
White flight is a thing.
|
On September 26 2016 23:02 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Show nested quote +
Well, I'm assuming pollsters also know about pesky things like demographics. Also, the main base for right-wing parties is actually not the cities where immigrants might be a problem. It is the countryside.So if anything, I would expect inhabitants of cities to have a more realistic view of the number of immigrants, as opposed to people in the countryside
Is this just because white people have fled the cities and moved somewhere without migrants. White flight is a thing.
Speaking for the Netherlands: no.
|
I just had to do check the top of the page but yes, this is the US politics thread, not the EU one.
So why is it full of EU migrant talk now?
|
Let's not forget that agricultural communities rely on illegal immigrant farm labor.
|
On September 26 2016 22:46 Clonester wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2016 22:38 Acrofales wrote:On September 26 2016 22:01 Clonester wrote:
Still, the amount of acceptions does not matter, as no accepted seekers do not get removed. The amount of yearly removals to total amount of non accepted is arround 2-4%.
I am living in Duisburg Hochfeld, Muslim Population: >50%.
City of Pforzheim: Foreign backgroung: 50%, 35-40%. Under 3 year olds foreign descent: over 70%
These numbers are from 2010. That's not a city. That's a neighbourhood. Duisburg is the city. It has ~19% foreigners. That there are neighbourhoods with a majority is unsurprising. And I guess autochtonous Hochfelders might not feel all that happy about that. However, I will compare it to Bos en Lommer in Amsterdam (49,8% foreigner), which I am more familiar with (in fact, Schilderswijk in The Hague, is a better example. It has about 90% inhabitants of foreign descent, and I assume there are neighbourhoods like this in Germany too). This is seen as a troubled, poor neighbourhood. People who live there tend to have bigger problems than whether their neighbour was born in the country or not. I am assuming Hochfeld is mostly the same. That doesn't stop people from the outside peering in mixing up cause and correlation, though (that neighbourhood is poor because it is filled with foreigners. No. The neighbourhood is bad, which means lower housing prices, which means poor people can afford to live there. Immigrants from non-Western nations tend to be poor. This in turn puts a stigma on the neighbourhood, which causes lower housing prices... etc). As for Pforzheim, I'm going to ask for a source. I cannot find anything about Ausserzahl in German, and the only reference I see for demographics is this: http://www.urbistat.it/AdminStat/en/de/demografia/dati-sintesi/pforzheim,-kreisfreie-stadt/8231/4which doesn't support your claim at all. For Pforzheim, numbers of 2010: https://web.archive.org/web/20110312052659/http://www.pz-news.de/Home/Nachrichten/Pforzheim/Pforzheims-Zukunft-gehoert-den-Migranten-_arid,172201_puid,1_pageid,17.html(German obviously) Over 70% of the 3 year olds have been of foreign background over the complete city. Parts of the city have a total foreign background of more then 50%: Oststad (61,9%), Au (60,8), Innenstadt (59,2), Weststadt (59,6) und Buckenberg (56,7) – davon Haidach: 66,1 Prozent. You can now argue that these dont have to be muslims, but Pforzheim has never been a center of russian (german russian backgroun) and polnish immigration, the other 2 major immigration groups next to turk-arab. You showed that people in Germany percepted that the total amount of muslims is arround 19%, where it is in reality only 6%. Now I showed you (and some of you showed yourself to counterfact me) that muslim population is over the percepted 19% in large cities and goes up to 50% in part of the cities. Germany has no Chinatowns, no little Italies, no little anatolia. And if it gets these places, then not out of historic growing, but because the native population moves away thanks to the changing factor. The growing of little anatolia is üart of the problem.
While this might need to move to the Euro thread, because the background against which this takes place is completely different to the background in the USA, I will venture to ask why is Little Anatolia part of the problem? What, exactly, is wrong with Turks having their own community. This used to be a fairly common occurrence in Europe, btw. Jews used to live in their own community. In the Netherlands, there are still strictly Protestant towns with very strict Protestant values. I would not feel comfortable living there, as an atheist. Gypsies also stick together in their own neighbourhoods (albeit they are also seen as a problem). What is so fundamentally wrong with Turks that such a neighbourhood would be an aberration?
|
|
|
On September 26 2016 23:02 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Show nested quote +
Well, I'm assuming pollsters also know about pesky things like demographics. Also, the main base for right-wing parties is actually not the cities where immigrants might be a problem. It is the countryside.So if anything, I would expect inhabitants of cities to have a more realistic view of the number of immigrants, as opposed to people in the countryside
Is this just because white people have fled the cities and moved somewhere without migrants. White flight is a thing.
Once they are done flying, do they turn around and blame immigrants for their incapacity to integrate?
|
On September 26 2016 22:54 Liquid`Drone wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2016 22:35 Danglars wrote:On September 26 2016 20:04 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 26 2016 08:57 TheDwf wrote:On September 26 2016 08:29 FiWiFaKi wrote:
Now to some people it isn't troubling, that's fine, but when I look at Europe, and how rapidly their Muslim population has been rising... Rose so rapidly that there is now a terrifying proportion of... 6% Muslims in Europe (factoring in the countries with a majority of Muslim in South East Europe). Guess we'll have to wait a few centuries before wearing turbans, uh? But medias did such a nice propaganda job that they managed to convince millions of people of the existence of an unstoppable force: I'm not really up to date on the thread, just got to this post now, but I just have to quote this post because that picture is fucking beautiful and it should be present on more pages. Thank you. I can believe perception is higher than reality. And why the hell does it say public estimates of Muslim population "%, 2014." Those numbers look like they're from 2010. Which would make more academic sense since it would be ludicrous to compare actual muslim representation in 2010 to public perceptions in 2014. Perception being higher than reality makes total sense to me too. It's just that the discrepancies are so high - 5% compare to 0.1%? 3-4 times higher than reality for most countries? I'm also with you that the numbers of muslims from 2010 doesn't perfectly match up with the numbers from 2014, but I'd be very surprised if the numbers actually changed all that significantly. (If it was perception from 2016 with real numbers from 2010, that'd be different - migrant crisis did for some countries, like germany and sweden, lead to a big increase, but then even for sweden, we're looking at real numbers moving from like 5% to like 7% - nothing near justifying the 17% impression. ) I basically don't think this is really a case of deliberate misleading or obtuseness - it's just that there aren't necessarily good data for every year. 2010 was apparently a year where pew researched this, so they have good numbers for immigrants for 2010, then 2014 they have good numbers for what the impression is. Then the actual numbers hardly changed from 2010 until 2014 - I'd be very surprised if real numbers changed by more than 2% for any surveyed country, and I think it's more likely they changed by 0.5% or less. edit: The reason why I wanted to highlight this was also to showcase how the narratives matter, and for that reason, perception poll being after reality poll makes some sense, even independently of practical matters. Perceptions are shaped over time and much more volatile than the actual numbers are. I would have loved to see perception numbers from 2010 - if they are significantly lower than 2014 numbers, I'd argue this is because of the islam-unfriendly narrative having successfully been pushed and changing people's impressions over a 4 year period of time.
No, like the actual numbers of perception are identical to an economist graphic with 2010 attitudes. Down to the tenth of a percent.
They'd have to do another to make any conclusions. Besides people are bad at estimating gross percent (people are also bad at estimating poverty rate and low-income rates). Perceptions should be mismatched even worse 2014/15/16 after seeing a doubling or tripling rate of migrants, mostly visually congregated at points of entry. And of course the deeply unpopular political response.
|
|
|
On September 26 2016 23:08 Gorsameth wrote:
I just had to do check the top of the page but yes, this is the US politics thread, not the EU one.
So why is it full of EU migrant talk now?
Obsessions are globalized too!
|
|
|
I'm gonna guess Chicago, L.A., Baltimore, Houston, Atlanta, New Orleans, and either Philadelphia or St. Louis to round out the last spot 
|
On September 26 2016 23:08 Gorsameth wrote:
I just had to do check the top of the page but yes, this is the US politics thread, not the EU one.
So why is it full of EU migrant talk now?
Both the EU and US suffer from a severe case of Feels before Reals when it comes to Muslims and immigration. Although the people in the US like to act like we are totally different from the EU, in this case, we have a lot of fear when shit really isn’t all that bad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
