Metro Vancouver is now more multicultural than Miami, Los Angeles or New York City.

[Nutterbug]

Originally Posted by zivan56

I agree, Metro Vancouver is more "tri-cultural" than it is actually multicultural. At least it's not as bad as Miami...although Richmond could be soon
Look at this chart (keep in mind most people in BC live in Metro Vancouver, so it's pretty much right on):

Source: wikipedia

[zivan56]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Not at all my friend, in fact not even half of BC residents live in Metro Vancouver, and the interior regions tend to be predominantly white and indegious so that chart in no way represents Vancouver.

Metro Van in 2006: 2,116,581
BC in 2006: 4,254,500
=~ 50%
Even if everybody was "white" in the interior, it is still a 3 way split between the same groups.
While there may be many cultures here, most of the population consists of the 3 main groups.
If you look at Toronto for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Toronto
There are 5 predominant groups, which is a bit better. However, I don't see how Miami is that multicultural either:
# 66.6% White
# 22.3% African American
# 0.2% Native American
# 0.7% Asian

[mr.x]

here's multicultural Vancouver for ya during the Santa Claus Parade last week:

[raggedy13]

^Sweet picture.

I really don't look into this General Discussion area enough.

Anyways, here is an interesting immigration-related article I found about Vancouver...

Asia immigration churns Canada's cultural makeup

1 day ago

VANCOUVER, Canada (AFP) — When Tung Chan immigrated here from Hong Kong in 1974 most people spoke English, there was one Chinese-language newspaper, and historic "Chinatown" was considered exotic.

Waves of immigration from Asia have since turned this West Coast metropolis into an Asian-flavored, multicultural entrepot, with newcomers -- including growing numbers of mixed-race couples -- resident on virtually every street.

English and French are Canada's official languages. But Chinese and other languages have made steep gains in recent years, according to the latest census, released this week.

News here is now delivered in 22 different languages through more than 144 different media outlets.

Shops and bank machines post signs in English, Chinese, Punjabi and Farsi.

Former "ethnic" goods are rarely differentiated, with grocery stores selling Bok Choy next to spinach, lemon grass alongside parsley, and Indian chutneys in the ketchup and mustard aisle.

Even Vancouver's city hall provides basic information about municipal services in Mandarin, Cantonese, Punjabi, Spanish and Vietnamese.

"Vancouver has changed dramatically," said Chan. "We're really very lucky -- this is a microcosm of the world."

In 150 short years Vancouver shot from being a largely aboriginal community, to becoming a resource-extraction outpost for mostly Britons and other Europeans, to one of the world's most multicultural destinations today for immigrants who speak a dizzying variety of languages.

Chan came here at age 22, and eventually became a successful banker, member of the city council, and now a philanthropist and the head of an agency to help new immigrants.

He said old and new residents here mostly get along well, and Canadians, especially in Vancouver, "should be very, very proud of ourselves in terms of how we integrate people."

"The mentality here is integration rather than confrontation," said Eleanor Yuen, a Hong Kong native who now heads the Asian Library at the University of British Columbia.

"Most of the people who come here don't come with a strong ideology that they want to fight and die for."

Yuen said accommodation and integration in Canada differs from Western Europe, where her research shows immigrants, including those from China, tend to stay in "a ghetto of their own, in secluded areas, and speak little English."

Nationally, Canada has one of the world's highest immigration levels compared to its population. A federal report this week showed the mother tongue of fully one in five Canadians is no longer English or French, especially in major cities like Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal.

Overall, nearly 18 million Canadians still cite English as their first language, and nearly seven million call French their mother tongue, Statistics Canada reported.

But newcomers from Asia have made Chinese the third most common language now, with about one million speakers (324,000 in Vancouver), and up 18.5 percent between 2001 and 2006, compared to an increase of just 3.1 percent for English speakers and 1.7 percent for Francophones.

Punjabi speakers increased by 35.5 per cent in the same period, and immigrants from India now number about 350,000 nationwide (117,000 in Vancouver).

The rise of ethnic media especially is a sign of how rapidly the West Coast culture is changing, said Catherine Murray, a professor at Simon Fraser University here. Murray and a team of researchers recently released a report on local news media outlets in 22 languages.

One potential problem, said both Chan and Murray, is the gap between new media outlets, which focus mostly on overseas and cultural news, and mainstream media that reports on local and national issues.

"The big stories in English media are not followed in Asian media," said Murray, citing a dearth of ethnic media reports about Canada's military in Afghanistan.

"Overlooking Canada's war effort in Afghanistan is setting up an important dynamic in the next election," she said.

Chinese newspapers "have to do a much better job in providing coverage for local issues," said Chan. "Most reporters are from China or Hong Kong, and many of them do not have the necessary understanding of the nuances of Canadian issues. That, to me, is an area that could be improved."

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5...56BW-vONiies8w

I bolded a lot but I found those bits especially interesting, at least as a local.

[raggedy13]

After reading previous comments in this thread, I don't see what the big deal is. Yeah we've got 3 predominant 'racial' groups but they can be subdivided into many different Eurasian ethnicities. Just because you might not be able to distinguish between them at first glance doesn't mean they aren't equally significant and contribute something unique to the city's cultural fabric. And just because the rest aren't equally as big as the main groups doesn't mean they don't add to the greater picture. Depending on your neighbourhood, some of these smaller groups can have a significant impact.

Essentially it's like Metro Vancouver has some large all encompassing 'background' ethnicities with a variety of smaller ethnic communities doting the landscape. Each smaller community on its own may seem insignificant but altogether the metro would be a very different place without them.

Also, since when must New York be the defining standard of 'multicultural'? Why must a more equal population of visible minorities immediately equate to being more multicultural? Just because say our black population is proportionally smaller than New York's doesn't mean it is any less relevant. Also, using the racial view that some here appear to favour, New York has a much larger white population than Vancouver. In that sense, perhaps Vancouver is more 'balanced' after all:

In 2005, New York was 73.8% 'white' (this includes 'white Hispanics' seeing as some people prefer not to break things down into separate ethnicities). In comparison, in 2001 Vancouver was 63.1% 'non-visible minority' (ie white). Obviously after gaining 5 more years of immigrants this has no doubt decreased further by the 2006 census.

Sources:
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/36000.html
http://www12.statcan.ca/english/prof...lts.cfm?Lang=E


Ultimately, when you consider the time frame, Vancouver has accomplished a lot in a very short time. No other similarly populated metro can compare to Vancouver. New York has had centuries to build upon its diversity. In little more than a decade from now Vancouver will be in a whole other league than New York. I've read that it has been projected that by 2017 Vancouver will be one of only two cities in the 'Western World' (the whole world?) with no majority racial group (the other of course being Toronto). When you break that down into separate ethnicities, Vancouver would have already had no majority ethnicity even earlier. I find that pretty impressive.

[Dr Nevergold]

Originally Posted by westcoast604

We aren't more multi-cultural than those cities. Taking a look at that picture you see one predominant race. Asian. We have a large asian population, and a sizable east indian population. Thats it. Hardly Multi.

The same can be said of Miami which is predominantly hispanic and most of the foreign born is in latin america.

[Phil McAvity]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

i think someone secretly harbours racist views

Geeze, ya think, there Captain Obvious? With many people it isn't even a secret, myself included. I find older people generally more racist. Or perhaps they are just more honest about it.

That pie chart showing the racial breakdown of BC is in no way indicative of Vancouver's racial breakdown either. If you think there are anything close to the percentage of Chinese people living in say Prince George, Cranbrook or Victoria as there are in Vancouver, you really need to shake your head.

Try this pie chart instead:

[twoNeurons]

interesting Pie. I think that if immigration slows in the next few years, the next generation of kids will be a "little" more asian, and a lot more caucasian. Education, after all, is officially only really in English and French.

If you have Chinese Canadian friends who don't speak or Write Chinese, that's what a lot of the next generation will be. I don't think the Chinese will rush to keep their identity in Canada as there's no threat against it, but that's my opinion.

[cornholio]

i wonder when their going to finally split up the white segment into western european, eastern european, central european and southern european. there is as many if not more visible differences between european cultures as there are most aisian cultures.

[MolsonExport]

^really? Not sure about that. Do you really think that say, people of czech descent differ more from say, people of Spanish descent, than do people of Pakistani descent differ from people of Korean descent?

[cornholio]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

^really? Not sure about that. Do you really think that say, people of czech descent differ more from say, people of Spanish descent, than do people of Pakistani descent differ from people of Korean descent?

yes there are big differences but these groups that you mention are already split in to different categories as you can see in the above pie chart. people of Spanish decent are completely different then people of Czech decent. people of Spanish decent have more in common with people from north Africa while Czechs have more in common with the Slavic tribes that originated in eastern Europe. Europe is home to several different groups of people, you have the Mediterranean, you have the Albanian, the Irish, Germanic, Slavic and to a extent Scandavanian and British/Scotish differ from the other also. these are not just cultural differences but physical differences as well, no less important then say Chinese, south east aisian, Filipino etc.

[raggedy13]

Yeah, 'Asia' encompasses quite a large and diverse area. Though it seems most people associate 'Asians' with East Asians. But even among East Asians I think you could say the diversity is similar to that diversity between European nations. Different European countries like different East Asian countries have their own languages, cuisines, traditions, regional variations in the frequency of certain physical features etc.

I bet shortly after the current white majority has slipped under 50% they'll consider statistically dividing it up into its separate European immigrant components since technically there won't really be any such thing as a 'visible minority'. Although at the same time, such a graph as the pie shown above doesn't show immigrant groups. Aside from the large 'white' group, it mostly shows ethnic nationalities. It would be difficult to divide the white group up in the same manner since many Canadian-born whites are products of mixed European ethnicities (at least I assume). So they'd either have to set aside a unique group for them, or put them under a broader 'mixed ethnicities' grouping which would likely result in the city statistically appearing less 'white' than it actually is. Not that it is a big deal but from an outsiders perspective it might seem to exaggerate our degree of multiculturalism.

Looking at that pie chart I'm curious as to where somebody of half-Asian, half-European ancestry would be put? There doesn't seem to be a category for that. The closest thing appears to be 'multiple visible minorities' but if you're half-Chinese, half-Scottish you wouldn't technically be multiple visible minorities because you'd really be 'half-visible minority', right? They need a somewhat broader category methinks.

[Nutterbug]

Originally Posted by raggedy13

Yeah, 'Asia' encompasses quite a large and diverse area. Though it seems most people associate 'Asians' with East Asians. But even among East Asians I think you could say the diversity is similar to that diversity between European nations. Different European countries like different East Asian countries have their own languages, cuisines, traditions, regional variations in the frequency of certain physical features etc.

I bet shortly after the current white majority has slipped under 50% they'll consider statistically dividing it up into its separate European immigrant components since technically there won't really be any such thing as a 'visible minority'. Although at the same time, such a graph as the pie shown above doesn't show immigrant groups. Aside from the large 'white' group, it mostly shows ethnic nationalities. It would be difficult to divide the white group up in the same manner since many Canadian-born whites are products of mixed European ethnicities (at least I assume). So they'd either have to set aside a unique group for them, or put them under a broader 'mixed ethnicities' grouping which would likely result in the city statistically appearing less 'white' than it actually is. Not that it is a big deal but from an outsiders perspective it might seem to exaggerate our degree of multiculturalism.

Looking at that pie chart I'm curious as to where somebody of half-Asian, half-European ancestry would be put? There doesn't seem to be a category for that. The closest thing appears to be 'multiple visible minorities' but if you're half-Chinese, half-Scottish you wouldn't technically be multiple visible minorities because you'd really be 'half-visible minority', right? They need a somewhat broader category methinks.

Or some people just spend too much time analyzing useless data.

[giallo]

Originally Posted by raggedy13

Yeah, 'Asia' encompasses quite a large and diverse area. Though it seems most people associate 'Asians' with East Asians. But even among East Asians I think you could say the diversity is similar to that diversity between European nations. Different European countries like different East Asian countries have their own languages, cuisines, traditions, regional variations in the frequency of certain physical features etc.

I bet shortly after the current white majority has slipped under 50% they'll consider statistically dividing it up into its separate European immigrant components since technically there won't really be any such thing as a 'visible minority'. Although at the same time, such a graph as the pie shown above doesn't show immigrant groups. Aside from the large 'white' group, it mostly shows ethnic nationalities. It would be difficult to divide the white group up in the same manner since many Canadian-born whites are products of mixed European ethnicities (at least I assume). So they'd either have to set aside a unique group for them, or put them under a broader 'mixed ethnicities' grouping which would likely result in the city statistically appearing less 'white' than it actually is. Not that it is a big deal but from an outsiders perspective it might seem to exaggerate our degree of multiculturalism.

Looking at that pie chart I'm curious as to where somebody of half-Asian, half-European ancestry would be put? There doesn't seem to be a category for that. The closest thing appears to be 'multiple visible minorities' but if you're half-Chinese, half-Scottish you wouldn't technically be multiple visible minorities because you'd really be 'half-visible minority', right? They need a somewhat broader category methinks.

My future child will fall in to that category as my girlfriend is Taiwanese and I'm English/French/Polish.

[renthefinn]

My daughter is Finnish / Chinese