HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Europe

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #101  
Old Posted Jun 6, 2009, 9:51 PM
FREKI's Avatar
FREKI FREKI is offline
Kicking it Viking style..
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 6,961
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swede View Post
Yeah, South of Berlin (or the Alps when being generous) and east of Finland = not really "white" to those who care about such things up here. Where the line between the races are drawn is very arbitrary.
I remember my first visit to Geneva last millenium - first trip south of Hamburg - gotta say I was very suprised and people didn't exactly look as I had expected the Swiss to look.. ( thank you Hollywood )

Using "white" is such a dumb term - not only are no people on the planet white and if there was it would certainly not be anything to be proud about!


"Ze master race" - well not quite, but that pink tone is nothing a little skin bleech can't handle!
__________________
Recent FREKI PRESENTS threads:
Prague - Denmark - The Wild Wild West - Dubai - Phuket - Shanghai

Last edited by FREKI; Jun 6, 2009 at 10:11 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #102  
Old Posted Jun 7, 2009, 4:10 AM
SrbijaCG's Avatar
SrbijaCG SrbijaCG is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 545
For the first time since the last census was taken in 1991, all the ex-Yugoslav states will be conducting a simultaneous official census in 2011.

What do you think, will there be less of us, more or just about the same?

Data from last Yugoslav census of 1991:

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #103  
Old Posted Apr 1, 2010, 5:15 PM
liat91's Avatar
liat91 liat91 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Metropolis
Posts: 497
Race can be important, and observed for other than negative conotations.
On the contrary for example; in the United States it is measured to protect minorities, not scrutinize them. There are also important measures including health and medicine. By counting race you can more aptly find better methods of treatment for certain populations.

So unless you knew where the black people in France where living, it would be more difficult to direct resources and flow of services for this group. Their increased susceptibility to sickle-cell disease for example is one variable.

It's foolish to not see the importance in measuring a population by as many variables as possible.
__________________
WATCH OUT!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #104  
Old Posted Apr 4, 2010, 4:45 PM
New Brisavoine New Brisavoine is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,066
Now that the first decade of the new century is over, we have a better view of what's shaping up for this century in Europe.

Population from 0 to 9 y/o (on Jan. 1, 2010):
- Russia: 14,846,546
- France: 8,027,605
- UK: approx. 7,200,000
- Germany: 7,038,185
- Italy: approx. 5,650,000
- Spain: 4,759,123
- Ukraine: 4,324,491
- Poland: 3,753,727
- Netherlands: 1,927,534

Source: the statistics offices of each country.
__________________
New Axa – New Brisavoine
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #105  
Old Posted Apr 4, 2010, 5:26 PM
SHiRO's Avatar
SHiRO SHiRO is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Barcelona
Posts: 15,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Brisavoine View Post
Now that the first decade of the new century is over, we have a better view of what's shaping up for this century in Europe.
Nonsensical comment...

But thanks for the data anyway...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #106  
Old Posted Jul 31, 2010, 5:54 PM
Minato Ku's Avatar
Minato Ku Minato Ku is offline
Tokyo and Paris fan
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Paris, Montrouge
Posts: 3,810
It is not that true, racism is reconized but without some racial stat it can be more difficult in some case to prove racism, especially the discrimination.
If somebody call you dirty n*** in the street, it can be easy to prove racism but how could you prove that you were not employed by an entreprise because you are black.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #107  
Old Posted Jul 31, 2010, 6:19 PM
Swede's Avatar
Swede Swede is offline
YIMBY co-founder
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: sol.III.eu.se.08
Posts: 6,710
yeah, race is far from denied in countries that don't keep track of what race everyone is. racial discrimination is taken very seriously in Sweden, I doubt the tax authority keeping track of what race you are would, help in any way shape or form.
__________________
Forumers met so far:
Huopa, Nightsky, Jo, wolkenkrabber, ThisSideofSteinway, jacksom, New Jack City, LeCom, Ellatur, Jan, Dennis, Ace, Bardamu, AtlanticaC5, Ringil, Dysfunctional, stacey, karakhal, ch1le, Hviid, staff, kjetilab, Þróndeimr, queetz, FREKI, sander, Blue Viking, nomels, Mantas, ristov, Rafal_T, khaan, Chilenofuturista, Jonte Myra, safta20, AW, Pas, Jarmo K, IceCheese, Sideshow_Bob, sk, Ingenioren, Ayreonaut, Silver Creations, Hasse78, Svartmetall
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #108  
Old Posted Aug 1, 2010, 10:17 AM
Spocket's Avatar
Spocket Spocket is offline
Keep yo pimp hand strong
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Changchun , China
Posts: 2,722
Why are some people so keen to jump and down to proclaim that race doesn't matter and the very mention of it is enough to send them into hysterical politically correct shrieks ? There's nothing at all wrong with discussing race even if some people can't do so without getting their underwear in a knot at the prospect .

I for one would like to see Europe remain majority white . I would also like to see sub-Saharan Africa remain majority black . There's absolutely nothing wrong with saying this either despite how some people would like to jump on the statements and paint them as overtly racist . Diversity is good and you can't remain diverse if everybody is the same .

Europe's birthrates for historically-native people ARE below replacement levels . Obviously if this continues the people we think of today as European will eventually become not just minorities in their own countries but possibly extinct as distinct groups of people . That , however , is a very long way off and historically speaking , populations rise and decline all the time . It's actually highly unlikely that the current trend will continue for any great length of time longer . Some countries such as France and Russia are beginning to see a rise in their birthrates .

It's also likely that Muslims will continue to make up a greater and greater proportion of the European population . Quite simply , they have higher birth-rates and are less amenable to the secular ideals that currently act as a defacto population control mechanism . On the other hand , just as with all immigrants , successive generations tend to lose their cultural (and in this case religious) identity such that they basically assimilate completely . If the spigot was turned off tomorrow , Muslims currently residing within Europe would probably take on the same ideals and worldviews as the rest of the European population .
__________________
Giving you a reason to drink and drive since 1975.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #109  
Old Posted Aug 2, 2010, 7:18 PM
sopas ej's Avatar
sopas ej sopas ej is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: South Pasadena, California
Posts: 3,572
I find it interesting that a number of European nations don't even keep statistics on race; I would think that people would be curious to know the racial makeup of their populations. I discovered this some years ago when I wanted to know what percentage of the people in France are black, and couldn't find any statistics.

My own experience growing up in the United States, California in particular, back when affirmative action policies were in place at public colleges and universities, keeping track of race and ethnicity doesn't faze me. Also, filling out job applications, there's always that section where you may state your race/ethnicity, but it's always with the disclaimer that filling out that section is "for statistical purposes only and is entirely voluntary, and will not affect your chances of getting hired" or however it's worded.
__________________
I'm just a soul whose intentions are good.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #110  
Old Posted Jun 19, 2013, 3:27 PM
New Brisavoine New Brisavoine is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,066
The largest French, German, and British cities in 1806. The list is interesting because it shows the ranking of these cities on the eve of the Industrial Revolution, i.e. before the Industrial Revolution completely changed the size and ranking of the Western European cities. It also shows indirectly which Western European cities have the largest pre-industrial city centers (if they haven't been destroyed during WW2).

French figures come from the 1806 Napoleonic census, which was the best census taken in France in the early 19th century. British figures are a linear interpolation of the 1801 and 1811 British censuses. Belfast is a pre-census estimate. As for Germany, figures come from the various censuses organized by each city and state.

The population for each city is within city limits. Today it would make such a list useless, due to suburbanization, but back in 1806 all built-up areas were still contained within the city limits, except for London, where the figure given here refers to the city and its suburbs.

Population in 1806:
- London: 934,399
- Paris: 649,412
- Berlin: 170,000 (1806)
- Lyon: 114,184
- Hamburg: 106,983 (1811)
- Manchester: 99,830
- Marseilles: 99,169
- Bordeaux: 92,219
- Edinburgh: 92,210
- Liverpool: 89,394
- Glasgow: 88,298

- Rouen: 86,672
- Birmingham: 79,482
- Nantes: 77,226
- Bristol: 69,747
- Lille: 68,800
- Leeds: 57,658
- Dresden: 55,711 (1806)
- Toulouse: 51,689
- Strasbourg: 51,465
- Plymouth: 49,208
- Orléans: 42,651
- Nîmes: 41,195
- Munich: 40,638 (1810)
- Frankfurt: 40,485 (1810)
- Cologne: 40,400 (1807)
- Amiens: 39,853
- Metz: 39,523
- Norwich: 37,043
- Portsmouth: 36,713

- Caen: 36,231
- Bremen: 36,041 (1807)
- Paisley: 33,837
- Sheffield: 33,501

- Magdeburg: 33,466 (1804)
- Montpellier: 33,264
- Leipzig: 32,146 (1800)
- Rochdale: 32,910
- Rheims: 31,779
- Nottingham: 31,442
- Aberdeen: 31,249

- Brest: 31,169
- Clermont-Ferrand: 30,982
- Nancy: 30,532
- Braunschweig/Brunswick: 29,950 (1812)
- Bath: 29,530
- Rennes: 29,225
- Angers: 29,187
- Troyes: 29,005
- Besançon: 28,727
- Augsburg: 28,534 (1806)
- Toulon: 28,170
- Newcastle: 27,974
- Dundee: 27,794

- Aachen/Aix-la-Chapelle: 27,168 (1808)
- Versailles: 26,974
- Dunkirk: 26,628
- Saint-Etienne: 26,070
- Nuremberg: 25,176 (1806)
- Le Havre: 25,078

- Belfast: ca. 25,000
__________________
New Axa – New Brisavoine
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #111  
Old Posted Jun 20, 2013, 4:53 AM
Swede's Avatar
Swede Swede is offline
YIMBY co-founder
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: sol.III.eu.se.08
Posts: 6,710
^Sweden today would merge nicely into that list (except for Stockholm standing out a bit). What were the total populations of the countries back then?
__________________
Forumers met so far:
Huopa, Nightsky, Jo, wolkenkrabber, ThisSideofSteinway, jacksom, New Jack City, LeCom, Ellatur, Jan, Dennis, Ace, Bardamu, AtlanticaC5, Ringil, Dysfunctional, stacey, karakhal, ch1le, Hviid, staff, kjetilab, Þróndeimr, queetz, FREKI, sander, Blue Viking, nomels, Mantas, ristov, Rafal_T, khaan, Chilenofuturista, Jonte Myra, safta20, AW, Pas, Jarmo K, IceCheese, Sideshow_Bob, sk, Ingenioren, Ayreonaut, Silver Creations, Hasse78, Svartmetall
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #112  
Old Posted Jun 20, 2013, 5:25 AM
SHiRO's Avatar
SHiRO SHiRO is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Barcelona
Posts: 15,728
Low Countries around 1810 (estimates)

Amsterdam 180,000 (down from 206,000 in 1675)
Brussels 80,000 (120,000 including the villages that are included in the city today)
Rotterdam 64,000
Antwerp 60,000
Ghent 60,000
The Hague 50,000
Liege 47,000
Utrecht 35,000
Bruges 33,000
Leiden 28,000 (down from 70,000 in 1675)
Haarlem 23,000 (down from 37,000 in 1675)
Leuven 23,000
Middelburg 21,000 (down from 30,000 in 1675)
Mechelen 20,000
__________________
For some the coast signifies the end of their country and for some it signifies the beginning of the world...

Last edited by SHiRO; Jun 20, 2013 at 5:44 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #113  
Old Posted Jun 20, 2013, 1:05 PM
prahovaploiesti prahovaploiesti is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
I'm selfishly a little happy that Southern and Eastern Europe are (so far) not as multicultural. I would hate for Naples to feel like an indistinct mix of peoples (like current Frankfurt or Rotterdam). At that point, I feel I might as well stay here in Brooklyn because everywhere else is pretty much the same.
That depends on how far in time you go with a demographic study.
For example in Romania there are more than 16 officially recognized minorities: hungarians and szeklers, roma (please do not mistake them for romanians), ukrainians, transilvanyan saxons and swabians, russians/lipovans, turks, crimean tatars, serbs, slovaks, bulgarians, croats/krasovani, greeks, jews, czechs, poles, italians, chinese, armenians, csango. Also there are important comunities of aromanians, syrians and other smaller arab ethnicities witch I don't know if they are officialy recognized, but they do have citizenship. Then you have the moldavians who declare themselves romanians. Also africans with citizenship or african-romanians (africans born in romania). Most of these minorities are married with romanians, who themselves are in large part of another descent.

Basically Romania is a mix of peoples and cultures since the antiquity, from the dacs marrying romans, then the invasion of mongols and tatars, nomadic peoples, the Ottoman Empire etc.

Also there are a lot of romanians who know their descent but declare themselves as romanians.

I myself am part german (swabian), part polish, from what I know, but I think I have at least 4 or 5 more different genes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #114  
Old Posted Jun 20, 2013, 1:19 PM
New Brisavoine New Brisavoine is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,066
Quote:
Originally Posted by SHiRO View Post
Low Countries around 1810 (estimates)

Amsterdam 180,000 (down from 206,000 in 1675)
Brussels 80,000 (120,000 including the villages that are included in the city today)
Rotterdam 64,000
Antwerp 60,000
Ghent 60,000
The Hague 50,000
Liege 47,000
Utrecht 35,000
Bruges 33,000
Leiden 28,000 (down from 70,000 in 1675)
Haarlem 23,000 (down from 37,000 in 1675)
Leuven 23,000
Middelburg 21,000 (down from 30,000 in 1675)
Mechelen 20,000
The figure for Brussels looks exaggerated. Brussels was included in the 1806 French census, since it was part of France at the time, and its population at the 1806 census was precisely 72,280.

The figures for the other Belgian cities look right.
__________________
New Axa – New Brisavoine
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #115  
Old Posted Jun 22, 2013, 6:06 PM
New Brisavoine New Brisavoine is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,066
+ the Low Countries.

Population in 1806:
- London: 934,399
- Paris: 649,412
- Amsterdam: 185,000
- Berlin: 170,000 (1806)
- Lyon: 114,184
- Hamburg: 106,983 (1811)
- Manchester: 99,830
- Marseilles: 99,169
- Bordeaux: 92,219
- Edinburgh: 92,210
- Liverpool: 89,394
- Glasgow: 88,298

- Rouen: 86,672
- Birmingham: 79,482
- Nantes: 77,226
- Brussels: 73,928
- Bristol: 69,747
- Lille: 68,800
- Antwerp: 60,057
- Rotterdam: 59,000
- Ghent: 58,199
- Leeds: 57,658
- Dresden: 55,711 (1806)
- Toulouse: 51,689
- Strasbourg: 51,465
- Plymouth: 49,208
- Liège: 46,983
- Orléans: 42,651
- Nîmes: 41,195
- Munich: 40,638 (1810)
- Frankfurt: 40,485 (1810)
- Cologne: 40,400 (1807)
- The Hague: 40,000
- Amiens: 39,853
- Metz: 39,523
- Norwich: 37,043
- Portsmouth: 36,713

- Caen: 36,231
- Bremen: 36,041 (1807)
- Bruges: 34,245
- Utrecht: 34,000
- Paisley: 33,837
- Sheffield: 33,501

- Magdeburg: 33,466 (1804)
- Montpellier: 33,264
- Leipzig: 32,146 (1800)
- Rochdale: 32,910
- Rheims: 31,779
- Nottingham: 31,442
- Aberdeen: 31,249

- Brest: 31,169
- Clermont-Ferrand: 30,982
- Nancy: 30,532
- Braunschweig/Brunswick: 29,950 (1812)
- Bath: 29,530
- Rennes: 29,225
- Angers: 29,187
- Troyes: 29,005
- Leiden: 29,000
- Besançon: 28,727
- Augsburg: 28,534 (1806)
- Toulon: 28,170
- Newcastle: 27,974
- Dundee: 27,794

- Aachen/Aix-la-Chapelle: 27,168 (1808)
- Versailles: 26,974
- Dunkirk: 26,628
- Saint-Etienne: 26,070
- Nuremberg: 25,176 (1806)
- Le Havre: 25,078

- Belfast: ca. 25,000
- Groningen: ca. 25,000
__________________
New Axa – New Brisavoine
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #116  
Old Posted Jun 22, 2013, 6:25 PM
New Brisavoine New Brisavoine is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,066
For comparison, the population of the largest urban areas of France, Germany, the Low Countries, and the UK in 1900. The figures here aggregate the cities and their suburbs as they existed in 1900 (by 1900, many European cities had grown beyond their municipal borders). The figures have been computed by the Geopolis research group, using the population censuses of each country + detailed ordnance maps of 1900.

Population of the urban areas in 1900:
- London: 6,507,000
- Paris: 3,733,000
- Berlin: 2,644,000
- Manchester (incl. Rochdale and many other suburbs): 1,920,000
- Birmingham: 1,360,000
- Ruhr: 1,300,000
- Leeds: 1,004,000
- Hamburg: 983,000
- Liverpool: 963,000
- Glasgow (incl. Paisley and many other suburbs): 867,000
- Newcastle: 688,000

- Brussels: 650,000
- Amsterdam: 524,000

- Munich: 519,000
- Lyon: 508,000
...
...
only a few urban areas available below 500,000 inh.
...
- Marseille: 481,000
...
- Rotterdam: 372,000
__________________
New Axa – New Brisavoine
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #117  
Old Posted Jun 28, 2013, 10:34 AM
prahovaploiesti prahovaploiesti is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 10
These are the current Top 10 Romanian cities from the 2011 census, and their historical population based on the first mentioned year on wikipedia.

1. Bucharest, 1,677,985 - 10,000 (1595)
2. Cluj-Napoca, 309,136 - 6,000 (1453)
3. Timisoara, 303,708 - 9,479 (1787)
4. Iasi, 263,410 - ~30,000 (18th century)
5. Constanta, 254,633 - 5,204 (1853)
6. Craiova, 243,765 - 45,438 (1900)
7. Galati, 231,204 - 62,678 (1900)
8. Brasov, 227,961 - 30,781 (1890)
9. Ploiesti, 197,542 - 2,024 (1810)
10. Oradea, 183,123 - 9,790 (1787)

Also the Romanian population experienced a semnificative growth in the last 200 years, from 4,424,961 in 1866 to 19,042,936 in 2011 (the last official national census).
There are 3 times in this period when it registered a semnificant decrease of population: 1941 (-32,1% from the 1939 population), 2002 (-4,7% from the 1992 population) and 2011 (-12,2% from the 2002 population). The main reasons where the WWII for 1941, and the emigration wave for 2002 and 2011. It seems that the population numbers weren't affected by the communist period when most of the germans, jews and other small minorities left the country.

Last edited by prahovaploiesti; Jun 28, 2013 at 10:47 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #118  
Old Posted Jun 29, 2013, 6:57 AM
Kingofthehill's Avatar
Kingofthehill Kingofthehill is offline
International
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oslo
Posts: 4,051
No surprise that Romania's population took a major hit. Tons of young Romanians have left to find work in Spain, Italy, and Germany. And, of course, problematic Gypsy/Roma beggars (typically of Romanian and Bulgarian origin) and street children can be now be found in most major Western European cities.

The destinations served from Bucharest's airport by low-cost, no-frills carrier Wizz Air (i.e, aimed primarily at local/O&D traffic; not necessarily tourists or connecting traffic) is indicative of the places where Romanians moved to following the country's ascension to the EU: Alghero, Alicante, Barcelona, Bari, Beauvais (Paris), Bergamo, Bologna, Catania, Charleroi (Brussels), Cuneo (Turin), Dortmund, Dubai, Eindhoven, Geneva, Girona, Larnaca, London-Luton, Madrid, Milan, Naples, Palma de Mallorca, Perugia, Pisa, Rome, Oslo, Tel Aviv, Treviso, Valencia, Verona, Zaragoza.

20 out of the 30 destinations served are to either Italy or Spain.

Last edited by Kingofthehill; Jun 29, 2013 at 4:48 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #119  
Old Posted Jun 29, 2013, 12:37 PM
R@ptor's Avatar
R@ptor R@ptor is offline
Global Citizen
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Frankfurt
Posts: 6,644
You also have to consider that Romania's strong population growth in the 70s and 80s was only the result of Ceausescu's questionable policies.


The European countries with the highest population loss during the last decades.

Latvia: 2.67 million in 1989 to 2.02 million in 2013 (-24.4%)

Lithuania: 3.70 million in 1992 to 2.96 million in 2013 (-20.0%)

Romania: 23.2 million in 1990 to 18.6 million in 2013 (-19.8%)

Bulgaria: 9.01 million in 1989 to 7.30 million in 2013 (-19.0%)

Moldova: 4.36 million in 1990 to 3.56 million in 2013 (-18.4%)

Estonia: 1.57 million in 1990 to 1.28 million in 2013 (-18.4%)

Ukraine: 52.2 million in 1993 to 44.8 million in 2013 (-14.2%)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #120  
Old Posted Jun 29, 2013, 2:54 PM
New Brisavoine New Brisavoine is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,066
On Tuesday the Spanish statistical office published the 2013 post-censal estimates of the Spanish population, and the results are shocking. In 2012, Spain experienced a population decline. This is the first time since the Spanish Civil War of the 1930s that Spain experiences a population decline.

In 2012, the population of Spain decreased by 0.24%, which means a loss of 113,902 people. This is in sharp contrast to the boom years, as you can see in the graph below.

The graph shows the annual population growth of Spain, Metropolitan France (the European part of France), and the USA from 1991 to 2013. Germany and the UK have not released their intercensal and post-censal estimates yet, so it's not possible to add them on the graph.



Nearly all the Spanish regions experienced population decline in 2013, except the coast of Andalusia, the Balearic Islands, the Canary Islands, and the Spanish enclaves in North Africa.

The boom years in Madrid and Barcelona are over. The province of Madrid lost 16,357 inhabitants in 2013 (-0.25%) and the province of Barcelona lost 39,888 inhabitants (-0.72%).
__________________
New Axa – New Brisavoine
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Europe
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:54 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.