Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
I think the fat cat is pointing out that those projections are based on sustained eveidence. Evidence you debunked with some Canadian figures showing a rapid drop off in birth rates there.
20 years is a generation. Try reading the arguments again.
I think the fat cat is pointing out that those projections are based on sustained eveidence. Evidence you debunked with some Canadian figures showing a rapid drop off in birth rates there.
Overall, Muslims account for 3 per cent of the British population, about 1.5 million people. However, the Muslim birthrate is roughly three times higher than the non Muslim one.
This what CD based his predictions on and he was roundly pilloried. Seems the rate hasn't changed in the last 20 years. So much for that theory of birth rates dropping to the norm.
Time for an apology Greg, SASguru et al?
CD was talking about the Asian birthrate not the Muslim one, and making ludicrous projections and I am not going down this path again this week. Hard to believe though it might be, I have a living to earn.
Overall, Muslims account for 3 per cent of the British population, about 1.5 million people. However, the Muslim birthrate is roughly three times higher than the non Muslim one.
This what CD based his predictions on and he was roundly pilloried. Seems the rate hasn't changed in the last 20 years. So much for that theory of birth rates dropping to the norm.
Time for an apology Greg, SASguru et al?
define "norm". Culturally immigrants from Africa, South Asia have larger families so that is their "norm".
Overall, Muslims account for 3 per cent of the British population, about 1.5 million people. However, the Muslim birthrate is roughly three times higher than the non Muslim one.
This what CD based his predictions on and he was roundly pilloried. Seems the rate hasn't changed in the last 20 years. So much for that theory of birth rates dropping to the norm.
Muhammad is now second only to Jack as the most popular name for baby boys in Britain and is likely to rise to No 1 by next year, a study by The Times has found. The name, if all 14 different spellings are included, was shared by 5,991 newborn boys last year, beating Thomas into third place, followed by Joshua and Oliver.
Although the official names register places the spelling Mohammed at No 23, an analysis of the top 3,000 names provided by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) puts Muhammad at No 2 once the 14 spellings are taken into account. If its popularity continues – it rose by 12 per cent last year – the name will take the top spot by the end of this year. It first entered the Top 30 in 2000.
Overall, Muslims account for 3 per cent of the British population, about 1.5 million people. However, the Muslim birthrate is roughly three times higher than the non Muslim one.
Statistics from the ONS show that Muslim households are larger than those headed by someone of another religion. In 2001, the average size of a Muslim household was 3.8 people while a third contained more than five people.
In 2001, the average size of a Muslim household was 3.8 people while a third contained more than five people.
But what is this supposed to mean? Doesn't it just mean that Muslim families, by culture rather than religion, tend to keep several generations living together in one house whereas the rest of us leave home at 17 and never go back, and dump anyone old into a residential home/prison camp.
Also, what is the figure for non-Muslims? 3.8 doesn't sound that high really. There's six in my household and most people I know have 3 or 4 people in theirs.
As all (with few exceptions) male muslim children are named after the prophet it is a little disengenious to measure that name against any other single name.
We can assume that all other names are non muslim so we should measure the Mohameds against ALL other names. Then we would see a relevance.
What is significant here is the "3.8" and "3 times the birth rate" figures which I believe give evidence supporting arguments in another thread .
Leave a comment: