Whites are quitting cities (in Britain)

The Sun via Drudge ^ | February 10, 2005 | NIC CECIL

[Korth]

TENS of thousands of white families are pouring out of UK cities as immigrants move in, a controversial new report claims.

The exodus is creating an increasingly divided society, says the study for independent think-tank Migrationwatch UK.

It found that 600,000 more people left London for the regions between 1993-2002 than arrived in the capital from elsewhere in Britain.

Those moving out were believed to be mainly white. In the same decade, the number of immigrants arriving in London went up by 726,000.

Migrationwatch said there were similar changes in Manchester and Birmingham. Chairman Sir Andrew Green said: “The development of increasingly ‘parallel societies’ in some of our major cities is extremely undesirable.

“Government immigration policy is exacerbating this trend.”

The report follows a study for the Greater London Authority last year which showed the proportion of whites in London fell by almost eight per cent in the 1990s.

Migrationwatch claimed the biggest population movement was from high ethnic minority areas to largely white communities.

But Keith Best — head of the Immigration Advisory Service — said: “They are making dangerous assumptions.”

[GOP_1900AD]

I know that there are people moving up to Scotland, ongoing. If the trend keeps up, there will be more Englishmen there than Scots in about 10 years.

[facedown]

Whites are quitting cities (in Britain)

Now there's a shocker.

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

But Keith Best — head of the Immigration Advisory Service — said: “They are making dangerous assumptions.”

Telling the truth is a dangerous assumption?

[Clemenza]

Whites are quitting cities (in Britain)

P-ssies...

[AngryJawa]

Bush's Fault...8^)

[RetiredArmy]

Sounds like most of Kaliforniastan and Seattle.

[siunevada]

Telling the truth is a dangerous assumption?

If one is committed to a Big Lie the truth is indeed dangerous. I guess it is easy tell what this bureaucrat is committed to.

[Wallace T.]

This "white flight" has occurred for a lot longer in the United States, as far back as the 1940s, when the GI Bill encouraged mass construction of new homes in suburbs from Long Island to the San Fernando Valley. The article does not say if the white Britons were leaving their equivalent of Chicago, Detroit, or Dallas for their equivalent of Du Page County, Troy, or Plano. It may also be that they are abandoning whole sections of the United Kingdom, much as many white Californians are abandoning the entire state.

[Lowcountry]

“Government immigration policy is exacerbating this trend.”

The question should be "what is the British government doing that causes immigrants to move to the cities?"

Here in the United States our cities are basically socialist havens that invite the underclass. Think about it: Government jobs, food, housing, schools, transportation, day care, health care and social services - all governemnt run and paid for by thoses seeking to leave. If you want to see what the socialist system would look like in America, just look at ANY inner city.

That's why people are "quitting" the cities in the U.S.

[Tuba Guy]

dhimmitude:

live it .......... or fight it!

[Clemenza]

Really, Seattle is filled with white and Asian yuppies. The underclass lives in places like Renton, Skyway, and Tukwila.

[yobid]

As the non-english speaking population increases in my "Sweet Home Chicago", I'm contemplating getting out as well. Enough is enough.

[JudgemAll]

It's not about immigration per se, it's every bit about culture.

I'm sorry, but immigration is the direct raiser of these kinds unfriendly influx into cities. Amnesty those coming in, but not those living in. Typical.

[Lowcountry]

"as far back as the 1940s, when the GI Bill encouraged mass construction of new homes in suburbs from Long Island to the San Fernando Valley."

It may be a small mistake, but the GI Bill did not "encourage" the construction to occur in the "suburbs." The suburbs were simply the result of what happens when new homes are built in urban areas. Some call it sprawl, but it is simply the growth of new development.

[JudgemAll]

dhimmitude: live it .......... or fight it!

Bingo.

[longtermmemmory]

red UK/blue UK?

[Wallace T.]

I am not opposed to what the liberals call urban sprawl. As areas within city limits filled in, it was inevitable that adjacent communities would be subject to development. The GI Bill helped introduce mortgage lending at below market rates and low down payments, more liberal terms than had existed previously. It probably sped up the development of suburbs than would have otherwise been the case, but such growth would nonetheless have occurred. New York, Boston, Chicago, and Philadelphia had suburbs well before World War II, some even dating back to the late 1800s. These suburbs, like Garden City, NY, Evanston, IL, or Brookline, MA, were mostly upper middle class or better. Suburban growth has continued, even though the GIs who populated the post-World War II suburbs have either died or are in their 80s or more.

[Clemenza]

Chicago has been filled with non-English speakers since the 1850s, when the Germans arrived in droves. Its just that, due to strict immigration laws from the 1920s-1960s, the valve was closed and it became a largely English speaking city as the second and third generations became Americanized. Now, of course, its back to what it was in the 1920s, when you would rarely hear English outside of the loop.

When I lived in Chicago (1997-1999) I heard everything from Russian to Farsi, to Yoruba, to Mandarin Chinese, to standard English. This was all in a little neighborhood on the far North Side.