News   Oct 02, 2024
 190     0 
News   Oct 02, 2024
 359     0 
News   Oct 02, 2024
 732     0 

Minorities to be majorities in two CAD cities by 2031, Statistics Canada projects

I would cordially invite my fellow forumers to return to the topic at hand.



What are the potential consequences of this trend?

I think a consequence of this is that racist people that I hate seem to move outside of the city because of it which then makes my life much better.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Genes are not the rationale, and it makes no sense to begin using them to set groupings when the entire point of multiculturalism and counting visible minorities and asking people what ethnicity they self-identify with or what country they are from is all based on anything and everything but genes, particularly since there's absolutely no way to acquire genetic information from anonymous census respondents, even if you ask them and they're willing to answer.
Given the very high correlation between self-identified ethnicity and actual genetic ancestry, it is thankfully sufficient and common practice to not need actual genetic information for such purposes; the situation is, as I said, slightly more complicated for highly admixed populations, but the correlation is still strong, so until the whole country (or world) becomes one big mixture with free multiway gene flow, there is no reason it would not work.

Having good, scientifically consistent data on the country's ethnic make up can, for example, inform the authorities on how to allocate healthcare resources, what diseases/tests/treatments to focus on or expand upon, etc. Ethnicity and counting vismins has, you know, real "dick sucking" consequences (yea that didn't make sense, but I had to throw it in somewhere) other than how much ethnic food we're getting (or at least I hope the census takers realize that).
 
"Consequences" is such a negative word...

I think a lot of us are just afraid of asking the question. I think it is a legitimate concern when we continue to have very high levels of immigration.

This isn't just solely a race thing (though obviously most new immigrants are non-white right now), we need to be doing more to integrate better.
 
Aside from skin colour and heritage everyone could all melt someone into a new race of Canadians, perhaps even with new regional accents, it's started to happen already.
I know a Canadian Chinese guy that speaks with a Jamaican accent, and I met a blonde Canadian Dutch woman with an Indian accent and a Chinese last name. I also know a half Polish Canadian guy with a Quebecois accent.
 
Given the very high correlation between self-identified ethnicity and actual genetic ancestry, it is thankfully sufficient and common practice to not need actual genetic information for such purposes; the situation is, as I said, slightly more complicated for highly admixed populations, but the correlation is still strong, so until the whole country (or world) becomes one big mixture with free multiway gene flow, there is no reason it would not work.

Having good, scientifically consistent data on the country's ethnic make up can, for example, inform the authorities on how to allocate healthcare resources, what diseases/tests/treatments to focus on or expand upon, etc. Ethnicity and counting vismins has, you know, real "dick sucking" consequences (yea that didn't make sense, but I had to throw it in somewhere) other than how much ethnic food we're getting (or at least I hope the census takers realize that).

It doesn't work when people report themselves as "Canadian." What if 50% do this in 2011? You need to prod further than "State your ethnicity/ethnicities."
 
It doesn't work when people report themselves as "Canadian." What if 50% do this in 2011? You need to prod further than "State your ethnicity/ethnicities."
That's why I've never argued that all existing categories are adequate, and more can be done to improve the way ethnicities are reported, including continuing to refine the categories according to new data and understanding.
 
That's why I've never argued that all existing categories are adequate, and more can be done to improve the way ethnicities are reported, including continuing to refine the categories according to new data and understanding.
Some people get quite offended if asked to answer anything other than Canadian.

One of my university profs would answer "Canadian" whenever asked by anyone what her ethnic background was, even though she was an obviously Asian, teaching Japanese in university. Then again, I believe she was born and raised in Canada, so "Canadian" makes perfect sense.

---

P.S. It was rather interesting going to the Scarborough Town Centre today. Not an "ethnic" mall in the Pacific Mall sense, but Caucasians are definitely in the minority there, vs. the "invisible majority". In fact, the person I went with specficially made that comment, that she immediately notices she's in the minority when she goes to that mall. While she's fine with that, nonetheless it's something she notices. I wonder if this will be a problem for others used to being in the majority.

BTW, it still looks like crap in that mall. The renovations it's currently getting are really needed. Oh and given the ethnic makeup of the STC's clientele, it seems this picture may no longer be representative. Need to add a few hijabs or something. ;)

keyelementpic-3.jpg
 
Last edited:
I think a consequence of this is that racist people that I hate seem to move outside of the city because of it which then makes my life much better.
I love how white people who move to Oakville are considered "racist", but Asians who move to Markham or Indians who move to Brampton are just trying to fit in.

Gimme a break.
 
coool:

That depends on the motivation behind the move - if it is to get away from "those other people" - then it is racism regardless of what their ethnic background is.

AoD
 
Why is "Canadian" a less valid answer than Chinese, Arab, or Polynesian?

Would your answer to my question also apply to people who claim to be Mexican, Cuban, or "French-Canadian"?

Some people (myself included) do not like to answer ethnic questions because our culture perceives "White" ethnicities differently than "non-White" ones.

Some people get quite offended if asked to answer anything other than Canadian.

One of my university profs would answer "Canadian" whenever asked by anyone what her ethnic background was, even though she was an obviously Asian, teaching Japanese in university. Then again, I believe she was born and raised in Canada, so "Canadian" makes perfect sense.
 
Why is "Canadian" a less valid answer than Chinese, Arab, or Polynesian?

Would your answer to my question also apply to people who claim to be Mexican, Cuban, or "French-Canadian"?

Some people (myself included) do not like to answer ethnic questions because our culture perceives "White" ethnicities differently than "non-White" ones.

Here's the question from the 2006 census:
"What were the ethnic or cultural origins of this person's ancestors?"

I can see how this can result in some ambiguous answers. But I think the spirit of the question is asking one's ethnic origins in the census, for statistical purposes it should be answered appropriately. But true... it does make me think, if one answers "Canadian" what does it mean? Does it mean "white" and in that the person isn't a visible minority?
 
Oh interesting, actually there was a question after what I just posted asking you to choose one of the races:

19. Is this person:

Mark more than one or specify, if applicable.

This information is collected to support programs that promote equal opportunity for everyone to share in the social, cultural and economic life of Canada.

circle White

circle Chinese

circle South Asian (e.g., East Indian, Pakistani, Sri Lankan, etc.)

circle Black

circle Filipino

circle Latin American

circle Southeast Asian (e.g., Vietnamese, Cambodian, Malaysian, Laotian, etc.)

circle Arab

circle West Asian (e.g., Iranian, Afghan, etc.)

circle Korean

circle Japanese

Other — Specify

______________________________

Source: http://www12.statcan.ca/english/census06/info/questions/index.cfm?s=11
 
I'd be interested in how many people identify themselves as "Klingon". Seriously.
 
I'd be interested in how many people identify themselves as "Klingon". Seriously.
Dunno about Klingon, but apparently 55000 Jedis in the 2006 census.

Somebody I know listed himself as a "non-practicing druid" for his university registration. That actually could make sense though, sorta, as his family was Scottish. :)
 

Back
Top