Hi Sparks!
This topic is generally not one to get me going, but having grown up in a large Midlands city with a huge immigrant population, I thought I'd throw in my 2p.
Back in the 1960s when I was at school, already a large proportion of my city was inhabited by Asians, who had started coming over just after the war. In my school, the classes were "streamed" according to ability. Even back in 1964 we had
entire classes composed of Asians. Regrettably this was because they were in the bottom level having been unable to take the assessment tests because they could not speak English. In the school yard at break time, they tended to stick together. They didn't mess with us, and we didn't mess with them. They were law abiding in their communities, and there was never any trouble. Most of these were Indians, with names like Singh and Patel, and one assumes they were Hindu, not Muslim. They were a valuable asset to the community. Indeed, the Leicester Corporation bus service would have been at a standstill without them.
Things changed more recently, with another wave of immigrants who imported their culture and built mosques. Often these mosques popped up in such a way as to encroach upon established white middle class areas, much to the chagrin of the people living there, who found their house prices devalued. It seems to be this group from which "Muslim Extremism" has stemmed. There have been racial clashes, and in recent local elections, a large swathe of disaffected working class voters indigenous to Britain voted for the British National Party, which is calling for an immediate halt to all further immigration. See the BNP policy statement:
http://www.bnp.org.uk/policies/policies.htmThe third group is composed of caucasians, which means it is easier for them to blend in. Since the EU expanded to take in countries like Poland and Latvia, there has been considerable immigration to Britain from those countries and others like them. The difference here is that these people are more readily accepted. They don't try to import their culture in such a way as to encroach upon the indigenous population, they get jobs which other people might not be inclined to do, and they work damned hard. This group also includes South Africans who, despite having certain privileges that they cannot enjoy here (winks at Lazs) choose to come anyway to escape the high levels of crime in their own country. Many of these are descended from British grandparents, so they have legal right of entry to Britain. The South Africans who come here are also very hard working.
Originally posted by asilvia
Which countries in Europe are part of the EU and which are not? I thought the UK was part but they did not want to change thier currency to the Ecru(SP??) new Europien currency. Why is that?? I lived in Germany for 8 years and I will say the new currency hasnt gone over that well there. My in-laws still complain about it. Just a question anyways...
A google search would have given you the answer. Here, I've done it for you:
http://europa.eu/abc/governments/index_en.htmNorway is the most notable exception. You're right, and the UK did not switch to the single European currency. The other two that didn't were Denmark and Sweden. Part of the problem in Germany is that they cannot fix interest rates to be able to stimulate their economy. They're stuck with whatever interest rate is mandated by Brussels. Another major problem for Germany is of course their reunification costs.
Why didn't Britain adopt the Euro? Possibly because of the
disastrous ERM (exchange rate mechanism) experiment of the early 1990s. Too long to go into here.
