[RD] Daily Graphs and Charts

[Domen]

Thanks!

Spoiler :

And in the link I posted above, there are the following numbers for Polish-Brazilians in 1937:

Table 6. Number of Poles in Brazilian States 1937:

Paraná: 92,000
Rio Grande do Sul: 83,000
Santa Catarina: 28,000
São Paulo: 12,000
Espírito Santo: 1,500
Other states: 500

So it seems that Rio Grande do Sul was only slightly behind Paraná.

These numbers are on pages 133-134 out of 237 in the paper from this link:

https://escholarship.org/uc/item/12n2t3zd#page-134

 

[luiz]

Interestingly your numbers add up to much more the 155,000, and that's just in 1937, so I wonder if they include second generation or if the 155,000 is a big understatement (always a big possibility when it comes to old Brazilian Censuses and port registries).

 

[Domen]

so I wonder if they include second generation

Yes, they do - this number (217,000 in 1937) includes Brazilian-born descendants of Polish immigrants too.

While 155,000 probably refers only to European-born Poles who immigrated to Brazil from 1892 to 1968.

I'm surprised Brazil only received about 240 thousand German immigrants

Maybe you received them early on (so they had more time to increase their numbers by Brazilian-born Germans).

And also maybe this 240 thousand refers to people from Germany rather than to all ethnic Germans from Europe?

given how common German last names

My mother's original last name is German or Dutch even though she is Polish. German last names are not so uncommon in Poland.

At the same time in Germany Slavic (incl. Polish) last names are also common. At least something like 13% - 15% of all Germans have surnames of Slavic origin, including at least 4% who have surnames of Polish origin (according to: http://www.iz.poznan.pl/pz/news/9_06. Kowalski.pdf). That said, many Poles when they emigrated to Germany (for example to the Ruhr region), decided to Germanize their surnames - some examples of such surnames are given below:

Original surname --> Germanized version:

These are examples from the Ruhr region (see the source - a 1975 book by W. Burghard).

 

[madviking]

We have fairly strict building regulations and lots of low rise housing. Not many apartment buildings are above ~6 stories, even in central London. (When I say "not many", I mean a fairly small % of the total number of buildings. There are obviously quite a lot of apartment buildings that are >6 stories in London, but relative to the total it's not that many.) We also have a really good public transport system that makes living outside of central London and commuting in quite viable. You can live 30 miles away and still have a ~1 hr commute.

Anyway those are just my thoughts, I'm no expert and I'm sure there are other/better reasons.

same with washington dc but minus the "really good" public transit system.

 

[luiz]

Yes, they do - this number (217,000 in 1937) includes Brazilian-born descendants of Polish immigrants too.

While 155,000 probably refers only to European-born Poles who immigrated to Brazil from 1892 to 1968.

Yeah that makes sense. After all there are now 2 million Brazilians of predominantly Polish ancestry. Brazilians just reproduced like rabbits during much of the 20th Century. My own family went to Brazil on the early 20th Century, originally just 4 brothers and their wives, and now there are thousands of people with our last name in the country

Maybe you received them early on (so they had more time to increase their numbers by Brazilian-born Germans).

And also maybe this 240 thousand refers to people from Germany rather than to all ethnic Germans from Europe?

My mother's original last name is German or Dutch even though she is Polish. German last names are not so uncommon in Poland.

The Germans came en masse around the same time as the Italians and Japanese, so that's not it.

Your second theory makes sense - a lot of German names probably ended up in Brazil via immigrants from other countries. Maybe a significant part of those hundreds of thousands of Russian immigrants were of German origin, for instance.

 

[Borachio]

So..

Is Poland like the Tardis then? Bigger on the outside that the inside?

No. That's wrong.

Does Poland have more people outside than inside?

So, that's like Ireland, then.

How do they do that?

 

[Domen]

A few examples of surnames of Slavic origin in Germany (these are of Obotrite, Veleti and Sorbian origin; rather than Polish):

Surname Pietsch: http://www.verwandt.de/karten/relativ/pietsch.html

Surname Wendt: http://www.verwandt.de/karten/relativ/wendt.html

Surname Radtke: http://www.verwandt.de/karten/relativ/radtke.html

Surname Liedtke: http://www.verwandt.de/karten/relativ/liedtke.html

These surnames are most frequent in eastern Germany, areas which were inhabited by Slavic Obotrites, Veleti and Sorbs.

 

[Domen]

How do they do that?

High fertility!

 

[Heretic_Cata]

How do they do that?

They think condoms are satan.

Catholics ... not even once.

 

[Godwynn]

We have fairly strict building regulations and lots of low rise housing. Not many apartment buildings are above ~6 stories, even in central London. (When I say "not many", I mean a fairly small % of the total number of buildings. There are obviously quite a lot of apartment buildings that are >6 stories in London, but relative to the total it's not that many.) We also have a really good public transport system that makes living outside of central London and commuting in quite viable. You can live 30 miles away and still have a ~1 hr commute.

Anyway those are just my thoughts, I'm no expert and I'm sure there are other/better reasons.

What's the reason for the building regulations? Safety? To protect the skyline? So what little sun London receives it can get to street level?

 

[Monsterzuma]

London has such a relatively low population density?

And it is still among the most densely populated cities in the EU (if this map is correct):

I have it on good authority that England is more densely populated than the Netherlands.

 

[GoodEnoughForMe]

Via a joint study by Rutgers and Match.com:

 

[warpus]

I am under the impression that the building codes in London do not in many cases allow tall buildings, becuase it would obscure iconic landmarks and stuff. But I'm not sure if my impression is based on fact or just some bs I read somewhere.

 

[Lohrenswald]

Honestly, I think it's just that London is relatively small compared to most of those other cities.
Though it might have something to do with the English having higher standards of living, and that they thus "won't accept" higher population density.

 

[cybrxkhan]

same with washington dc but minus the "really good" public transit system.

Nothing like a good day of traffic pileups on the good ol' 495.

 

[madviking]

Nothing like a good day of traffic pileups on the good ol' 495.

i'll take "things i will not miss about dc" for $100, alex

 

[Cutlass]

We have fairly strict building regulations and lots of low rise housing. Not many apartment buildings are above ~6 stories, even in central London. (When I say "not many", I mean a fairly small % of the total number of buildings. There are obviously quite a lot of apartment buildings that are >6 stories in London, but relative to the total it's not that many.) We also have a really good public transport system that makes living outside of central London and commuting in quite viable. You can live 30 miles away and still have a ~1 hr commute.

Anyway those are just my thoughts, I'm no expert and I'm sure there are other/better reasons.

I've read, but don't have the link, that 6 stories for housing units is about the max for the best effects of people being connected to their communities. And above that works to disconnect residents from the communities.

 

[Mise]

What's the reason for the building regulations? Safety? To protect the skyline? So what little sun London receives it can get to street level?

Quite a lot of buildings are protected for historic reasons, even ones that don't really look nice. Planning laws also tend to require maintaining the "character" of the area, so ripping up old streets/buildings and replacing them with shiny new ones is generally quite difficult. You see a lot of new or refurbished buildings that still maintain the original front of the old one as a façade.

There are also regulations that protect the skyline; there are certain things that you must be able to see from certain places, and several of those things are right at the heart of the city. There is also a lot of political and social opposition to high-rise buildings, for purely aesthetic reasons.

Finally, England is full of NIMBYism, and our laws not only reflect but encourage that. Developers have to bend over backwards to cater to local residents when planning new buildings, and in a lot of London, those residents are not exactly keen on a massive great tower block being put next to them, blocking their views, causing traffic, and flooding schools. Local councils don't really benefit much from new buildings: residents are almost always "unprofitable" from a tax-and-spend POV (councils are partly funded by central government, for this reason), so their only incentive is to cater to existing residents, who already have a vote.

Honestly, I think it's just that London is relatively small compared to most of those other cities.
Though it might have something to do with the English having higher standards of living, and that they thus "won't accept" higher population density.

Yeah, and the two are surely related. Part of the reason that London hasn't grown a lot more are planning laws that protect green belt areas. London's contiguous built-up area would surely have expanded well beyond its current boundaries, if it weren't for the strict green belt area of protected land surrounding it. It's also true that most people, even in big cities, yearn for things like gardens and trees. So you have laws that keep London small in height and other laws that keep London small in area too.

 

[JohannaK]

what is NIMBY?

 

[MagisterCultuum]

An Acronym for "Not In My Back Yard," indicating an opposition to an opposition to developments not on any general principles but because of fears that having it in ones own neighborhood would be dangerous to health, quality of life, or the resale values of one's real estate investments.