Cyprus-Forum.com

[Alexandros Lordos]

To make a long story short: The only sensible way to define who is a TC and who is not is per Anan Plan: Everybody who was in the official records of 1963 plus his decendands plus their foreign spouces are TCs.The rest are settlers.

That make me a settler then? My (TC) father left Cyprus in 58.

Oops ...

[erolz]

To make a long story short: The only sensible way to define who is a TC and who is not is per Anan Plan: Everybody who was in the official records of 1963 plus his decendands plus their foreign spouces are TCs.The rest are settlers.

That make me a settler then? My (TC) father left Cyprus in 58.

Oops ...

I have no problem with such arbitary labels, but this is just an example of how there can be so much confusion on this issue of 'who is a settler' and 'who is not'. Count me as a settler if you widh, but do not apply any thesis of 'illegal settler imported just to change demographics in Cyprus' to me or call me a Turkish mainland settler. If anything I am a UK (part) Cypriot settler. Was I counted in the 'list' of settlers allowed to stay according to the Annan plan? Would I be 'sent home'? Would I be allowed to stay as a EU citizen (rather than a Cypriuot national)? No wonder no ones knows what the true number of 'settlers' are in the North!

Oh and if I am a settler than where is my 'free' land (stolen from GC) that we settlers are supposed to all have?

[-mikkie2-]

Turkcyp,

Your argument I am afraid falls flat on its face because you have not taken into account the many thousands of indigenous TC's that have left Cyprus since 1974.

You cannot make the argument that the population in the north is the result of a natural growth rate similar to the GC community.

[erolz]

Turkcyp,

Your argument I am afraid falls flat on its face because you have not taken into account the many thousands of indigenous TC's that have left Cyprus since 1974.

or those that have returned

[-mikkie2-]

True, but I suspect many more have left than have returned. I am sure that many TC's have a conscience and wouldn't accept to take stolen land!

[erolz]

True, but I suspect many more have left than have returned. I am sure that many TC's have a conscience and wouldn't accept to take stolen land!

You suspect that but have I guess no evidence.

There is land in the TRNC that has always been TC land by the way.

Are you suggesting many TC left the north after 74 because if they stayed it would have been on 'stolen land'?

[brother]

Was there much choice then to use what was available.

[turkcyp]

Turkcyp,

Your argument I am afraid falls flat on its face because you have not taken into account the many thousands of indigenous TC's that have left Cyprus since 1974.

You cannot make the argument that the population in the north is the result of a natural growth rate similar to the GC community.

Not really my agrument doesw not fell short because I did took into account the emmigration. I simply did not assume that 1/3 of TCs laft after 1974. I assume that emigration rate after 74 was the same as before 74.

You may not like my assumption, as I did not like 1/3 but do not tell me that I do not take into account emmigration.

And I have explained my rationale. The worst times in Cyprus for TC was the period between 63-74. And if the emigration rate did not exceed 8.5% during that time period, then it should not pass that rate after 74.

You can try to poke holes into my logic, but I am not employing any politics into my assumptions. If you have any valid criticism as to why this emigration rate should be higher, I am more than willing to listen.

I simply refuse to take any emigration figure wothout any scientific or survey study as true. At the absence of those studies, everybody is free to make their assumptions as they wish. So I base my assumptions to old proxies, which is I believe the most representative of today's emigration rate in the absence of any study.

Again, very simply, this is what I did:
1) I have taken the 1974 TC population as 120k.
2) I have applied GC population growth rate to TC population growth rate, assuming that GCs, And TCs have the same population growth rates.
3) Then I have taken emigration rate between 63-70 as the proxy for emigration rate of after 1974. And reached to my current TC population on the island.
4) Then I have deducted this final figure from the official north Cyprus population figures to obatin settler number.

So basically there are two assumptions made. At point (2) and (3). At point (2) I assume that TCs and GCs have the same population growth rate. The only possibility that this assumption is biased towards higher TC population is if there is net immigration to GC so that population growth statistics for GCs (that I have used as a proxy to TCs) is higher than the population growth statistics of TCs. So if you are telling me that after 1974 there is a net immigration back to GC area from the rest of the world then I would accept that TC population growth rate in less than the GCs.

Furthermore one should realize that the less wealthy a society is the higher population growth in that society is. So if you ask me there is a chance that there is a discrepancy then it is “TC population growth rate may be higher than the GCs but not the other way around since we are poorer.”

Second assumption is made at point (3) at assuming that emigration ratio of TCs has not changed after 1974. at this point my logic was that, TCs life on the island had improved after 1974 until 90s, when things started going down again. So there is no reason fro me to assume that between 1974-90 the emigration rate of TCs was higher than during 60s, (which is the worst times of TCs in Cyprus). For example until 90’s we could mostly export our products to UK, and there was plenty of money coming to north from Turkey and from UK. After 90’s the economic conditions in Cyprus started worsening again. But again there is no reason to assume that the emigration rate is higher than during 60s. But in order to use only one emigration rate and keep things simple I have used emigration rate of 60s as a proxy for 74-2002 period.

These are my assumptions and they are open to any logical assault.

Have a great day,

[MicAtCyp]

Here you go for example between year 1975-2002. Population growth rate in Cyprus annucalized is 1%. This is taken from UN web site.

It just crossed my mind to check the figure of 1% population growth that you mentioned.
TurkCyp, first of all could you please give us the link regarding this percentage?

For your information I can tell you for sure that in the free areas this should mean an increase in population of about 6-7,000 per year.
Do you know however that the total number of new born babies in the free areas is less than 10,000 per year? This means polulation increase zero!!
If your figure for 1% population growth is correct then we must be having 10,000 births per year and only 3-4,000 deaths. Which is an impossibility !!

Of course there is another explanation to justify that 1% per year population increase in Cyprus This increase is not due to the indigeneous (GC+TC) population but to the import of foreigners!

[MicAtCyp]

Why don't you trust yor own goverments pop. growth figures?

I asked you to give me the link to the UN OECD etc that you yourself said you referred to - you never did.Now you come back and asking me why I don't trust the RoC official statistics? In the end are you referring to the official RoC statistics, or to the statistics some UN took from the RoC and after mixing them with those of the occupied areas formed his overall statistics for CYPRUS, or to something else?

Using these two facts again, you can not mathematically calculate how many settlers are there on the island. You can infer that there should be at least minimum of 41k, but nothing else.

It seems to me you cannot deal with maths concerning propabilities. Yes you can conclude the minimum is 41K but the propability of that minimum being the actual number is ZERO.

Three months ago.

In last April, I have voted "Yes" for Annan plan

So you were here from last April until September?

So in any future plan (Annan 6 or anything else) I simply would totally agree with you if you say those legal and illegal workers who do not carry TRNC citizenship should not be counted as settler, I would totally agree with you.

Careful! This is not what the Anan Plan says.The Anan plan considers everyone who is not a decendent of a TC or a spouce-irrespective of whether he has a so called "citizenship" as a settler.The problem with the Anan Plan is not the definition of who is a settler. The problem is that it effectively allows every settler to stay!

So basically there are two assumptions made. At point (2) and (3). At point (2) I assume that TCs and GCs have the same population growth rate.

No, there are more assumptions here. That the population increase at the free areas is due to the increase of the numbers of the GCs! Which is far away from the truth.We have about 40K Europeans, 100K legal workers, another 100K (?) illegal, plus about 70K Pontians who hold Greek passports. Plus a lot of foreign spouces. One out of four who studies abroad comes back with a foreign spouce! None of those (except the spouces) ever got a citizenship though.So population is one thing, citizenship is another.
In the occupied areas however population and citizenship is the same thing as far as settlers are concerened.

*************************************************************************

That make me a settler then? My (TC) father left Cyprus in 58.

Your father is a decendant of another father. Are you trying to tell us that your grandpa was an extraterrestrial by any chance?

The records of 1963 did not include only the living... they go back as far as 1900 AD when the British started issuing identity cards, and they include both living and dead, but unfortunately no extraterrestrials. Sorry...