Football (Soccer) and the Weather is usually about it.

And in summer Wimbledon and cricket, especially cricket, which is an inexhaustible subject for discussion.
Harzer

Just ask "did you vote for Will or Gareth?". Far more of this age range voted for the Pop Idol than vote in any election!

Mark, it might be worth looking at the TV and newspaper websites, some of which have message-boards, which may help you sample current topics of debate:
www.bbc.co.uk
www.channel4.co.uk
www.channel5.co.uk
www.itv.com
www.mtv.co.uk

For 20/30 year olds, there will indeed be lots about [so-called] reality-TV show controversies (but by March Pop Idol might (?will) have been superseded by something else); and I think the FA cup (= our SuperBowl only more so) will be coming towards its final stages with several London clubs still in contention.

xxx hit the nail on the head regarding pop idol.

Football is always a hot topic.

Forget cricket - too old.

You will find the attitude towards american politics fairly negative (in terms of environmental policy, globalization, Bush being an idiot, that kind of thing) but that is politics, not the attitude towards americans in particular.

Hot button local issues... definately transport! Train and tube strikes, PPP (public private partnership for the Tube), under-investment in the rail network.

Also, government spin doctoring, and underfunding in the National Health Service. You will find that any discussion of government politics, foreign policy and public services will be negative. We Brits love to criticise our own country. We are far less 'patriotic' than america in this sense.

In fact we also love to criticise anyone famous. We are far less admiring of fame than america. Jealous maybe? who knows.

So people will find it very odd if you arrive saying Tony Blair is lovely and George Bush is doing a great job.

I guess the general attitude about american citizens is that they are a little isolated from world politics and a bit overly patriotic. We find the flag worshipping rather strange.

When entering somebody else's local be you British, American or whatever, speak when you're spoken to.
Don't bounce in and announce, "I'm Josiah B. Jellyhammer III, Vice President of Associated Ballbearings, whaddya think about global warming?"
A simple, "nice weather we're having" is quite enough. If people want to start a conversation with you, they'll start one.

I think it's funny that the British think Bush is an idiot. They should take a long, hard look at Prince Charles. The US can get rid of Bush in 4 years, the British are stuck with Prince Charles.

In the three times I have been to England, it is the Brits who have been interested in talking to me, when learning I was American. Initially, I was somewhat reticent about beginning conversations, not wanting to seem pushy or break a social convention of which I was not aware, but I shouldn't have worried. On my first trip, Bill Clinton was a big topic of conversation because it was in the middle of the Monica Lewinsky mess. They were interested in what we Americans thought of him. But overall, I find that Brits are especially chatty if they have been to America, wanting to know where I am from, talking about their experiences in America, etc. And they are always so helpful if asked for advice about tourist-related issues (where to eat, what to see, how to get there). I have even become quite friendly with a fellow working in a certain pub in the Cotswolds and look him up each time I am there to catch up on his life. You really don't need to sweat the topics. They will come naturally.

and I think it odd that the brits worship a German/Danish/Greek family that lives on the dole

A couple of misapprehensions here;- we don't worship them; we thole them.

And, much as I dislike royalty, at least Chuck can speak in joined up sentences

Who did you thell them to? Limited market, I'll wager.

Not only can Chuck speak in joined up sentences, he can use and understand words of more than one syllable, without having to practice in front of a mirror first. He also doesn't run the country, or, as Bu$h thinks, the world.

Ask about their policy towards Northern Ireland and their justification for continuing to occupy a foreign land.

or ask about the sense of responsibility for the hell that is the Indian subcontinent

It's probably just easier to blame America for the world's problems than it is to accept responsiblity for their part in creating some of these situations.

Just as point of fact: George W.Bush, regardless of what you think of him is not a real "mover and shaker" of British politics. He runs a charity, I think, I doubt he could order a missle strike or act with any real power. That would be Tony Blair and the House of Commons, who are elected officials similar to our president.
I find that in general, Europeans, and people in the UK tend to be slightly more liberal, and for better or worse, we now a have conservative government, that is persuing policies that tend to generate a great deal of controversy and negativity abroad. Like it or not that is simply the fact.
That being the case, I've been travelling back and forth to the UK for 20 years, and never had a bad word spoken to me regarding the American government, mostly I've had people talk to me about celebrities and sports.
The most bad mouthing I've ever experienced regarding the United States government came from a cab driver in New York City.
As stated before, just keep a low profile, be polite. You should find the British very friendly, if you are respectful of them and their culture.

Ooops, hit send before proofreading... the above first statment should have read: Regardless of what you think of him Prince Charles is not a Mover or Shaker of British politics. Sorry

For the UK I like:

www.ananova.com

It has nice news bits that aren't too indepth. I like to track it for a few weeks before I go to the UK. That way I have a sense of what's going on.

You'd be amazed how much more friendly people can be if you take the trouble to know a little bit of their country's current events.

You can really talk about almost anything. Europeans in general and Brits in particular read a lot more newspapers (even if a lot of them are of the tabloid variety) than the average American. They know more about "us" than we do about them. You can join a lively discussion about almost anything. Of course there are exceptions - on both sides.

Um, searching out locals to meet and talk with? Are you an investigative reporter? If you are just a regular guy like the rest of us, why don't you just treat people like individuals, not as sociology experiments. If you're sitting in a pub and there's a news programme on tv, you can ask the person next to you what he thinks. If it starts to rain, you can make a comment about the weather. I find it incredibly odd to read a question on this board asking how to speak to strangers in London.

Whether or not Charles actually has "power" he still represents the country, which is power in itself. But let's take a look at their most important choice:

George Bush - Laura Bush
Prince Charles - Camilla Parker-Bowles (yikes!!)

We're stuck with an idiot, you've voted for an idiot, here's the difference

Hey God Save the Queen... maybe the world at large is unaware that the majority of people DIDN'T vote for the idiot.. he bought his way in (using Enron money no doubt) and his election was a huge CONTROVERSY.

I'm not a betting man, but I'll give you 100 to one in Euros or dollars that "Irishman" is no more Irish than Prince Charles. For the non-trolls who are genuinely interested:
Britain is not occupying a foreign land, it is doing its best to help to keep the peace in a part of Ireland where the majority of the population feel themselves to be British and want to remain as part of the United Kingdom. In point of fact, a recent opinion poll has shown that a large majority of people on the "mainland" would support a united Ireland.
The people of Southern Ireland have played a great part in the peace process even to the extent of changing their constitution and renouncing their claim to NI. I get the impression that the main opponents to peace are the so called Irish-Americans who keep the old hatreds alive from which the real Irish have had the maturity to move on.
Again if you are interested in facts, have a look at the Good Friday Agreement at http://www2.nio.gov.uk/agreement.htm

Mark: A great website for 20/30 somethings is www.thisislondon.com. It's the website for one of the London newspapers...has some really interesting info on culture and lifestyle in London (as well as local news and travel articles)

If it wasn't for the clueless (I was going to use a harsher term) Irish Americans in the NE USA who bankroll the IRA, there would have been peace long ago. The Repiblic has repudiated them, but the Boston partisans just have to keep stirring the pot.

Would Great Britain be justified invading the U.S. in an attempt to wipe out support for IRA terrorists?

Also, I have another less-hypothetical question I hope someone can answer: weren't British troops originally sent to Northern Ireland to primarily protect Catholics from Protestant violence? That's my understanding and, if I have it wrong, I appreciate a correction. Thanks.

I think something else needs saying again. Regardless of the fact that the Electoral College -- and the Supreme Court -- put Bush in office, it's also a fact that, of Americans who voted, more preferred Gore to Bush. In otherwords, while Bush won *legally*, he did NOT win popularly.

I'd take George W over charles the strange every time.

kate gorringe - british public idolises fame, you must understand this. Big brother, HEAT magazine, Pop Idol, skeletor 'n becks - all popular 'cos british public love fame and celebs.

Secondly, dont confuse the british (or in your case, london-based) media with the feeling of the british public. I dont think you're stupid enough to do that but you're certainly seeming to say that from where I'm sittin' (which happens to be Tampa, Florida).

George Bush has done a great job during a difficult period yet the brit media portrays him as a dope. If you want to believe that then fine but dont think that means all Brits are as easily taken in.

Also -I dont think anyone north of watford gap is talking about the tube privatisation (methinks you're suffering from the gordon brown/eddie george syndrome - britain exists outside of london solely as a buffer from the rest of europe).

Mark, most brits love americans and will talk to you about almost anything. Talk about what you know and what you dont know - as opposed to what you think you should be talking about.

stay healthy.

anon,

..and yet the other thirty people who responded found it a reasonable question. I certainly won't quibble with your individuality in that respect.

Actually many of the responses were either off on their own tangent or sarcastic and not offering real advise to you. Think of any 5 people you know, from different walks of life. How can you generalize a list of topics to talk about? Everyone is different, and spontaneous conversation is the best. I wouldn't want a foreigner approaching me and asking pre-programmed questions, I would rather find a common ground or interest serendipidously and let things flow from there. Sorry, I didn't mean to come across so harshly!

I just returned from a 3 week stay in the UK, I visit yearly.
What did we talk about (long time friends and new aquaintances)?
The weather.
Food.
Sports.
Fun things to do while on holiday.
Holidays we've taken in the past.
Funny or interesting Anecdotes from our lives/childhoods.
Bits about our jobs.
Movies we've seen and liked.
Popular music.

I try to keep heavy debates about politics or religion out of my social life, unless I know to whom I'm talking with. If you don't know alot about a person's background, spouting off about abortion, for example, can get you into some hot water.
I also refrain from being overly critical of the place I'm visiting. You don't go to a person's home and mock their furniture, do you?

Just remember that people are people no matter where they are and have fun.
If you're already worrying what to have talks about, you're way too uptight.
Relax and enjoy!

I'd agree with the last speaker. Sometimes you folk should experiment with substituting New York or another American city before you post. Supposing I said, I am planning on searching out locals etc. etc. in New York.
Another poster complained about Europe just being a place where people live and work. That's just what it is. The inhabitants may speak different languages or have different accents, but they are not funny foreigners or exotic locals. They are people that's all.
...and yes British troops did initially go in to protect the catholic community and were welcomed with cups of tea etc. It all went wrong on "Bloody Sunday". I hope the same sort of thing will not happen with the peace-keeping forces in Afghanistan, but that's another tangent.

Blimey, Tony Hughes, such a personal attack on a lighthearted response. But for just for your sake...

the orginal poster asked:

"we were just wondering what some hot conversation topics are among young (20's and 30's) Londoners"

Not Britains, English, Welsh, Scots or Europeans in general. My answers reflected the topics of conversation amongst Londoners of that age group, as the majority of my friends, colleagues and acquantances are. They do not necessairly reflect my own views.

And if I want to know the hot topics of conversation in Scotland, or Tampa Bay for that matter, I'll be sure to come to you.

So less of that chippy North of Watford Gap rubbish. As a brummie, you've no need to lecture me on venturing beyond zone 1.

That was no personal attack. Go cram it.

I think President Bush is doing a fine job. And even though I did not vote for him, I certainly will the next time around. And Laura Bush is an exceptionally caring First Lady.

Go cram it?? Aah diddums

too interesting to let slide.

how about talking about the Marshall plan? definitely a good way to piss people off.

a) Anyone who says they want to go to a foreign country and seek "locals to meet and talk with" is an idiot, and the kind of Americans that Europeans all make fun of.

b) George W. Bush is also an idiot. But we elected him, unfortunately (at least I can say I didn't vote him). Regardless of how he got into office, Americans put him there. End of story.

c) Prince Charle is a boob, and always has been. However, he's a product of inbreeding, and no one elected him to anything.

d) Northern Ireland. There simply is not enough space here, or in 5,000 postings, to talk about the atrocities that England has committed in Ireland (just to give you a taste--trying to breed out the Catholics by taking away their land and in their place putting Scottish Protestants; not allowing Catholics to own land or vote; the famine--read your history books to find out more about this one. No, England didn't cause the famine, but hundreds of thousands of people died because of the government's actions). That said, Tony Blair is the first prime minister to actually work toward a solution to the N.I. "question". Bill Clinton all did a great deal to promote peace there. George Mitchell, in my opinion, is a diplomatic genius. Yes, there is much to do in N.I., and it will take several generations. But more was accomplished in the 90s than in the past 600 years.

e) For those Americans traveling to the UK and Ireland, don't try to discuss the Northern Ireland situation with locals. For you to sit there and condemn the English for a situation that you don't understand is wrong. For the 1% of Americans who do know something about British and Irish history, I'd still avoid the topic. Talk about how Liverpool is going to win the league this year, and how we all knew that there was no way Fergie would retire in a year when there is a chance his team may not win a trophy.

Thanks to those of you who've given helpful responses.

For the reactionary minority, perhaps my writing style in the original post sounded a little clinical; it wasn't meant to be. I guess I don't see much difference between what I asked and a normal conversation two people might have about a friend who is known by one of them but not by the other. "So what's Jack into?", that kind of thing. So I think I'm treating Londoners the same way I'd treat anyone from anywhere I knew nothing about. Certainly Londoners experience different media, a different cultural mix, etc than most of us here in the US; I was merely trying to get a general feel. What's wrong with trying to learn about people so you may have an easier time finding things in common? People do this all the time by what they say, what they wear, and who they associate with. Generalizations can be helpful--would you get tickets for your fundamentalist grandmother to go see a hardcore punk band? No? But why not--surely we can't draw any reasonable conclusions from the little we know about her.

school - Since I've not travelled much, and was born in a very rural coal town in Appalachia, I wouldn't think twice about asking about New Yorkers' take on things, since NY is almost as different a place from what I know as London is. Difference is, I'm bound more closely in a lot of respects to residents in New York than I am residents of London. After all, we share the same national government, probably watch more of the same TV, have common sports we are able to follow, etc. If someone from London asked about St. Louisans' take on things, I would let them know what I think to be the prevailing attitudes here, and then I would tell him where my opinions differ from those. I don't see why that's so difficult for some of you. Also, what in my original post gave you the impression I thought of foreigners as exotic or funny?

Ted - As for people from, say, London asking about prevailing attitudes in my city and even (gasp) admitting their interest in going beyond the standard touristy activities and meeting some of us--I certainly wouldn't smugly dismiss THEM as 'idiots'. But then again I realize some people can't resist a chance to feel superior to someone else, however flimsy their basis of doing so is.

Mark, it's been awhile since I was a 20- or 30-something with wife newly arrived in Britain. But my recollection (dust off the synapses - or, as my decrepit south-of-England instructor greeted us in graduate school, "G'Morning. How am I?") is that starting and sustaining a conversation requires a pretty similar approach to the way you'd do it in the States. Have a topic of mutual interest. Music and musicians are probably good starts, world events (including the Euro); travel, politics maybe, movies... what icebreakers would you use in the US? I think you'll find (big generalization follows) that more British folks know a fair amount about US culture, politics, and domestic affairs than vice versa, and you can flatter and engage people wonderfully if you learn ahead (or, preferably already know) something about British culture, life, and issues, aside from tourist basics. The Tower of London and Shakespeare aren't particularly the focus of conversation in Britain at the moment. Go visit http://news.bbc.co.uk and become a regular, so you come off as an educated, interested (and therefore interesting) person. You shouldn't have any problems starting a conversation, particularly if you buy a round.