Prior to the European invasion, The americas were heavily populated. The modern day united states had more people then than it does today. The issue isnt how many of us that ther are, it is how we live on the earth. Many human cultures have lived on the land while building up its fertility. These silly talking crackers just ruin everything while pointing the finger at other cultures.
@toob247 The population went from 3 billion in 1960 to 6 billion in 2000, we just got to 7 billion, at a billion every 12 years or so, it will be 2075 before we hit 12 billion
which would be the doubling you are referring to, I don't see us getting there with abortion and birth control and constant bombardment of over population messages,
so don't worry, we are not screwed as you put it, you are letting the pop fanatics get
Professor Rosling is an ecstatic raving lunatic that by fantastic oratories and revelations document truth just as easy and convincing as the most fundametalistic believers of totally different categories.
The role of the western world is to be the foundation of the new world - it is and has been for 300 years - that's why we see the march of the dots to the lower right
I really like the presentation and I agree with everything he says. However, the only thing that i critisize is the this missleading concept of "reducing an overpopulated world." The world is not overpopulated, nor is overpopulation the issue. The issue is overconsumption and a lack of distribution. Population growths and declines, are predicted to grow and decline as time passes.
lol @ "global governance" - de-industrializing the west and moving industries to the 3rd world (that have no pollution control) will only increase pollution and reestablish poverty in the west (that will lead to more children).
The fact of the matter is that both "overpopulation" and "climatechange" are myths for the elite to build their global empire.
(More co2 when there were dinosaurs. We live on less then 0,005% of the planet - one USA family consumes more then a whole african village)
The "overpopulation" myth is Malthusian genocidal propaganda, spreading prophecy of "what will happen in 100 year if...!?"..
Well, WE didn't even live the same way 100 years ago, who are they to say that 3rd world will have to limit their population because they'll get cars? Cars were hardly in common use 100 years ago. Our culture was different.
Anyway, one family in USA consumes more then a whole village in africa, the population relationship to consumption is really.
just because 3rd countries gets wealthy doesn't mean that they will have less kids. only god knows why they have kids so much even now. stop analyzing numbers and go find whats really going on in the world.
I don't think you guys truly understand his real message. POVERTY AND HUNGER CAN BE ENDED IN OUR GENERATION BUT DEVELOPED COUNTRIES MUST BE THE FOUNDATION FOR THAT GREAT FUTURE. We have the technology and capability to lead a fantastic GREEN future. Population will grow, yes, but so will everyone's quality of life with schooling and medicine to prevent third world over-population. By the time I die I hope there has been great positive progress towards this. Imagine a world without poverty.
What the richest must to show to the world is an example of spartan life, because the hungry ones always see in their direction.
The few pleasures the poor can take almost free, is to fuck with his wife or his women, accepting that the pleasures the rich can take, he would never be capable to reach.
we need to stop importing and exporting so much and lifting restrictions on food growth for personal and for small business all over the world meanwhile seize the patents GMO companies have wrongly attained.
life was never meant to patentable. farming corps in america are truly disgusting, they are ruining diversity and potentially a large contributer to our health crisis. everyone on earth should have equal ownership of our food
This guy is completely wrong. Its not birth rates per se that are important in terms of pressure on the earths resources, its the number of years each person spends on the earth x the number of people x the amount of resources consumed each year. If fertility rates go from 4 births/woman to 2 births/woman and those people are living way longer (say 50% longer) plus they are consuming WAY more (and they will as they get richer desepite what this guy thinks) then we are WORSE off.
@BeerIstGood with respect, your math says that woman w/ two children would live and consume as much as 3 people from the mother who gave birth to 4 (50% longer from each added together: one hundred percent) so consumption would still drop
@emersonmakebest You're right assuming that resouce consumption/year is the same/person, but I made a point that resource consumption goes up when you get richer (in absolute, despite greater efficiency). So then it looks like: 2 people living 50% longer live as many human years as 3 from the mother who gave birth to 4 (your point). In order for their consumption to exceed the 4 from the other mother they only need to consume 4/3-1 = 33% more. I'm 99% sure I consume 33% more than an african.
What is this very mysterious energy he talks about? Here he is yapping on about some bullshit while he pretends to have information about this unknown energy. All the scientists in the world tells us that there is not even a theoretically possible energy that can replace oil, and what other energy we have - will only cover a few prosentage of what the oil gives us now. In 2050 billions will die.
In the last 10 years, the population of India expanded by how much, 200 million people? How many Indians have emigrated to the US or Europe in that time? Even if it was 2 million, it would still be irrelevant. 99% of Indians live and will live in India. If that country doesn't stop its uncontrolled population boom soon, it is going to collapse in the next 30-40 years.
@Winner8501 Please watch the video again and look at India's "bubble". The trend clearly shows India joining the rest of the "western" world with decreasing family size and increase in child survival rate. Rosling does not explain why child survival causes family size decrease, he just explains the obvious relationship which consistently exists and persists over decades. The trend is already happening in India right now.
The video doesn't address the point - countries like India can't afford to wait until social change brings down the fertility rate. The world as a whole can't sustain its current population - the resources that have fuelled the initial growth of the West and which are now fuelling the newly industrialized countries are almost gone. India is overpopulated, it's carrying capacity is rapidly decreasing, yet its population keeps growing. That's a road to hell, or Somalia, rather.
@Winner8501 The video addresses that point exactly. It's one of the main ideas actually. If we want to curb population growth, increase standards of living in third world countries which is seen in places like India now. Like I said already, family size is decreasing in India and although population is growing, the rate of increase is slowing. The world will have to wait whether or not it can afford it. They use far less resources than the US despite its far greater population.
@Radjehuty I'm with Winner here. I very much doubt that India's population growth will be slowed down quickly enough to prevent a catastrophe like the one in Ethiopia and Somalia right now. The theory isn't wrong, it's just that it'd take too much time in this particular case.
Flawed logic - we simply don't have time to wait until the Third World population stops growing naturally. The resources that fuelled our (Western) growth and which now fuel Chine and a handful of other developing countries are almost exhausted. Unless we take action now to stop this, there will be nothing left for the remaining billions of people.
I am not blaming us - India could have stopped its population explosion if it wanted. Now they're doomed to collapse because of it.
@TerminalSulcus to hell what wiki says common sense says egypt is in AFRICA.. north africa to be exact. those gyptians in modern day egypt are called arab invaders..the real egyptians that build those great pyramids more look like somalians,eritreans, ethopians... those arabs are invaders of the land..now fuk u go eat an aids dick...
@mofire9999 Horseshit. Your definition of common sense seems to be distorted. The middle east isn't a continent. It's a geopolitical term for the region. Get your fucking facts straight. And the thing about pyramids is pseudo-history which you want to believe in. The majority of today's Egyptians are Arabized rather than being ethnically Arabs. The absurd Afrocentric claim that the ancient Egyptians were Hamitic has been refuted by loads of scientists.
I spent 6 years living in the middle east and I actually experienced exactly what Hans is talking about here. let's focus on helping developed countries out of poverty and most of our problems will go away
Great speech! The only thing I would disagree is that he speaks of the population of the countries as if they were homogeneous, and they're not. In a country like mine (Brazil) you'll find a significative quantity of people in every social class.
Investments in health and hygiene = socialized health care via higher taxes. Indeed, THAT will lower population but it won't solve poverty. Tax people and you get less of them.
Every word of what this man said was wonderful. In less than 10 minutes he outlined a problem, gave us a general framework for solving it, and a projected outcome for what is to come if we act or if we choose not to act. Interestingly I have always thought the exact same thing but we have to stop thinking and start acting.
I'm alzo a stupidz westernez commiez... lez kill ze zdupid white people and make roomz for za poor from 3rld countriez zu make kidz. Even better, letz put zhose white peoplez into camps to work for the eco-green 3rd worldz countries which btw just cut down 2/3 of the world forestz in the last 20 yearz... yeah!
@mcbrave15 haha wow you're comment couldn't be any more ironic and delicious...62 people didn't finished high school? or 62 people didn't FINISH high school...you fail
Nice video, but surely correlation does not imply causation in this case. As the countries become rich, they have better health care, while richer people also tend to have fewer kids.
Hans I am also a "possiblist" and believe that education is Gods gift to us in the Healthy wealthy corner of the world. The internet will make it available FREE to anyone as long as there isn't any outside interference from Government interests.
SO BASICALLY ITS ABOUT KEEPING THE RESOURCES IN AFRICA AND NOT FUCKING EXPLOITING MAMA AFRICA. THE "POOR INNOCENT" WESTERN COUNTRIES GOT RICH AND ASPIRED FOR CARS AND PLANES OFF OF AFRICAN RESOURCES.
Hans said at the end which is a kind of possibility. he is thinking about the best way possible. I must say that if you are looking for the best possible way, it is best to expose all the problems you see. forgotten in the exhibition, the quality of life, goes hand in hand per capita consumption of energy. energy and land are the two big problems.
the two big problems that makes population another problem
I am currently living in Oakland California. My roomate is a child of ten. and has his own offspring not taking care of. I think stupid people will continue to reproduce to many kids and take pride in it. I wish that helping people is the answer. It isn't. People have to want it for themselves. However even when we want to change it takes so much time for anyone to truly do it. I really want to be optimistic but I don't see increased child survival reducing the world population. Education...
I agree with Uthredthevikin use all the controseptives available we need to get to zero population and mabey get to the point where the population isn't growing at all at least for a few years and in the meantime help get rid of the friggen plastic thats smothering our world have you seen the plastic thats floating out in our oceans there are two major ones in the atlantic and the big one in the pacific both the size of continents
Hans here seems to have discounted a whole lot of data to focus on an optimistic precept that the entire world can increase in population to 9 billion and sustain itself at western levels of consumption. I think he has spent too much time locked in the lab and not got in touch with the facts. This is the all too common belief of optimistic planners. A better model presents itself in looking at the long history of civilizations who outstripped available resources.2 children =25 years longevity.
Couldn't he just as well say that the way to increase child survival is to decrease population growth?
I didn't see him show that there is a CAUSAL relationship between increased child survival and population growth. Correlation does not equal causation.
There are certainly other factors than child survival that cause people in developing countries to have many children--chief among them probably being religion (especially Islam and Catholicism).
@sdog74 if you correlate what happens in the animal world with this, you will note that species with better child care produce less offspring than species with less child care. What is good for the goose is good for the gander. So it is the same with humans. The more you increase child survival, the greater the trend to limit family size. The biggest reason for large families in the old days was to ensure the survival of the next generation.
I hope you are listening carefully to what Rosling said (after all, he was talking to us like a bunch of 3rd graders). It's the first world's responsibility to drag the 3rd world to our status via wealth redistribution so that we have hope of the inevitable population implosion headed our way by 2050. Redistribute wealth in the hopes reducing population via the 1 world order (or as he called it "global governance'). "Do it well," he said, and "get used to it." Were listening 1st world?
Or, if there was a way to make the economy run on something other than human labor, like - if it was a benefit to have just one or two kids, because human physical labor is replaced more by machine and its not benefit to have kids for labor. I don't think the key is reducing energy consumption so there are more cars, I think its reducing families' need for physical human labor so you reduce population and reduce consumption that way
Just because you have more children if they are more likely to die doesn't mean you will stop having more children if they are less likely to die, you might still have more children because of something else caused by poverty... like if there is no other way to earn a living than to increase your familial labor force. So I guess it's tied to the same thing, increase economies world wide, reduce overpopulation one way or another..human lives shouldn't be 'added value' like that in poor countries
i find the world a pretty stupid place... that people like us have got everything we could ever want yet there are people in the world that just want to be able to get through the day without starving to death... what up with the world?
oc governance and governante are different parts of power. but he is from sweden, he might use the wrongs, but if you are trying to understand what he whats to say, you'll figure it out. People in Sweden in his generation learned german in school, not english.
2010-Rosling now changes his message, instead of all that positive Whiggish history we get a new and welcome notion of possibility.
However, he now wanders into an area where he has no expertise. Impossibility is the apposite term. We are constantly reminded of infinite possibilities of technology but just try changing capitalist democracy, the status quo, cheap labor...impossible! You can't buck the market! We can bail out billionaires but we can't save millions of children.
Wait...global governance?? Did he say "global governance"? No way mate! People in the west are getting poorer becuz of the economic depression. Unemployment & homelessness on the rise. The rich elite banksters are ripping them all off & the middle class in the US is being decimated. Same with Europe with their debt problems. Helping child survival & increasing prosperity is all well & good. But when they get into global government & popu. reduction through vaccines like Bill Gates, NO THANKS!!!
@mana2432 Are you delusional? Of course, things are going well for us here in Asia but not in your country. 20+% unemployed in the US. Most people living pay check to pay check, heavily in debt, graduates can't find a job. If you're American, your country is in a depression. Do you call that getting rich? What cloud of denial and self-delusion do you live in?
@msquestionmark First off, its a recession, not a depression. They occur and hit the hardest under fiat currency. Unemployment is at 9.6%, if you count the people who stopped looking for work, is a bit more than that but not 20. Americans own much more stuff than they did 10 years ago, I don't call that getting poorer. Even in a recession, people are still in malls, and in wholesale, consuming. Anyway, check Tabarrok on how ideas trump crises.
@mana2432 Yea, we'll see *who* will see! Stupid, gullible, brain-washed American! Fat, dumb and delusionally happy! Why am I even wasting my time replying to you!! Go find something more truthful to listen to than Tedtalks! Pffft!! I recommend Alex Jones!
@msquestionmark Why did you even reply to me? anyway ad hominem attacks (I am pretty fit btw :P) will get you nowhere. As for tedtalks and alex jones, i don't waste my time listening to pcs or patriotic zealots like you do apparently.
"the middle class is disappearing, they are becoming richer :)."
-all the millionaires are becoming billionaires?
really ???
are you sure we aren't seeing a deepening pyramid, with wider gap between super-rich & underclass/'slave-class', and pressure to elimnate the middle class from both directions
@walter0bz add me so i can send you an excerpt from an article I read explaining why that hole 'income inequality' by many keynesian economists is misleading.
my main observation is: there IS a deepening pyramid.
i think money functions as heirarchy as much as resource management: e.g: log of money = heirarchy level. hence billionaires and debt-slaves with negative worth.
I am generally in favour of free market, i'm certainly not a socialist - but people *should* be very concerned that 'eachother' values a few thousands of times more. [more]
@walter0bz money is just a medium used for trade. Im not in favor of fiat currency, because it is unstable. I am in favor of the free market, because it is analogous to evolution, and I think it is the fastest way to achieve technological advancements, because u are not just trading goods, ur also trading ideas. Check out how ideas trump crises by Alex Tabarrok on TED. I highly suggest u check out that vid. :)
my point about heirarchy - successively bigger bets taken by people rising higher in the heirarchy, putting them higher in the pecking order and giving them more control.
>>Im not in favor of fiat currency,
- IMO fiat serves to depen this heirarchy. No money? go ahead an breed anyway, in debt.. producing slaves for someone else. Similarly, leverage allows centralizing more power in the "winner" [ i think we're in agreement fiat = Fail]
@walter0bz Here's the thing about hierarchy, you are partly right because we only have aspects of an fm (at least in the us). the state has a safety net for corporations that are not efficient and can't compete because they are a 'valuable asset' to the public. However you still see people moving up and down from those income brackets every year, especially the 95th percentile.
i've heard about the bailouts for auto industry. and incentives to buy new cars. this is bad since freemarket intelligence should be changing the world for carfree living (e.g. accomodation closer to work - i.e. city centre flats; more bicycle / more teleworking etc)
the problem here is populist politicians able to manipulate a dumb sheep like population.
@mana2432 - I do also see the price signals functioning as a sort of intelligence, quantified voting, assimilating more information from more fields than any one person can directly encounter. (which you call "trading ideas")
if you blindly accept the free market, what about the housing bubble .. the masses went for it, then it literally broke the banks. More money was printed out of thin air (i gather thats keynsianism..); the meaning of the price signals is misinterpretted, diluted.
[ rising house prices = scarcity of land, overcrowding. solution = **less people** ]
@walter0bz it wasn't the fm. the housing bubble was basically created by the government and the federal reserve bank. The gov. was forcing banks to hand out spm loans, and at the same time the fed had interest rates very low, from there u know what happend.
Anyways, name one country that got wealthier by cutting their population in half... And I suggest you go to Hans Rosling's website mindyourgap and check out how China has done over the last 200 years.
when a country loses its resources, it loses its wealth, population decreases.
Thats the situation we're facing with oil; I'm suggesting preparing for it gracefully.
my practical suggestion is Global One Child Policy, only lifted when: (i) pop is below 1billion, or (ii) Fusion solved, or (iii) we use Offworld resources..
for me it is incredible that this speech just ignored the word resources, its like he assumes resources can be created or replaced by technology, a vastly common fallacy in normal people.
@jpradacr - It is because 'normal people' do not step outside of their bubble, their place in the value chain, and have to see the big picture of how they fit into society or how humans fit into nature. They just react e.g. deploy their labour to satisfy the greatest demand.
"Where does food come from ? Supermarkets! Empirically, shelves are abundant! thats' all my monkey brain designed to figure out 'trees' has ever known. Never mind these pesky abstract theories about finite resources!"
@jpradacr - You ignored the entire reason for giving this speech in the first place. If he assumed resources were unlimited, he would not need to give a speech about the urgent need to stabilize population growth. Slowing growth to peak at around 9 billion people by 2050 is our best realistic goal. With the demographic trends already happening, we can't make it peak at any lower level without totalitarian repression, or horrific catastrophes such as a major nuclear war (which he also mentions).
@kevintype thanks for your reply, I understand your point, but how do you get to the conclusion that the world can stand those huge amounts of people without collapsing (huge generalized suffering)? "Because its already doing so" is yet another fallacy by normal people, its like "i've already fallen 99 floors, so far so good" Ive tried all ways to imagine how this recent past huge population explosion could be sustainable in the future, were already falling only we havent noticed.
@jpradacr - Rosling is not arguing in favor of a global population increase to 9 billion. He merely points out that we have little choice in the matter. Unless some catastrophe occurs - such as the collapse you mention - population will rise whether we like it or not. So his focus is on possible ways to reduce human impact on our planet's support systems. Electric cars, for example, and smaller family sizes to stabilize population growth and peak at 9 billion, instead of continuing to explode.
@kevintype Hi, there are countless examples were technology seems to be a future saver. Do you know how much contamination is required to make 1 electric car? and thats before it hits the road. What about animals killed in the road? No more wild animals anyway? What about battery life? What about power plants? How many 9 billion generations do we want nature to sustain? A few? Is it to hard to grasp that technology always creates further problems? I'll let you finish this thread.
@jpradacr - Your questions might be more persuasive if you asked them in the context of any practical and concrete proposals for resolving the problems you mention. Rosling's point is that some technologies are more harmful than others. If people are determined to have cars, for example, it is less harmful to use electric cars charged by a renewable power grid, than to use cars powered by burning oil. We can encourage this, and smaller family sizes, without destroying essential human freedoms.
@jpradacr - Thank you for an interesting conversation. I had hoped to arrive at a better understanding of the thought processes that lead you to the positions you appear to hold, as well as a more complete picture of what exactly you believe needs to be done to resolve the problems you mention. Yet I also understand everyone's time is limited, so I appreciate the time you have already spent discussing these ideas here. Best wishes to you.
@kevintype Hi, I used to believe in recycling, solar panels... but went further and found every solution creates huge new problems once you multiply it by the billions, can you imagine to multiply that by 100,000 human generations? Just think of shoe soles (or car wheels), do the math, please. The solution is simple but difficult: make people aware of the problem. The most difficult part is making an alcoholic to admit his problem and decide to solve it.
@kevintype I want to thank you a lot for your interest and I would be very pleased to continue this conversation but this page is about Mr. Roslin. I am developing a framework for all understanding, sounds complicated but it isnt, I call the project "From the beginning" because I have quite developed the idea that we can agree on everything as long as we start from the beginning, its not done and Im looking for contributors so youre very welcome, regards,
Wait..global governance?? Did he say "global governance"? No way mate! People in the west are getting poorer becuz of the economic depression. Unemployment & homelessness on the rise. The rich elite banksters are ripping them all off & the middle class in the US is being decimated. Same with Europe with their debt problems. Helping child survival & increasing prosperity is all well & good. But when they get into global government & popu. reduction through vaccines like Bill Gates, NO THANKS!!!!
I used to think that even though AIDS was awful it did something to help overpopulation but after seeing this very well presented video i see that curing AIDS is The planets No 1 obligation to curb overpopulation and consequently helping the environment. Possible-ist I love it
thats why they want the west to become multicultural center of the world, so that the west can rule everyone by claiming that they speak for all cultures and people.
Did you pay attention to what was actually being said in this video. We have to stop thinking that it is still 1960. Where has your statement been proven?
In 2009 the TFR (total fertility rate) of France was 2.02 children / woman while Algeria had 1.79 / woman. In United States it is 2.05 / woman while Iran has one of 1.71. All this can be found in the CIA World fact book. It is really time that we start to see the world for what it really is
He doesn't take into account cultural reasons for large families. Muslims living in the west have proven that high rates of child survival doesn't mean that they will have small families
@phillozoph50 Jews don't generally breed like rats, they only act like them. Even Catholics who haven't traditionally believed in birth control have low birth rates now. I guess I was speaking about both cultural and religious in this case, as most of middle eastern culture is religious since islam became their culture
@FTPopo i guess they're taken into account cause they live in the west and are accounted for within those western countries statistics? also, how many % out of one ethnicity that you feel generally have big families are actually living in wealthy conditions? im willing to bet that number is pretty insignificant. point still stands imo that cultural differences have next to no effect to the link of poor conditions and large families,especially as cultural differences are weakening in this day&age
@FTPopo This is because the Muslim countries' culture, and thus Muslims living in the West, are only now coming out of Stage 2 of the Demographic Transition.
@FTPopo Already fertility rates are below replacement rate in many Muslim-majority countries. Bosnia and Herzegovina 1.26, Albania 1.47, Tunisia 1.71, Maldives 1.83, Kazakhstan 1.87, Brunei 1.88, Iran 1.89, Uzbekistan 1.92. From CIA World Factbook. If you browse Gapminder you'll see that fertility rates have collapsed in most Muslim-majority countries. In some cases the Muslims are now having fewer children than their non-Muslim neighbours. E.g. Indonesia compared with Philippines or East Timor.
This guy is a great speaker, with an equally great and optimistic (whatever he says) message on the future of the world population. 10 minutes, with great visual aids!
@kchomer1 yes and what is bad about that? or stupid? it is the most logical thing. if we cut down on all those disease festering people this world would be a better place. there would be no 3rd world countrys. it would be one less obstacle on earth to pity on. your just a instigating shrewd ignoramus.
Paul Polak makes a very important point about the billion we don't see coming out of poverty and that is that they are poor rural farmer isolated from access to much of the benefits of national economic growth. I would love to get more insights into this group. The small share farmers in developing countries. New low cost solutions are being developed every day. Paul also makes the point that if designers and businesses will serve the bottom billion in ways that help them earn more money th
Interesting vid, but it's not child survival but quality of life that needs to increase. Child survival and lower birthrates are more effects of economic prosperity and not causes.
totally agree with this guy. all those poor mexicans and africans are fucking baby machines since they r so poor and have nuthing else better to do.oh and that isnt a racist comment or anything its just true.
and all these anti-abortionists....up urs ok? message me if ur such a anti and lets see who is really in the right or wrong.
Human race is cancer
GeorgeZupster 5 hours ago
The west stopped helping developing worlds sincerely a long time ago. Now they are actively trying to slow their growth (since about 40 years ago)
crudhousefull 1 day ago in playlist More videos from TEDtalksDirector
Prior to Europe invasion the Americas had very low population u moron. Thats a fact of history.
Mythicist 6 days ago
Prior to the European invasion, The americas were heavily populated. The modern day united states had more people then than it does today. The issue isnt how many of us that ther are, it is how we live on the earth. Many human cultures have lived on the land while building up its fertility. These silly talking crackers just ruin everything while pointing the finger at other cultures.
jamesdeanwi 1 week ago
if 3 billion 50 years ago , wow we're screwed if in just 50 more we double again.
toob247 2 weeks ago
@toob247 The population went from 3 billion in 1960 to 6 billion in 2000, we just got to 7 billion, at a billion every 12 years or so, it will be 2075 before we hit 12 billion
which would be the doubling you are referring to, I don't see us getting there with abortion and birth control and constant bombardment of over population messages,
so don't worry, we are not screwed as you put it, you are letting the pop fanatics get
to you, let the pop grow, human nature to grow!!
limoboss6242 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Professor Rosling is an ecstatic raving lunatic that by fantastic oratories and revelations document truth just as easy and convincing as the most fundametalistic believers of totally different categories.
flyvefisken 3 weeks ago
When a woman knows that her children will probably die, she will have as many children as she can in hopes that one will survive.
xdarkeagle17x 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
BPcaution.blogspot.com …… very important health tips for HIGH BLOOD PRESSURE
sophiathomas210 1 month ago
SOLUTION: Sterylize poor people!
TheYaom 1 month ago in playlist 8.1 Population
the think is we know how to stop poverty and we have the money but all the wealthiest countries are selfish...
alexavo98 1 month ago
6:40 africa!
mBrooks95 2 months ago 2
The role of the western world is to be the foundation of the new world - it is and has been for 300 years - that's why we see the march of the dots to the lower right
cheekymonkeyali 2 months ago 2
@cheekymonkeyali Exactly.
Gammodore 1 month ago
Very well explained.
tetpwav1 2 months ago
I really like the presentation and I agree with everything he says. However, the only thing that i critisize is the this missleading concept of "reducing an overpopulated world." The world is not overpopulated, nor is overpopulation the issue. The issue is overconsumption and a lack of distribution. Population growths and declines, are predicted to grow and decline as time passes.
ashunga543 2 months ago
@ashunga543 - You are correct, the world is not over populated, the population is more
each year as we grow!!
limoboss6242 1 week ago
@limoboss6242 That is true, but the rate at which it is growing, is declining. Meaning, population will eventually hit a pinicle climax and decline.
ashunga543 1 week ago
@ashunga543 - True, so gloom and doomest people need not worry about more babies
being born!!
limoboss6242 1 week ago
lol @ "global governance" - de-industrializing the west and moving industries to the 3rd world (that have no pollution control) will only increase pollution and reestablish poverty in the west (that will lead to more children).
The fact of the matter is that both "overpopulation" and "climatechange" are myths for the elite to build their global empire.
(More co2 when there were dinosaurs. We live on less then 0,005% of the planet - one USA family consumes more then a whole african village)
clarkcolt45 2 months ago
The "overpopulation" myth is Malthusian genocidal propaganda, spreading prophecy of "what will happen in 100 year if...!?"..
Well, WE didn't even live the same way 100 years ago, who are they to say that 3rd world will have to limit their population because they'll get cars? Cars were hardly in common use 100 years ago. Our culture was different.
Anyway, one family in USA consumes more then a whole village in africa, the population relationship to consumption is really.
clarkcolt45 2 months ago
just because 3rd countries gets wealthy doesn't mean that they will have less kids. only god knows why they have kids so much even now. stop analyzing numbers and go find whats really going on in the world.
cinamona57 2 months ago
I don't think you guys truly understand his real message. POVERTY AND HUNGER CAN BE ENDED IN OUR GENERATION BUT DEVELOPED COUNTRIES MUST BE THE FOUNDATION FOR THAT GREAT FUTURE. We have the technology and capability to lead a fantastic GREEN future. Population will grow, yes, but so will everyone's quality of life with schooling and medicine to prevent third world over-population. By the time I die I hope there has been great positive progress towards this. Imagine a world without poverty.
Gammodore 2 months ago 23
@Gammodore What world do you live in? What are you doing except bloviating?
DeepThought42a 1 month ago
@DeepThought42a Wouldn't you want your kids to live in a world like that?
Gammodore 3 weeks ago
Rosling is an outright genious!
Peroman200 2 months ago 21
What the richest must to show to the world is an example of spartan life, because the hungry ones always see in their direction.
The few pleasures the poor can take almost free, is to fuck with his wife or his women, accepting that the pleasures the rich can take, he would never be capable to reach.
citlaltlamina 3 months ago
Family planning need to be seriously considered.
RosalieandJacob 4 months ago
Man, what he says is true. I REALLY wish poverty can be ended in our lifetime.
Gammodore 4 months ago 2
we need to stop importing and exporting so much and lifting restrictions on food growth for personal and for small business all over the world meanwhile seize the patents GMO companies have wrongly attained.
life was never meant to patentable. farming corps in america are truly disgusting, they are ruining diversity and potentially a large contributer to our health crisis. everyone on earth should have equal ownership of our food
emersonmakebest 4 months ago
Lets throw a bomb over africa, whos with me?
indiancambel 4 months ago
@indiancambel No. That would solve nothing.
Gammodore 4 months ago
thank you
Clavicula1121 4 months ago
We are fucked end of.........people are ultimatley selfish like cancer cells to this planet.
Mother nature will eradiicate us that will happen in less than 50 years. Look forward to chaos!!!
gannet58555 4 months ago
This guy is completely wrong. Its not birth rates per se that are important in terms of pressure on the earths resources, its the number of years each person spends on the earth x the number of people x the amount of resources consumed each year. If fertility rates go from 4 births/woman to 2 births/woman and those people are living way longer (say 50% longer) plus they are consuming WAY more (and they will as they get richer desepite what this guy thinks) then we are WORSE off.
BeerIstGood 4 months ago
@BeerIstGood with respect, your math says that woman w/ two children would live and consume as much as 3 people from the mother who gave birth to 4 (50% longer from each added together: one hundred percent) so consumption would still drop
emersonmakebest 4 months ago
@emersonmakebest You're right assuming that resouce consumption/year is the same/person, but I made a point that resource consumption goes up when you get richer (in absolute, despite greater efficiency). So then it looks like: 2 people living 50% longer live as many human years as 3 from the mother who gave birth to 4 (your point). In order for their consumption to exceed the 4 from the other mother they only need to consume 4/3-1 = 33% more. I'm 99% sure I consume 33% more than an african.
BeerIstGood 4 months ago
What is this very mysterious energy he talks about? Here he is yapping on about some bullshit while he pretends to have information about this unknown energy. All the scientists in the world tells us that there is not even a theoretically possible energy that can replace oil, and what other energy we have - will only cover a few prosentage of what the oil gives us now. In 2050 billions will die.
1TtidnaB 5 months ago
SO I GUESS its a race to provide better (yet wasteful) living while at the same time improving that wasteful living with more sustainable ways
dirty1smelly1turban 5 months ago
My bubbles :)
Zorn27 6 months ago
Kill your self and safe the world !
QadirPopal 6 months ago
@QadirPopal wont change nothing
mariamole011 5 months ago
@deshmeradesh1
In the last 10 years, the population of India expanded by how much, 200 million people? How many Indians have emigrated to the US or Europe in that time? Even if it was 2 million, it would still be irrelevant. 99% of Indians live and will live in India. If that country doesn't stop its uncontrolled population boom soon, it is going to collapse in the next 30-40 years.
Winner8501 7 months ago
@Winner8501 Please watch the video again and look at India's "bubble". The trend clearly shows India joining the rest of the "western" world with decreasing family size and increase in child survival rate. Rosling does not explain why child survival causes family size decrease, he just explains the obvious relationship which consistently exists and persists over decades. The trend is already happening in India right now.
Radjehuty 6 months ago
@Radjehuty
The video doesn't address the point - countries like India can't afford to wait until social change brings down the fertility rate. The world as a whole can't sustain its current population - the resources that have fuelled the initial growth of the West and which are now fuelling the newly industrialized countries are almost gone. India is overpopulated, it's carrying capacity is rapidly decreasing, yet its population keeps growing. That's a road to hell, or Somalia, rather.
Winner8501 6 months ago
@Winner8501 The video addresses that point exactly. It's one of the main ideas actually. If we want to curb population growth, increase standards of living in third world countries which is seen in places like India now. Like I said already, family size is decreasing in India and although population is growing, the rate of increase is slowing. The world will have to wait whether or not it can afford it. They use far less resources than the US despite its far greater population.
Radjehuty 6 months ago
@Radjehuty I'm with Winner here. I very much doubt that India's population growth will be slowed down quickly enough to prevent a catastrophe like the one in Ethiopia and Somalia right now. The theory isn't wrong, it's just that it'd take too much time in this particular case.
doom032 5 months ago
@Winner8501 they may have to nuke africa some tie in the future.
mariamole011 5 months ago
Flawed logic - we simply don't have time to wait until the Third World population stops growing naturally. The resources that fuelled our (Western) growth and which now fuel Chine and a handful of other developing countries are almost exhausted. Unless we take action now to stop this, there will be nothing left for the remaining billions of people.
I am not blaming us - India could have stopped its population explosion if it wanted. Now they're doomed to collapse because of it.
Winner8501 7 months ago
Green is in middle east wow..i didnt knw egypt is in the middle east...wat an idiot..
mofire9999 7 months ago
@mofire9999 Wikipedia:The Middle East is a region that encompasses Western Asia and North Africa.
You are the idiot.
TerminalSulcus 7 months ago
@TerminalSulcus to hell what wiki says common sense says egypt is in AFRICA.. north africa to be exact. those gyptians in modern day egypt are called arab invaders..the real egyptians that build those great pyramids more look like somalians,eritreans, ethopians... those arabs are invaders of the land..now fuk u go eat an aids dick...
mofire9999 7 months ago
@mofire9999 Horseshit. Your definition of common sense seems to be distorted. The middle east isn't a continent. It's a geopolitical term for the region. Get your fucking facts straight. And the thing about pyramids is pseudo-history which you want to believe in. The majority of today's Egyptians are Arabized rather than being ethnically Arabs. The absurd Afrocentric claim that the ancient Egyptians were Hamitic has been refuted by loads of scientists.
TerminalSulcus 7 months ago
@TerminalSulcus I'm black..and I hate afrocentric people..
I remember some black guy said vikings were black.. I am not shitting you.
AgrivatedKillah 4 months ago
@AgrivatedKillah What. No one is that insane, are they? Vikings being black makes no sense.
Vengrence 3 months ago
@Vengrence Lmaooo I swear, hold on i'll try and link you to it.
AgrivatedKillah 3 months ago
@Vengrence Couldn't find it, but try and look it up.
"afrocentric guy claims vikings were black"
AgrivatedKillah 3 months ago
@mofire9999 Unless, of course, you were referring to the slaves who were commanded by the Egyptians to build the pyramids.
TerminalSulcus 7 months ago
I spent 6 years living in the middle east and I actually experienced exactly what Hans is talking about here. let's focus on helping developed countries out of poverty and most of our problems will go away
SidandCoke 7 months ago
Do it well, and get used to it.
Word.
I'll try.
cmd2tuts 7 months ago
Great speech! The only thing I would disagree is that he speaks of the population of the countries as if they were homogeneous, and they're not. In a country like mine (Brazil) you'll find a significative quantity of people in every social class.
luizcadu 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
In the near future there will be too many people on earth.
Maby there are to many allready.
Unballands and unnatural.
The increasing population of humanity will decrease the population of animals and other living orgasms.
Not to speak about the pollution people allready make now.
Freddekaddeth 8 months ago
58 national science acadmeies agree that overpopulation is a major issue. See "One Planet One Child" for more info or "overconsumpulation".
phillips78 8 months ago
Investments in health and hygiene = socialized health care via higher taxes. Indeed, THAT will lower population but it won't solve poverty. Tax people and you get less of them.
truevoice08 8 months ago
4:30 a car doesn't make you rich - having everything you need in walking distance represents higher quality of life
walter0bz 8 months ago
Every word of what this man said was wonderful. In less than 10 minutes he outlined a problem, gave us a general framework for solving it, and a projected outcome for what is to come if we act or if we choose not to act. Interestingly I have always thought the exact same thing but we have to stop thinking and start acting.
andyrooney12 8 months ago
This is probably one of the best videos concerning poverty etc. It explains it so easy, yet so logical.
Robinzorz 8 months ago
Imagine having him as your teacher!
nokkan123 8 months ago 2
or, here's another alternative, stupid african monkeys and indians could stop having so many kids...problem solved
starhawks1 8 months ago
I'm alzo a stupidz westernez commiez... lez kill ze zdupid white people and make roomz for za poor from 3rld countriez zu make kidz. Even better, letz put zhose white peoplez into camps to work for the eco-green 3rd worldz countries which btw just cut down 2/3 of the world forestz in the last 20 yearz... yeah!
Rookie972 9 months ago
62 people didn't finished high school...
mcbrave15 10 months ago
@mcbrave15 haha wow you're comment couldn't be any more ironic and delicious...62 people didn't finished high school? or 62 people didn't FINISH high school...you fail
starhawks1 8 months ago
@starhawks1 LOL sorry.. english is my 3rd language. My bad! ;D
mcbrave15 8 months ago
Nice video, but surely correlation does not imply causation in this case. As the countries become rich, they have better health care, while richer people also tend to have fewer kids.
superminimizer 10 months ago 2
Hans I am also a "possiblist" and believe that education is Gods gift to us in the Healthy wealthy corner of the world. The internet will make it available FREE to anyone as long as there isn't any outside interference from Government interests.
TheMinistryMan 10 months ago
SO BASICALLY ITS ABOUT KEEPING THE RESOURCES IN AFRICA AND NOT FUCKING EXPLOITING MAMA AFRICA. THE "POOR INNOCENT" WESTERN COUNTRIES GOT RICH AND ASPIRED FOR CARS AND PLANES OFF OF AFRICAN RESOURCES.
etekle 10 months ago
Hans said at the end which is a kind of possibility. he is thinking about the best way possible. I must say that if you are looking for the best possible way, it is best to expose all the problems you see. forgotten in the exhibition, the quality of life, goes hand in hand per capita consumption of energy. energy and land are the two big problems.
the two big problems that makes population another problem
piansta 11 months ago
I am currently living in Oakland California. My roomate is a child of ten. and has his own offspring not taking care of. I think stupid people will continue to reproduce to many kids and take pride in it. I wish that helping people is the answer. It isn't. People have to want it for themselves. However even when we want to change it takes so much time for anyone to truly do it. I really want to be optimistic but I don't see increased child survival reducing the world population. Education...
danthecurious 1 year ago
the answer? free cigarettes and booze shipments to asia and africa.
NORTHERNKONFLIKT 1 year ago
can anybody remember the name of the website he uses that characterizes things as bubbles which changes over time?
abcarpenter8 1 year ago
@abcarpenter8
gapminder
thehoogard 1 year ago
I agree with Uthredthevikin use all the controseptives available we need to get to zero population and mabey get to the point where the population isn't growing at all at least for a few years and in the meantime help get rid of the friggen plastic thats smothering our world have you seen the plastic thats floating out in our oceans there are two major ones in the atlantic and the big one in the pacific both the size of continents
MrCatbirdie3 1 year ago
@MrCatbirdie3 I agree, but Abstinence is better than Contraceptives. Unless..........
loololollool 11 months ago
The answer? More condoms!
UthredthevikinG 1 year ago
Hans here seems to have discounted a whole lot of data to focus on an optimistic precept that the entire world can increase in population to 9 billion and sustain itself at western levels of consumption. I think he has spent too much time locked in the lab and not got in touch with the facts. This is the all too common belief of optimistic planners. A better model presents itself in looking at the long history of civilizations who outstripped available resources.2 children =25 years longevity.
pattunes1 1 year ago
@pattunes1 - Have you ANY evidence whatsoever to back up your gut feeling on this?
Nope? Didn't think so.
meadowfabricsdotcom 1 year ago
Woah! He's such an inspiration and such a great talker! I think i might actually pass my Geography A level now!
RidCoxy 1 year ago
Couldn't he just as well say that the way to increase child survival is to decrease population growth?
I didn't see him show that there is a CAUSAL relationship between increased child survival and population growth. Correlation does not equal causation.
There are certainly other factors than child survival that cause people in developing countries to have many children--chief among them probably being religion (especially Islam and Catholicism).
sdog74 1 year ago
@sdog74 if you correlate what happens in the animal world with this, you will note that species with better child care produce less offspring than species with less child care. What is good for the goose is good for the gander. So it is the same with humans. The more you increase child survival, the greater the trend to limit family size. The biggest reason for large families in the old days was to ensure the survival of the next generation.
Population is actually a self-limiting system.
pulsar996 1 year ago
I hope you are listening carefully to what Rosling said (after all, he was talking to us like a bunch of 3rd graders). It's the first world's responsibility to drag the 3rd world to our status via wealth redistribution so that we have hope of the inevitable population implosion headed our way by 2050. Redistribute wealth in the hopes reducing population via the 1 world order (or as he called it "global governance'). "Do it well," he said, and "get used to it." Were listening 1st world?
ambygirl1008 1 year ago
Or, if there was a way to make the economy run on something other than human labor, like - if it was a benefit to have just one or two kids, because human physical labor is replaced more by machine and its not benefit to have kids for labor. I don't think the key is reducing energy consumption so there are more cars, I think its reducing families' need for physical human labor so you reduce population and reduce consumption that way
dh234ful 1 year ago
Just because you have more children if they are more likely to die doesn't mean you will stop having more children if they are less likely to die, you might still have more children because of something else caused by poverty... like if there is no other way to earn a living than to increase your familial labor force. So I guess it's tied to the same thing, increase economies world wide, reduce overpopulation one way or another..human lives shouldn't be 'added value' like that in poor countries
dh234ful 1 year ago
One child and sterilize, end of discussion.
rezek71 1 year ago
Obviously Mr. Rosling hasn't heard about the East Anglia climate change emails revealing the fraud.
Nutrition is key to long lifespans.
Documentary revealing the economic shifts from population reduction: "Demographic Winter." (the trailer's on YouTube).
freaklemon 1 year ago
Childpopulation is the new Green!
Chrillothekid 1 year ago
Amazing presentation
Kimjiheo 1 year ago 3
the biggest losers are whites since their numbers are rapidly declining
tacotony24 1 year ago
i find the world a pretty stupid place... that people like us have got everything we could ever want yet there are people in the world that just want to be able to get through the day without starving to death... what up with the world?
ryphilli1 1 year ago
population growth explained with IKEA boxes TED
other title for this video on
wwwgapminderorgvideospopulation-growth-explained-with-ikea-boxes
note: dots & / marks removed in address
Copper4head 1 year ago
oc governance and governante are different parts of power. but he is from sweden, he might use the wrongs, but if you are trying to understand what he whats to say, you'll figure it out. People in Sweden in his generation learned german in school, not english.
schasper 1 year ago
2010-Rosling now changes his message, instead of all that positive Whiggish history we get a new and welcome notion of possibility.
However, he now wanders into an area where he has no expertise. Impossibility is the apposite term. We are constantly reminded of infinite possibilities of technology but just try changing capitalist democracy, the status quo, cheap labor...impossible! You can't buck the market! We can bail out billionaires but we can't save millions of children.
Zeitschen 1 year ago
that is Amazing , the way he presented his idea
alfayed1991 1 year ago
there's very little that can put a good argument against what this speaker says
pretty amazing
noobler9 1 year ago
Wait...global governance?? Did he say "global governance"? No way mate! People in the west are getting poorer becuz of the economic depression. Unemployment & homelessness on the rise. The rich elite banksters are ripping them all off & the middle class in the US is being decimated. Same with Europe with their debt problems. Helping child survival & increasing prosperity is all well & good. But when they get into global government & popu. reduction through vaccines like Bill Gates, NO THANKS!!!
msquestionmark 1 year ago
@msquestionmark global governance and global governance are two entirely different things...
mlefaye33 1 year ago
@mlefaye33 oh yea? what's the difference?
msquestionmark 1 year ago
@msquestionmark global government and global governance are two different things...
mlefaye33 1 year ago
@msquestionmark You are right, the middle class is disappearing, they are becoming richer :).
mana2432 1 year ago
@mana2432 Are you delusional? Of course, things are going well for us here in Asia but not in your country. 20+% unemployed in the US. Most people living pay check to pay check, heavily in debt, graduates can't find a job. If you're American, your country is in a depression. Do you call that getting rich? What cloud of denial and self-delusion do you live in?
msquestionmark 1 year ago
@msquestionmark First off, its a recession, not a depression. They occur and hit the hardest under fiat currency. Unemployment is at 9.6%, if you count the people who stopped looking for work, is a bit more than that but not 20. Americans own much more stuff than they did 10 years ago, I don't call that getting poorer. Even in a recession, people are still in malls, and in wholesale, consuming. Anyway, check Tabarrok on how ideas trump crises.
mana2432 1 year ago
@mana2432 Yea keep telling yourself that.
msquestionmark 1 year ago
@msquestionmark you'll see :)
mana2432 1 year ago
@mana2432 Yea, we'll see *who* will see! Stupid, gullible, brain-washed American! Fat, dumb and delusionally happy! Why am I even wasting my time replying to you!! Go find something more truthful to listen to than Tedtalks! Pffft!! I recommend Alex Jones!
msquestionmark 1 year ago
@msquestionmark Why did you even reply to me? anyway ad hominem attacks (I am pretty fit btw :P) will get you nowhere. As for tedtalks and alex jones, i don't waste my time listening to pcs or patriotic zealots like you do apparently.
mana2432 1 year ago
@mana2432
"the middle class is disappearing, they are becoming richer :)."
-all the millionaires are becoming billionaires?
really ???
are you sure we aren't seeing a deepening pyramid, with wider gap between super-rich & underclass/'slave-class', and pressure to elimnate the middle class from both directions
walter0bz 1 year ago
@walter0bz add me so i can send you an excerpt from an article I read explaining why that hole 'income inequality' by many keynesian economists is misleading.
mana2432 1 year ago
@mana2432 -
r.e. 'keynesian economists' - i am no fan,
& I am not an economist,
my main observation is: there IS a deepening pyramid.
i think money functions as heirarchy as much as resource management: e.g: log of money = heirarchy level. hence billionaires and debt-slaves with negative worth.
I am generally in favour of free market, i'm certainly not a socialist - but people *should* be very concerned that 'eachother' values a few thousands of times more. [more]
walter0bz 1 year ago
@walter0bz money is just a medium used for trade. Im not in favor of fiat currency, because it is unstable. I am in favor of the free market, because it is analogous to evolution, and I think it is the fastest way to achieve technological advancements, because u are not just trading goods, ur also trading ideas. Check out how ideas trump crises by Alex Tabarrok on TED. I highly suggest u check out that vid. :)
mana2432 1 year ago
@mana2432
>>"money is just a medium used for trade. "
my point about heirarchy - successively bigger bets taken by people rising higher in the heirarchy, putting them higher in the pecking order and giving them more control.
>>Im not in favor of fiat currency,
- IMO fiat serves to depen this heirarchy. No money? go ahead an breed anyway, in debt.. producing slaves for someone else. Similarly, leverage allows centralizing more power in the "winner" [ i think we're in agreement fiat = Fail]
walter0bz 1 year ago
@walter0bz Here's the thing about hierarchy, you are partly right because we only have aspects of an fm (at least in the us). the state has a safety net for corporations that are not efficient and can't compete because they are a 'valuable asset' to the public. However you still see people moving up and down from those income brackets every year, especially the 95th percentile.
mana2432 1 year ago
@mana2432 -
i've heard about the bailouts for auto industry. and incentives to buy new cars. this is bad since freemarket intelligence should be changing the world for carfree living (e.g. accomodation closer to work - i.e. city centre flats; more bicycle / more teleworking etc)
the problem here is populist politicians able to manipulate a dumb sheep like population.
walter0bz 1 year ago
@mana2432 - I do also see the price signals functioning as a sort of intelligence, quantified voting, assimilating more information from more fields than any one person can directly encounter. (which you call "trading ideas")
walter0bz 1 year ago
@mana2432 -
if you blindly accept the free market, what about the housing bubble .. the masses went for it, then it literally broke the banks. More money was printed out of thin air (i gather thats keynsianism..); the meaning of the price signals is misinterpretted, diluted.
[ rising house prices = scarcity of land, overcrowding. solution = **less people** ]
walter0bz 1 year ago
@walter0bz it wasn't the fm. the housing bubble was basically created by the government and the federal reserve bank. The gov. was forcing banks to hand out spm loans, and at the same time the fed had interest rates very low, from there u know what happend.
Anyways, name one country that got wealthier by cutting their population in half... And I suggest you go to Hans Rosling's website mindyourgap and check out how China has done over the last 200 years.
mana2432 1 year ago
@mana2432 -
r.e. population & wealth, IMO that observation is backwards;
abundant resource + technological advancement = "wealth". wealth = ability to increase population.
when a country loses its resources, it loses its wealth, population decreases.
Thats the situation we're facing with oil; I'm suggesting preparing for it gracefully.
my practical suggestion is Global One Child Policy, only lifted when: (i) pop is below 1billion, or (ii) Fusion solved, or (iii) we use Offworld resources..
walter0bz 1 year ago
for me it is incredible that this speech just ignored the word resources, its like he assumes resources can be created or replaced by technology, a vastly common fallacy in normal people.
jpradacr 8 months ago
@jpradacr - It is because 'normal people' do not step outside of their bubble, their place in the value chain, and have to see the big picture of how they fit into society or how humans fit into nature. They just react e.g. deploy their labour to satisfy the greatest demand.
"Where does food come from ? Supermarkets! Empirically, shelves are abundant! thats' all my monkey brain designed to figure out 'trees' has ever known. Never mind these pesky abstract theories about finite resources!"
walter0bz 8 months ago
@jpradacr - You ignored the entire reason for giving this speech in the first place. If he assumed resources were unlimited, he would not need to give a speech about the urgent need to stabilize population growth. Slowing growth to peak at around 9 billion people by 2050 is our best realistic goal. With the demographic trends already happening, we can't make it peak at any lower level without totalitarian repression, or horrific catastrophes such as a major nuclear war (which he also mentions).
kevintype 8 months ago
@kevintype thanks for your reply, I understand your point, but how do you get to the conclusion that the world can stand those huge amounts of people without collapsing (huge generalized suffering)? "Because its already doing so" is yet another fallacy by normal people, its like "i've already fallen 99 floors, so far so good" Ive tried all ways to imagine how this recent past huge population explosion could be sustainable in the future, were already falling only we havent noticed.
jpradacr 8 months ago
@jpradacr - Rosling is not arguing in favor of a global population increase to 9 billion. He merely points out that we have little choice in the matter. Unless some catastrophe occurs - such as the collapse you mention - population will rise whether we like it or not. So his focus is on possible ways to reduce human impact on our planet's support systems. Electric cars, for example, and smaller family sizes to stabilize population growth and peak at 9 billion, instead of continuing to explode.
kevintype 8 months ago
@kevintype Hi, there are countless examples were technology seems to be a future saver. Do you know how much contamination is required to make 1 electric car? and thats before it hits the road. What about animals killed in the road? No more wild animals anyway? What about battery life? What about power plants? How many 9 billion generations do we want nature to sustain? A few? Is it to hard to grasp that technology always creates further problems? I'll let you finish this thread.
jpradacr 8 months ago
@jpradacr - Your questions might be more persuasive if you asked them in the context of any practical and concrete proposals for resolving the problems you mention. Rosling's point is that some technologies are more harmful than others. If people are determined to have cars, for example, it is less harmful to use electric cars charged by a renewable power grid, than to use cars powered by burning oil. We can encourage this, and smaller family sizes, without destroying essential human freedoms.
kevintype 8 months ago
@kevintype I'll take it into account, thanks
jpradacr 8 months ago
@jpradacr - Thank you for an interesting conversation. I had hoped to arrive at a better understanding of the thought processes that lead you to the positions you appear to hold, as well as a more complete picture of what exactly you believe needs to be done to resolve the problems you mention. Yet I also understand everyone's time is limited, so I appreciate the time you have already spent discussing these ideas here. Best wishes to you.
kevintype 8 months ago
@kevintype Hi, I used to believe in recycling, solar panels... but went further and found every solution creates huge new problems once you multiply it by the billions, can you imagine to multiply that by 100,000 human generations? Just think of shoe soles (or car wheels), do the math, please. The solution is simple but difficult: make people aware of the problem. The most difficult part is making an alcoholic to admit his problem and decide to solve it.
jpradacr 7 months ago
@kevintype I want to thank you a lot for your interest and I would be very pleased to continue this conversation but this page is about Mr. Roslin. I am developing a framework for all understanding, sounds complicated but it isnt, I call the project "From the beginning" because I have quite developed the idea that we can agree on everything as long as we start from the beginning, its not done and Im looking for contributors so youre very welcome, regards,
jpradacr 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Wait..global governance?? Did he say "global governance"? No way mate! People in the west are getting poorer becuz of the economic depression. Unemployment & homelessness on the rise. The rich elite banksters are ripping them all off & the middle class in the US is being decimated. Same with Europe with their debt problems. Helping child survival & increasing prosperity is all well & good. But when they get into global government & popu. reduction through vaccines like Bill Gates, NO THANKS!!!!
msquestionmark 1 year ago
Comment removed
msquestionmark 1 year ago
I used to think that even though AIDS was awful it did something to help overpopulation but after seeing this very well presented video i see that curing AIDS is The planets No 1 obligation to curb overpopulation and consequently helping the environment. Possible-ist I love it
TheTrojanfootballer 1 year ago
be a possiblitiest like this guy by acknowledging what he has to say and go forth-ward, moreover, be inspired.
mkraft1212 1 year ago
thats why they want the west to become multicultural center of the world, so that the west can rule everyone by claiming that they speak for all cultures and people.
opaz79 1 year ago
number of children per woman = inversely correlated with education levels of women
nww1986 1 year ago
@nww1986
yeah but education level of women = inversely correlated with their happiness ;-)
kerimil 1 year ago
@nww1986 One of the many reasons we fail as a species.
TheTrojanfootballer 1 year ago
i LOVE ted talks !!! I always learn something new.
jileel 1 year ago
He said "a global government", I don't like the sounds of that!!, but it was a good talk none the less.
WhattsHisName 1 year ago
@FTPopo:
Did you pay attention to what was actually being said in this video. We have to stop thinking that it is still 1960. Where has your statement been proven?
In 2009 the TFR (total fertility rate) of France was 2.02 children / woman while Algeria had 1.79 / woman. In United States it is 2.05 / woman while Iran has one of 1.71. All this can be found in the CIA World fact book. It is really time that we start to see the world for what it really is
edvard1860 1 year ago
He doesn't take into account cultural reasons for large families. Muslims living in the west have proven that high rates of child survival doesn't mean that they will have small families
FTPopo 1 year ago 3
@FTPopo
heh that's what you are afraid of :-D soon their numbers will grow
kerimil 1 year ago
@FTPopo all the muslim families that I have met in the U.s. have small families
Lily2U1515 1 year ago
@FTPopo Cultural?Or religious?In your sentence I could replace word Muslims with Jews very easily and it's still gonna be 100% truth.
phillozoph50 1 year ago
@phillozoph50 Jews don't generally breed like rats, they only act like them. Even Catholics who haven't traditionally believed in birth control have low birth rates now. I guess I was speaking about both cultural and religious in this case, as most of middle eastern culture is religious since islam became their culture
FTPopo 1 year ago
@FTPopo i guess they're taken into account cause they live in the west and are accounted for within those western countries statistics? also, how many % out of one ethnicity that you feel generally have big families are actually living in wealthy conditions? im willing to bet that number is pretty insignificant. point still stands imo that cultural differences have next to no effect to the link of poor conditions and large families,especially as cultural differences are weakening in this day&age
noiserrr 1 year ago
@FTPopo
Not so very long ago the same thing was said about Catholics.
marelin333 1 year ago
@FTPopo This is because the Muslim countries' culture, and thus Muslims living in the West, are only now coming out of Stage 2 of the Demographic Transition.
dymecoar 1 year ago
@FTPopo Already fertility rates are below replacement rate in many Muslim-majority countries. Bosnia and Herzegovina 1.26, Albania 1.47, Tunisia 1.71, Maldives 1.83, Kazakhstan 1.87, Brunei 1.88, Iran 1.89, Uzbekistan 1.92. From CIA World Factbook. If you browse Gapminder you'll see that fertility rates have collapsed in most Muslim-majority countries. In some cases the Muslims are now having fewer children than their non-Muslim neighbours. E.g. Indonesia compared with Philippines or East Timor.
Ansliabh 1 year ago 40
@Ansliabh Actual facts! Actual figures! Thank you for actually adding something to the discussion.
tadknowsbest 11 months ago 30
This guy is a great speaker, with an equally great and optimistic (whatever he says) message on the future of the world population. 10 minutes, with great visual aids!
kennita728 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
This guy is a commie. Just listen to that accent.
SirPwn4lot 1 year ago
Good chart, i remember seeing it few years ago. But how condescending/ patronizing an explanation ! Good work but wrong conclusions in the end.
slumdog01 1 year ago
@kchomer1 yes and what is bad about that? or stupid? it is the most logical thing. if we cut down on all those disease festering people this world would be a better place. there would be no 3rd world countrys. it would be one less obstacle on earth to pity on. your just a instigating shrewd ignoramus.
rockerklaq93 1 year ago
Paul Polak makes a very important point about the billion we don't see coming out of poverty and that is that they are poor rural farmer isolated from access to much of the benefits of national economic growth. I would love to get more insights into this group. The small share farmers in developing countries. New low cost solutions are being developed every day. Paul also makes the point that if designers and businesses will serve the bottom billion in ways that help them earn more money th
ServantEntrepreneur 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
fuck niggers
beeqool 1 year ago
Interesting vid, but it's not child survival but quality of life that needs to increase. Child survival and lower birthrates are more effects of economic prosperity and not causes.
Agnotio 1 year ago
@TheAmericanEmperorbecause what is?
kchomer1 1 year ago
totally agree with this guy. all those poor mexicans and africans are fucking baby machines since they r so poor and have nuthing else better to do.oh and that isnt a racist comment or anything its just true.
and all these anti-abortionists....up urs ok? message me if ur such a anti and lets see who is really in the right or wrong.
rockerklaq93 1 year ago
@rockerklaq93 youre a stupid eugenicist
kchomer1 1 year ago
He had me until he mentioned "global governance".
d3wdman 1 year ago
all the good things he suggests wont out weigh the bad things that will happen from it.
kchomer1 1 year ago
This is a really touchy subject for many people, but such an important one. Glad to see TED discuss this issue.
myenglishguide 1 year ago
INTEL
matrixistrue 1 year ago
This can be done!!!!
I think so, but I think it is only a nice idea.
mohaltron 1 year ago
Rosling is a genius
morb02 1 year ago