Yes, because there is no solution proposed. Extreme poverty may cease to exist, but poverty will always be around. This video does not provide any useful solutions to the global population problem.
In the age of AI, VR, the professor would have dynamite with stats. They have data scientists now but even with all the platforms available, they still don't have anything over the Professor. May he Rest In peace🙏❤️
I like Hans, I like all his presentations... But I can't get past that screen. I need to know about it. How much are they? How does it work? When can plebians like myself get one? Where is the place on his graph I have to reach to attain one?
So what is the difference between extreme poverty and poverty in general? Is there a difference? I only ask cause obviously Americans have a different perspective of poverty than someone in China. I'm just curious if it could be arratacated completely. If so do we have create a different American dream sort of mindset. I'm just very interested in how this all works.
1.Poverty is a cycle of a lack of necessity added with misery. 2.Extreme poverty is poverty taken to extreme (This becomes harder to solve- You can just use Google) But to me they are both the same because in the end the person is in a cycle of lacks and misery. Note : It is possible to decrease or possibly end poverty but that depends on the ones at the top(The world's most powerful people and probably high ranked billionaires) and the change people are willing to do to achieve this goal.
According to his own numbers world poverty has not 'decreased' in absolute numbers. In 1800 total population was about 1 billion of which 850,000,000 were in extreme poverty. In 2015 total population was 7.4 billion of which 12%, or 880,000,000, were in extreme poverty.
extreme poverty in times of crisis would always be in increase. so then the question changed from "how to prevent a crisis while it actually be an unevitability" to "how to reduce the impact and the time of crisis". but we can see now that big crisis is incoming and the little ones are sprouting a lot more often as we are about to enjoy the show.
@@beyondtheinfinite3263 If with current technology the population level was the same as 200 years ago, there would be no poverty. It’s logical that the fewer people there are, the easier it is to provide them with food.
Poverty is most definitely not well-defined here. Is the “poorest” person in Britain better off than the “poorest” person in the Brazilian rainforests?
But the progress is exaggerating. I saw this comment when it was first posted, and thought "does that mean poverty will never end" so I can back to see what has happened in the past 3 years. and according to world bank it is now 736 million, which is quite a lot less
+Zoya The Zebra So how does that work historically & with geographical costs & culture. Seems a bit abstract to me tbh. (I'm not coming at this with some agenda, just interested at how this was arrived at) :)
+Jimbo Jones It is defined by the type of dwelling you have, the amount of income you earn, your access to healthcare, among other things. It is actually defined in less nebulous terms.
+Eamon Bohan Fair enough, but in relation to global population would make no sense surely? Is it purely a financial figure, abstracted from all other factors?
What Mr. Rosling fails to see is that even as we have become very efficient in the production of goods, the factors affecting the distribution of income and wealth have not changed. The result is that today every society (including the Chinese) is dominated by rentier interests. If you do not believe this to be true, examine the statistics published by former World Bank economist Joseph Stiglitz.
People cause others to fall into poverty. If i structured a team of gate keepers and we tried our best to sift who makes it. That would cause a slow wave of financial circumstances eventually. What people suffer from is other people, it's not a natural thing to be without when it's not being controlled. People created markets and what have you, that requires us to have money to get it. And if money is not what you have...you suffer. And if all we're offered is poor wages and horrible co-workers, maintaining becomes damn near impossible.
You can't solve problems by being pessimistic. Whether or not he's being accurate doesn't matter. He's trying to help fuel a movement, you have to be optimistic
This is encouraging, but it's not the be-all and end-all of poverty. It will raise the standards, yet will set new challenges with it. I think it does express an important lesson though: that as long as we're doing the right thing in the right direction, we will get by over time and reach the next destination - just try not to derail our progress too much along the way. I think this works for now, but there is a strong part of me that believes that the more human consciousnesses that we tap, the faster will be our ascent. Now the question is: ascent to what? And why? Those questions have lost their relevance for me ever since taking the BLUE pill. 🤔
World population in 1800 was approximately 1 billion people with 85% of them and poverty that's about 850 million people world population in 1990 is around 5.3 billion with 35% in poverty that's an extra BILLION people... A smaller percentage of the world population in poverty but yet a much larger number of total people? 1800. 1,000,000,000 x .85 = 850,000,000 1990. 5,300,000,000 x .35 = 1,855,000,000 Conclusion... the total percentage of the population of the world has indeed dropped significantly. But with our increased numbers we've actually added 1 billion people to the poverty level!?
If you are saying global poverty is being reduced then why is someone in Afghanistan having to sell their kidney organ to buy food for their family due to extreme poverty in Afghanistan? Something doesn't look right or feels right.
to Stan The answer is "ECONOMIC FREEDOM" not the collective fascism you desire (theft by government). FYI, fascism, related to the word fascicle, translates most closely to "ALL FOR ONE" or we all are together, a group of small twigs made stronger through sticking together (bundling)
How would we do that though???? So many societies don't even have a social net, be it individual or family. China can't seem to pivot away from manufacturing. India is pivoting into manufacturing but already has global elite due to the sheer amount of inequality there. Africa is rife with ethnic conflicts and the so called "tiger economies" of Africa barring Botswana have not chalked up to much. Singapore has become the globes middle man and its middle manness has trickled into malaysia but other SEA nations have been hollowed out into tourist destinations, Thailand of which is the best example of whats happening. Myanmar has been relegated into being a chinese-indian vassal state and to say the same about Nepal would not be a stretch. Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan cant seem to adress their own local turmoils enough to be a stable economic ground for anything. This video has aged horribly.
@Nick Breen Take a look at the end graphic again. Do you see the line for extreme poverty moving to reflect inflation? Neither do I. I'm not saying capitalism does or doesn't work, what I'm saying is this presentation isn't that strong as proof either way.
The end of poverty? Halving hunger failed: At the 1996 World Food Summit in Rome, Italy, leaders from 186 countries pledged to reduce the number of hungry people in the world by half no later than the year 2015 and the hunger should be conquered to 2025. The destination already seems missed today.
SO what standards are used as extreme poverty? what is the bench mark. NO shoes? well under weight , very short life?. The stats shown clearly date from Waterloo era, so one has to assume that is the benchmark?. If so why ? it is 2019 and the rich are much richer than in waterloo era?. maybe we need to see the other scale as a balance the rich side , then and only then you will see a balance of what is purported here!.
Syria Yemen Afghan Africa India Zimbabwe poor man poverty end all country Europ Asia Muslim Arab Dubai Qatar Kuwait Ireland Netherlands Turkmenistan Tajikistan Azerbaijan Kazakhstan Russia Ukraine china Japan Korea Australia France Malaysia Canada poor man poverty end fruit vegetables floor cheap all country
When was this video/Ted talk, because clearly we haven't eradicated poverty in a generation, and don't look anywhere close to achieving this anytime soon.
He said it whilst talking about the first graphic : 2015. Obama isn't dead yet, the Pope is as close to death as popes usually are... and you're not dead yet either, so that one generation still has a little time to go!
This is simply relevant to human technology and our ability to mass produce clothing, food etc. The extreme poverty has been defeated by our abundance however true poverty and wealth disparity are greater than they have ever been. This is a solid piece of BBC propaganda. This would have us believe that our failed economy, and homunculous money-grabbing politicians, bankers and CEOs are doing nothing wrong.
they say extreme poverty if your idea of wealth is cities , cars , material , money and long 9-5 or 8-12 hour jobs 7 or 6 days a week and the price of stuff keeps going up due to inflation and nothing's organic anymore so it has to be mass produced then yh.
+Narhang Ingnam Shit, son, at least it's not drinking poo-water from a hole in the ground, or being worked to death in slave camps. Room for improvement, sure, but hell... it's a start.
First "organic" is just a marketing scam. It means nothing. By definition, ALL molecules with carbon are organic. Secondly, there is nothing wrong with mass produced food. We would NEVER be able to feed 7 billion people with primitive farming methods only. If you want to attack things, attack the MEAT industry for needlessly mass breeding & torturing & murdering animals by the billions and humans breeding & overpopulating and WORTHLESS BRAIN-DESTROYING shit like RELIGION, and money wasted on unnecessary sports stadiums, and Wall Street.
Poverty is every nations facing issue.Every governnent taking corrective action to solve this problem.Every need food,every should need food and shelter. So the governnent do the requirements for this
Population growth won't stop until we hit about 10 billion Slowing reproduction creates a.top heavy tower forcing senior citizens to carry the economy until they die off and then the population would decrease so rapidly that we wouldn't be able to function properly after All things in due time
Due to the failure of our economic system based upon keysianism, we will experience a new financial crisis and economic depression ala 1930-style. Check upon the Weimarrepublic which roamed in Germany until 1923 till hyperinflation striked. Look at USA today, almost 1/7 of the population lives on so called food stamps (50 million) and in Europe there is around 30 million people who dont have work and a migrant crisis which will only get bigger. Do you really think this will end well when the next financial crisis hits the market like it did in 2008?
Factually correct, but unfortunatly misleading. In the sense that the world's population in that time has also increased enormously. So that means that, even as the preportion of poverty has gone down, the raw amount of needless human suffering, compared to 50 years go, is still staggering.
Far too simplistic. Take a billionaire's billion dollars. Give it to the world's population. Each inhabitant get's one seventh of a dollar. How long does that last them? Less than one meal. And meanwhile, you have destroyed everything in jobs and production and creation of even more money that that billion dollars represented. Sure, someone having a billion dollars may be horrendous, but would you rather go back to 1800 and have 80% of the population living in poverty?
Why is important that the whole world have the same living standard as the West? Wealth is relatively and the poor countries wouldn’t be poor if we didn’t compare them to us
This is delusional. Although poverty rates have come down, the number of people living in extreme poverty has actually risen, as you can see the size of the triangles increase. Moreover, this not even takes into account the inflation rate and hence the reduced purchasing power, which changes the definition of the parameters of extreme poverty, showing that the progress to curtail poverty is not that great after all! A lot needs to be done, we are moving towards more poverty!!
+Indigo Osmanthus You know that the average offspring per couple is around 2.4 (in the world) & most countries in Asia doesn't have higher than this. Hans Rosling does have a Ted Talks about this.
Gabeleeen Still too high. With a global population of 7.3 billion, the rate needs to be no higher 1.9 until our population goes back to 5 billion, and then it can remain 2.0. Pakistan's is 3.3, India's is 2.5 and is plateauing. NOT GOOD ENOUGH.
Gabeleeen because with more and more people living up to the living standards of Europeans and Americans, and with limited natural resources, we'll need 3 or 4 earths to sustain our needs. In fact, 4 billion is probably optimal (humans reached this number as recently as 1974).
what fantasy world is this guy in? the top one percent has 80% of the world's income or money. in fact more people from the middle class have become poor
+James Valderaz Check the diagrams to see the "staggering" shift in income distribution. www.aei.org/publication/the-imaginary-hobgoblin-of-rising-income-inequality-2/
+James Valderaz You seem to have a misconception. There's no limit to the wealth that can be created. It's not a fixed pie you share with others. You can make the pie bigger. The fact that 1% hold 80% of the world's "income" (a debatable piece of information) doesn't mean anything. Not to mention that entrepreneurs, who are some of the richest people, move the economy and provide work to millions of people.
+Oren Douek I've no issues with most of your comment, but that last sentence is another misconception, or at least is incredibly misleading. Whilst they do move the economy, many of them, especially the richest ones, do everything in and beyond their power to make it so they move the economy as little as possible. If we give them credit for the effects of their success, then we must also lump scorn on them for the effects of their criminal greed. The way they purchase politicians, keep their wages (as well as the minimum wage) low, bend the law with tax loopholes, break and re-shape the tax-law with government bribes... these are a group of people that got to where they are today through doing everything they can to 'not' move the economy. To siphon as much wealth out of circulation as is physically possible. The rise of China has only been possible because these entrepreneurs started paying for Chinese labour, which is very bad for the local economy as it removes jobs, often in far larger an amount than are replaced, which has led to less manufacturing-based nations in the western world suffering from having more people in the country than jobs to put them to work in. The movement of the economy is, to many of these people, an unfortunate side-effect of their lack of power, and their riches are only possible because of all of the corners they cut to save pennies. To the entrepreneurs that understand and appreciate and contribute to healthy economies, I offer no ends of thanks, because their jobs are as much a public service as that of the police force, but to the ones that abuse our reliance on them... there are no depths to the hatred I have for them.
+James Valderaz We are talking about EXTREME poverty, not mild poverty, not relative poverty, not poorness, and not the middle class. I agree that the income inequality is a significant issue in the US, and elsewhere, but the fact is that % of people living in extreme poverty as in living under conditions of 1.25$ by 2005 dollars inflation adjusted has declined is real, and it's good news. As far as absolute numbers living in extreme poverty. Today, between 800-900 million live in extreme poverty, but back in 1990, that number was close to 2 billion.
I agree with you, we in the lower class have a hard time affording an iphone right ://// and I need a new computer!!! Screw the people who don't have electricity in their and still die of infectious diseases, malnutrition and diarrhea. We are the one suffering right? You imbecile, the middle class you're talking about is in no consideration poor.
+Dany Pell Please expand your concept of wealth from just money to actual goods & services. Agreed - yes - it is goods & services that not only poor Africans but EVERYBODY needs. Money is worthless to ANYBODY.
lol capitalism works my arse, this is extreme poverty and the change is down to socialist ideas forcing the wealth to the poorest. If it was left to Capitalism only the few would have benefited. The rise in wealth overall is down to science and industry, capitalism actually hinders this. People with new ideas always have to find money to support this, in a socialist system the idea only needs support from the people and the benefits reach all. To suggest that everybody is in the middle lol. how big is that middle? It goes from scrapping by on a minimum wage to billionaires, its the disparity in wealth that is the main issue. Why do people need to "earn" billions while others work hard long hours for a pittance of a wage. This world is moving in the right direction but it isn't down to capitalism and never will be.
Your comment reeks of envy. That you have no idea because you're an entitled brat with no perspective outside your protected crib. You think the grass is greener on the other side? Then fuck off and prove us all wrong. But you won't because really you're just a lazy complainer.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
bloody video ends just when the most important bit is about to be discussed.
Exactly what i was gonna type
It's pissing off isn't it
Yes, because there is no solution proposed.
Extreme poverty may cease to exist, but poverty will always be around.
This video does not provide any useful solutions to the global population problem.
What a man, I wish all my lecturers were as devoted and as animated as Hans Rosling
I would not be sleeping in economy class too
RIP hans
the only an trying to show the world the truth about poverty and how to solve it
Did I miss something? I thought I was going to find out how to end poverty.
He is saying that it's already happening
Wherein the word it's HAPPENING?? @@moonstruck336
Six years left till this video is 15 years old
Argh why cut off there., I want to hear more!
There is a full 1-hour show here on UA-cam called DON'T PANIC...
Filip Schneider please share
watch?v=r6m81dIF75Q
Filip Schneider big thanks, sir Filip!
You can also get more info and videos on the webpage that Hans Rosling and his colleagues made: www.gapminder.org/
In the age of AI, VR, the professor would have dynamite with stats. They have data scientists now but even with all the platforms available, they still don't have anything over the Professor. May he Rest In peace🙏❤️
Me and my siblings, nieces and nephews broke the cycle of poverty. WHOOP WHOOP!!! MAMA I MADE IT
What did you do to break the cycle of poverty?
Thank you
I like Hans, I like all his presentations... But I can't get past that screen. I need to know about it. How much are they? How does it work? When can plebians like myself get one? Where is the place on his graph I have to reach to attain one?
What the hell.... just when the real video started... it ended!!!
The actual bus is an hour
Beautiful person
you can find the rest of this video on
www.gapminder.org/videos/dont-panic-end-poverty/
So what is the difference between extreme poverty and poverty in general? Is there a difference? I only ask cause obviously Americans have a different perspective of poverty than someone in China. I'm just curious if it could be arratacated completely. If so do we have create a different American dream sort of mindset. I'm just very interested in how this all works.
1.Poverty is a cycle of a lack of necessity added with misery.
2.Extreme poverty is poverty taken to extreme (This becomes harder to solve- You can just use Google)
But to me they are both the same because in the end the person is in a cycle of lacks and misery.
Note :
It is possible to decrease or possibly end poverty but that depends on the ones at the top(The world's most powerful people and probably high ranked billionaires) and the change people are willing to do to achieve this goal.
His talks are interesting as ever.
Guy on the left at 1:36 reminds me of Timothée Chalamet
Where is the bloody rest of the video?
Anyone know where the full show is?
Where is full video...
7 years ago video presentation mind blowing please share how to make video graphical presentation like this
Where is the full video?
does anyone know the name of the wooden thing Mr. hans used at the beginning?
Currently, Half of the global population lives on less than US$6.85 per person per day.
1:18 Isn't that Sansa in GOT?
How does the guy at the end control the eagle?
From were we got full vedio
According to his own numbers world poverty has not 'decreased' in absolute numbers. In 1800 total population was about 1 billion of which 850,000,000 were in extreme poverty. In 2015 total population was 7.4 billion of which 12%, or 880,000,000, were in extreme poverty.
Exactly
extreme poverty in times of crisis would always be in increase. so then the question changed from "how to prevent a crisis while it actually be an unevitability" to "how to reduce the impact and the time of crisis". but we can see now that big crisis is incoming and the little ones are sprouting a lot more often as we are about to enjoy the show.
Where is the full analysis (video).
rip
If the population is rising the numbers in poverty can still be larger than before even if the % is smaller.
But it will mean there are much more people not in the extreme poverty.
@@beyondtheinfinite3263 If with current technology the population level was the same as 200 years ago, there would be no poverty. It’s logical that the fewer people there are, the easier it is to provide them with food.
He doesnt need fancy 3D animations or wooden graphs. Just give him a normal computer and he's going to impress you
Poverty is most definitely not well-defined here. Is the “poorest” person in Britain better off than the “poorest” person in the Brazilian rainforests?
If anyone wants know more please read the book Fact fullness written by Hans rosling along with two others. Very exciting one.
+
Absolutely fantastic read!
How we can end it
TITLE....?? BBC the Title is wrong..!!!
RIP
how did he display those visuals?
Hmm... but 85% of 1800's population is 850 million people in poverty. Whereas 12% of todays 7.3 billion population is 876 million : /
But the progress is exaggerating. I saw this comment when it was first posted, and thought "does that mean poverty will never end" so I can back to see what has happened in the past 3 years. and according to world bank it is now 736 million, which is quite a lot less
Hi
Stone age power point presentation.
Anyone else here from online school?
Bit of a nebulous term, ' extreme poverty' would be interesting to see how it is defined? :S
+Zoya The Zebra So how does that work historically & with geographical costs & culture. Seems a bit abstract to me tbh. (I'm not coming at this with some agenda, just interested at how this was arrived at) :)
+Jimbo Jones
It is defined by the type of dwelling you have, the amount of income you earn, your access to healthcare, among other things. It is actually defined in less nebulous terms.
+Eamon Bohan Fair enough, but in relation to global population would make no sense surely? Is it purely a financial figure, abstracted from all other factors?
Full video in: www.gapminder.org/videos/dont-panic-end-poverty/
Amazing talk from an amazing guy!
Hi brayden
What Mr. Rosling fails to see is that even as we have become very efficient in the production of goods, the factors affecting the distribution of income and wealth have not changed. The result is that today every society (including the Chinese) is dominated by rentier interests. If you do not believe this to be true, examine the statistics published by former World Bank economist Joseph Stiglitz.
People cause others to fall into poverty. If i structured a team of gate keepers and we tried our best to sift who makes it. That would cause a slow wave of financial circumstances eventually. What people suffer from is other people, it's not a natural thing to be without when it's not being controlled. People created markets and what have you, that requires us to have money to get it. And if money is not what you have...you suffer. And if all we're offered is poor wages and horrible co-workers, maintaining becomes damn near impossible.
You can't solve problems by being pessimistic. Whether or not he's being accurate doesn't matter. He's trying to help fuel a movement, you have to be optimistic
Thanks Science!
9 years to go, fingers crossed
the music is so distracting
Greed is destroying mankind when we live in a world with more than enough for everyone .
This is encouraging, but it's not the be-all and end-all of poverty. It will raise the standards, yet will set new challenges with it. I think it does express an important lesson though: that as long as we're doing the right thing in the right direction, we will get by over time and reach the next destination - just try not to derail our progress too much along the way.
I think this works for now, but there is a strong part of me that believes that the more human consciousnesses that we tap, the faster will be our ascent. Now the question is: ascent to what? And why?
Those questions have lost their relevance for me ever since taking the BLUE pill. 🤔
World population in 1800 was approximately 1 billion people with 85% of them and poverty that's about 850 million people world population in 1990 is around 5.3 billion with 35% in poverty that's an extra BILLION people...
A smaller percentage of the world population in poverty but yet a much larger number of total people?
1800. 1,000,000,000 x .85 = 850,000,000
1990. 5,300,000,000 x .35 = 1,855,000,000
Conclusion... the total percentage of the population of the world has indeed dropped significantly. But with our increased numbers we've actually added 1 billion people to the poverty level!?
So is birth control the way?
1800 when great britain and other countries colonised most of the asian countries.
poverty is back with a vengeance
If you are saying global poverty is being reduced then why is someone in Afghanistan having to sell their kidney organ to buy food for their family due to extreme poverty in Afghanistan? Something doesn't look right or feels right.
Stop paying the TV licence fine
👏
Get rid of the top 1 percent's money and that would shift in an instant I hope it happens in my lifetime
to Stan
The answer is "ECONOMIC FREEDOM" not the collective fascism you desire (theft by government).
FYI, fascism, related to the word fascicle, translates most closely to "ALL FOR ONE" or we all are together, a group of small twigs made stronger through sticking together (bundling)
Hey
How you defining extrem poverty
>1.9 $ a day I think
1:18
How would we do that though???? So many societies don't even have a social net, be it individual or family.
China can't seem to pivot away from manufacturing. India is pivoting into manufacturing but already has global elite due to the sheer amount of inequality there. Africa is rife with ethnic conflicts and the so called "tiger economies" of Africa barring Botswana have not chalked up to much.
Singapore has become the globes middle man and its middle manness has trickled into malaysia but other SEA nations have been hollowed out into tourist destinations, Thailand of which is the best example of whats happening. Myanmar has been relegated into being a chinese-indian vassal state and to say the same about Nepal would not be a stretch. Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan cant seem to adress their own local turmoils enough to be a stable economic ground for anything.
This video has aged horribly.
is that timothee chamalet lol
Need a permanent solution
Lol when he skips to 1950's, was just thinking "yea the less said the better about that 50 years eh Hans?"
We're 6 yrs in and if anything further away from ending poverty.
@Nick Breen
Take a look at the end graphic again. Do you see the line for extreme poverty moving to reflect inflation? Neither do I. I'm not saying capitalism does or doesn't work, what I'm saying is this presentation isn't that strong as proof either way.
Im pretty sure its Inflation adjusted
Bebe
how to end extreme poverty you say? by ending extreme wealth.
The end of poverty? Halving hunger failed: At the 1996 World Food Summit in Rome, Italy, leaders from 186 countries pledged to reduce the number of hungry people in the world by half no later than the year 2015 and the hunger should be conquered to 2025. The destination already seems missed today.
SO what standards are used as extreme poverty? what is the bench mark.
NO shoes? well under weight , very short life?.
The stats shown clearly date from Waterloo era, so one has to assume that is the benchmark?.
If so why ? it is 2019 and the rich are much richer than in waterloo era?.
maybe we need to see the other scale as a balance the rich side , then and only then you will see a balance of what is purported here!.
hes trying to stop us hating on the super rich lol
I swear poverty was supposed to have ended by 2015, how did that work out?
Is this what they mean by British humor? Where’s the rest?
Income as a measure needs to be corrected for inflation bcs money is worth less
Syria Yemen Afghan Africa India Zimbabwe poor man poverty end all country Europ Asia Muslim Arab Dubai Qatar Kuwait Ireland Netherlands Turkmenistan Tajikistan Azerbaijan Kazakhstan Russia Ukraine china Japan Korea Australia France Malaysia Canada poor man poverty end fruit vegetables floor cheap all country
#CaptionThis
If we stopped spending money on arms and massive sport events then it would end.
spot on www.visionofearth.org/economics/ending-poverty/how-much-would-it-cost-to-end-extreme-poverty-in-the-world/
When was this video/Ted talk, because clearly we haven't eradicated poverty in a generation, and don't look anywhere close to achieving this anytime soon.
He said it whilst talking about the first graphic : 2015.
Obama isn't dead yet, the Pope is as close to death as popes usually are... and you're not dead yet either, so that one generation still has a little time to go!
Buhbuh
This is simply relevant to human technology and our ability to mass produce clothing, food etc. The extreme poverty has been defeated by our abundance however true poverty and wealth disparity are greater than they have ever been.
This is a solid piece of BBC propaganda. This would have us believe that our failed economy, and homunculous money-grabbing politicians, bankers and CEOs are doing nothing wrong.
they say extreme poverty if your idea of wealth is cities , cars , material , money and long 9-5 or 8-12 hour jobs 7 or 6 days a week and the price of stuff keeps going up due to inflation and nothing's organic anymore so it has to be mass produced then yh.
+Narhang Ingnam Shit, son, at least it's not drinking poo-water from a hole in the ground, or being worked to death in slave camps.
Room for improvement, sure, but hell... it's a start.
+Bushflare yh I'll admit their are better facilities
Narhang Vandam anthropologist spotted! hi-five!
Actually, they are talking about life expectancy, child mortality rate, access to drinking water and sanitation, etc..You know, important stuff.
First "organic" is just a marketing scam. It means nothing. By definition, ALL molecules with carbon are organic.
Secondly, there is nothing wrong with mass produced food. We would NEVER be able to feed 7 billion people with primitive farming methods only. If you want to attack things, attack
the MEAT industry for needlessly mass breeding & torturing & murdering animals by the billions
and humans breeding & overpopulating
and WORTHLESS BRAIN-DESTROYING shit like RELIGION, and money wasted on unnecessary sports stadiums,
and Wall Street.
Cõno
Poverty is every nations facing issue.Every governnent taking corrective action to solve this problem.Every need food,every should need food and shelter. So the governnent do the requirements for this
Africa is approaching 2 billion and there is no sign it will ever end. It is not sustainable.
Wrong we can end poverty in a day.
No end of poverty without end of population growth. A worldwide births stop is needed.
Well said. We childfree antinatalists have advocated mandatory vasectomies & abortions for decades.
TRY LISTENING to what the professor says.
Population growth will become leveled off soon.
Sterility doesn't solve poverty. It just shoots countries in the foot.
Population growth won't stop until we hit about 10 billion
Slowing reproduction creates a.top heavy tower forcing senior citizens to carry the economy until they die off and then the population would decrease so rapidly that we wouldn't be able to function properly after
All things in due time
ua-cam.com/video/LPjzfGChGlE/v-deo.html
BERNIE SANDERS
Due to the failure of our economic system based upon keysianism, we will experience a new financial crisis and economic depression ala 1930-style. Check upon the Weimarrepublic which roamed in Germany until 1923 till hyperinflation striked. Look at USA today, almost 1/7 of the population lives on so called food stamps (50 million) and in Europe there is around 30 million people who dont have work and a migrant crisis which will only get bigger. Do you really think this will end well when the next financial crisis hits the market like it did in 2008?
Factually correct, but unfortunatly misleading.
In the sense that the world's population in that time has also increased enormously. So that means that, even as the preportion of poverty has gone down, the raw amount of needless human suffering, compared to 50 years go, is still staggering.
Exactly. Well said.
You haven't understood the video. Try again.
Very simple fix, just nationalize the stealing wealth of " insane billionaires" and distribute among the general population in need.
Far too simplistic. Take a billionaire's billion dollars. Give it to the world's population. Each inhabitant get's one seventh of a dollar. How long does that last them? Less than one meal. And meanwhile, you have destroyed everything in jobs and production and creation of even more money that that billion dollars represented. Sure, someone having a billion dollars may be horrendous, but would you rather go back to 1800 and have 80% of the population living in poverty?
Why is important that the whole world have the same living standard as the West? Wealth is relatively and the poor countries wouldn’t be poor if we didn’t compare them to us
I believe that this is not a poor world, but Western countries consume too much.
This is delusional. Although poverty rates have come down, the number of people living in extreme poverty has actually risen, as you can see the size of the triangles increase. Moreover, this not even takes into account the inflation rate and hence the reduced purchasing power, which changes the definition of the parameters of extreme poverty, showing that the progress to curtail poverty is not that great after all! A lot needs to be done, we are moving towards more poverty!!
Actually it does take into account inflation. The numbers of people in poverty hasn't gone up either
Meh. All I can tell from this is: Asia, stop having offsprings!!!!!! (S and SW Asia, I'm looking at you)
+Indigo Osmanthus You know that the average offspring per couple is around 2.4 (in the world) & most countries in Asia doesn't have higher than this. Hans Rosling does have a Ted Talks about this.
Gabeleeen Still too high. With a global population of 7.3 billion, the rate needs to be no higher 1.9 until our population goes back to 5 billion, and then it can remain 2.0.
Pakistan's is 3.3, India's is 2.5 and is plateauing. NOT GOOD ENOUGH.
Indigo Osmanthus Why do it need to go back to 5billion?
Gabeleeen because with more and more people living up to the living standards of Europeans and Americans, and with limited natural resources, we'll need 3 or 4 earths to sustain our needs. In fact, 4 billion is probably optimal (humans reached this number as recently as 1974).
+Indigo Osmanthus You should look up more of Hans' presentations, he will convince you otherwise I am sure.
what fantasy world is this guy in? the top one percent has 80% of the world's income or money. in fact more people from the middle class have become poor
+James Valderaz Check the diagrams to see the "staggering" shift in income distribution.
www.aei.org/publication/the-imaginary-hobgoblin-of-rising-income-inequality-2/
+James Valderaz You seem to have a misconception. There's no limit to the wealth that can be created. It's not a fixed pie you share with others. You can make the pie bigger. The fact that 1% hold 80% of the world's "income" (a debatable piece of information) doesn't mean anything. Not to mention that entrepreneurs, who are some of the richest people, move the economy and provide work to millions of people.
+Oren Douek I've no issues with most of your comment, but that last sentence is another misconception, or at least is incredibly misleading. Whilst they do move the economy, many of them, especially the richest ones, do everything in and beyond their power to make it so they move the economy as little as possible.
If we give them credit for the effects of their success, then we must also lump scorn on them for the effects of their criminal greed. The way they purchase politicians, keep their wages (as well as the minimum wage) low, bend the law with tax loopholes, break and re-shape the tax-law with government bribes... these are a group of people that got to where they are today through doing everything they can to 'not' move the economy. To siphon as much wealth out of circulation as is physically possible. The rise of China has only been possible because these entrepreneurs started paying for Chinese labour, which is very bad for the local economy as it removes jobs, often in far larger an amount than are replaced, which has led to less manufacturing-based nations in the western world suffering from having more people in the country than jobs to put them to work in.
The movement of the economy is, to many of these people, an unfortunate side-effect of their lack of power, and their riches are only possible because of all of the corners they cut to save pennies. To the entrepreneurs that understand and appreciate and contribute to healthy economies, I offer no ends of thanks, because their jobs are as much a public service as that of the police force, but to the ones that abuse our reliance on them... there are no depths to the hatred I have for them.
+James Valderaz We are talking about EXTREME poverty, not mild poverty, not relative poverty, not poorness, and not the middle class. I agree that the income inequality is a significant issue in the US, and elsewhere, but the fact is that % of people living in extreme poverty as in living under conditions of 1.25$ by 2005 dollars inflation adjusted has declined is real, and it's good news. As far as absolute numbers living in extreme poverty. Today, between 800-900 million live in extreme poverty, but back in 1990, that number was close to 2 billion.
I agree with you, we in the lower class have a hard time affording an iphone right ://// and I need a new computer!!! Screw the people who don't have electricity in their and still die of infectious diseases, malnutrition and diarrhea. We are the one suffering right? You imbecile, the middle class you're talking about is in no consideration poor.
kill the poor?
Kill the rich and distribute their rescources would be more moral and efficent.
Seamus "hoist that rag"
What will the very poor in Africa do with money? Not much. Infrastructure to bring them water and other basic stuff is needed.
+Dany Pell Please expand your concept of wealth from just money to actual goods & services.
Agreed - yes - it is goods & services that not only poor Africans but EVERYBODY needs.
Money is worthless to ANYBODY.
Seamus, Kilmothel, bubmah axr, Danny Pell, LoL ReplayBaby and The Ultimate Reductionist, why don't we just kill everyone?
lol capitalism works my arse, this is extreme poverty and the change is down to socialist ideas forcing the wealth to the poorest. If it was left to Capitalism only the few would have benefited. The rise in wealth overall is down to science and industry, capitalism actually hinders this. People with new ideas always have to find money to support this, in a socialist system the idea only needs support from the people and the benefits reach all. To suggest that everybody is in the middle lol. how big is that middle? It goes from scrapping by on a minimum wage to billionaires, its the disparity in wealth that is the main issue. Why do people need to "earn" billions while others work hard long hours for a pittance of a wage. This world is moving in the right direction but it isn't down to capitalism and never will be.
Your comment reeks of envy. That you have no idea because you're an entitled brat with no perspective outside your protected crib. You think the grass is greener on the other side? Then fuck off and prove us all wrong. But you won't because really you're just a lazy complainer.
jew