Numbers are boring, people are interesting | Hans Rosling | TEDxSingapore
Vložit
- čas přidán 5. 01. 2016
- FYI, this is a shorten edited version. For the original full-length version, watch • Numbers are boring, pe...
Global trends and development through the lens of stats, sex, babies, men, women, romance and toilet rolls!
In Hans Rosling’s hands, data sings. Global trends and data come to vivid life. And the big picture of global development-with some surprisingly good news-snaps into sharp focus. www.gapminder.org
This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community. Learn more at ted.com/tedx
Rest in peace, Hans :(
One of (If not THE) best, most captivating speaker to ever step on a TED stage, and this particular "performance" can stand as eulogy. Such a legacy's value to mankind can't be quantified. Hope Ola will take it to brand new heights.
How I miss this man. Thank you Hans for showing me the truth of the world.
We can never understand the world without numbers, nor we can understand it with just numbers.
You have to understand the lives between, behind the numbers.
Thanks Hans, for what you brought.
Of ooooooookpooooookkkkkkoookokokkkokkkpkokokkkkkpkoopkokk and I klooien ok manai Bayarmaa and pop kkkokookk kk Kkk kkk okok kkkkkkkkkkkk on o kkk kkokokkkkkkkkp okok kkookookkok
Kleine and klokken and kokkk
Kkokk kkk kkkkko kkk kkkkk k look o kkokookokkkokkkkookpookkkk
Kkokkkokokkk kkk oookkokookkkkk okok Kkk Kkk Kkk kkk Kkk kooooookokk okok
Kop kkkko ok okmokkm Okok I kom kkok
Because of some comment to some article on linkedin about "developing countries" , i just spent once again the entire evening re-viewing the Rosling video collection. What an amazing charismatic man he was.
RIP, Hans. what a fantastic speaker and all round academic inspiration
Fantastic - so charismatic, bringing life to dull data sets! A great man.
It's Hans Rosling so of course I give a thumb up. I love how this brilliant man challenges my preconceived ideas about the state of the world.
and how about fathers being home taking care of the child while mother works?
+Anders Jackson Sorry, I do not fully understand the question.
+C6BD his major topic this time is about father and mother sharing the upbringing of their children, with the mother being home first 6 months and the father stays home the next 6 months with the child.
Proud to be Swedish when I hear his talks!
Proud to be called Swedish once I migrate to your homeland in about 20 years or so? :)
+Alicia Tan sure thing! :)
Crazy chimpanzee! Hahaha just joking.
RIP Hans Rosling... amazing work!
watching in 2018, felt bad at 11:57 😥
Thanks so much mr Hans
It's 2021 and his legacy still alive, may he RIP for ever
We lost gem of a person..but his legacy will live long
Thank goodness for my grandmother, she allowed my mother to go back to work when she needed to by making my lunch when I went to school!
Read his book: Factfulness - published in 2018 - it answers many questions you may have.
Excellent finish to his career!
I did 🙏
Miss you, Hans
one of the best talks
One of the best talks. True value, not just Asian value, should be kept in a morden way. When men are involved more in the family it's good for everyone.
Small addition to "lives behind the numbers". Singapore is too expensive to have babies - that is one big reason why young people don't do it - also social security lacks. Very different than Sweden where social safety net is there and you get 18 months off. Tough thing to do is to change these Asian policies.
What a beautiful mind!
In a bad country these talks changed my life. The world lost the day he passed
You must watch the original version of this talk! (link is in the description)
He’s fascinating, he manages to deliver insightful data as well as talk about humans and love, can’t wait to read Factfulness.
I would recommend everyone his book Factfullness. He describes 10 facts, why we should think about world differently and about the world being better than it was. It is easy reading and factfulling. Thank you Rosling for writimg this masterpiece.
things have gotten too expensive that if one not working, then they might end up in the Financial Assistance Scheme...I have talked about having more babies and couples are saying who is going to raise our children...everything is interwined...once greed comes in, only the rich can afford to have more children but these people are too busy to want to have more babies...
I am your fan
"Empowerment for women works and makes men's lives better." minute 15:04
But how are we going to colonize the galaxy like this?
Unpredictable speech by Hans Rowling....
Its a proof. Im always with a eye in this basic humans. Their reactions and ironys without give nothing for. Are so interesting.
there are simply too many people on earth
Coming from someone who has not cross the bother of his country. Travel for once in your life
I agree just too many people for our materialistic lives....as Gandhi once said there is enough for worlds need but not enough for one mans greed
To be a bit more serious, Lee Kuan Yew would turn in his grave to know Singaporeans are going to speak Singalish to confuse foreigners when he tried so hard to make Singaporeans speak a global language, not Malay, not Hokkein, or Tamil.
One of the worlds greasted men . 1
Swedens demographic is changing a lot.
In some countries women are having fewer children than the replacement level. And they have migrants from high birthrate countries. These migrants keep on having a high birthrate, so that there may be a population replacement. So, the statistical curve of declining birthrates does not differentiate the effects of unequal birthrates. Religion seems able to maintain high birthrates for some groups, while they fall for other groups. And the birthrate is not determined by the couples alone, the community and its ideology or theology manipulate the birthrate. So, this lecture overlooks the group influence.
And I would guess that a large share of women do not want a career outside the family and probably would rather stay home with children. Especially if they lack the talent or interest in careers that are interesting to the workers. Most workers probably do not have a job that they enjoy and want to continue working. Sweden seems to be experiencing more crime and violence than they had before the immigration to their country. But he is not talking about this problem. And the immigrants demand their culture be used to replace the previous Christian social values. And they have the high birtherates that Swedes do not have, so they could eventually become the majority and control the government. Wherever they migrate in large numbers, they seem bent on replacing the laws, culture and practices. And in Sweden they do not want the liberal family practices that Hans Roesling praises. They want the opposite, paternalism, subordination of women, domination of the culture by one particular ideology, no freedom of speech or behavior. Everything Swedes praise is threatened by a migration they think would work out well.
I would guess that this speaker and his wife had jobs and careers where you could quit for six months and get another job of similar pay and activities. There are such professions. Perhaps in computers or medicine or law. But there ar other jobs that you may not give up because there would never be another chance. A friend in Germany is an expert on medieval manuscripts and history of the church. He never got a professorship. If he should by a stroke of luck get one, very unlikely, he would never have another chance for something similar. So, he would not give it up to take care of children for half a year. His wife does not seem to have a wish for a career and seems to like being a mama. His first wife wanted him to help her get a career in medieval history at a uni, but she did not love him. So eventually they got divorced. So, Roesling should not generalize too much. What he and his wife did other couples might not be able to do. Or they might not want to. A college student I once knew was a house husband while their children grew up, and his wife was a medical doctor. But after the children were grown up, the couple got a divorce. He did not have the potential to earn as much as she could, and she needed him to raise their children. When that need was satisfied, they got divorced, and he had to find work. So, again a lecturer like this one is not talking about everyman. Also, in Sweden, members of the migrant community are very unlikely to make any such arrangements as he did. At most a few who are highly assimilated and have no ties to their old ideology might do this. And because of their high birthrates, the migrant community may in the future have the votes to impose their ideology on the Swedes who are still Swedish, who may soon be a minority.
Did he say," HE'S sitting there in the front row"
In india we have family to look newly born. For us family is not husband and wife but their parents too.
The secret skate relatedly argue because idea really transport behind a imported twilight. ambitious, wakeful eyebrow
i beg to differ with hans rosling
1) 2.5 Children per woman means that we continue to grow and will continue to do so for another 35 years at least. Hans Rosling is ecologically illiterate. He confuses population "growth" with carrying capacity.
2) In 2012, 105 national science academies agreed we are ALREADY overpopulated with 7 billion so even if we were at 2 children per woman today (which we won't be for another 35 years) we would still be overpopulated for a long time.
3) The average human uses 2.8 hectares of bioproductive land. However there are only 1.8 Hectares of land available per human. We are screwed, Hans thinks oil grows on trees. Realistically we can support 2 billion at Hans Rosling's consumption level.
4) We need most people to have less than 2 children globally or we have no hope whatsoever of beating poverty without screwing the planet and then ourselves.
+phillips78 a fertility rate of 2.0 does not equal a stagnant population. How about those who die before adulthood? the fertility rate must be greater than 2.0 for the working population to remain the same size, also to replace the disabled and unable to work.
+Naomi Eng The ageing population is a problem creating by the wrong way of thinking about pensions. People should pay into a pension that is protected and not spent by governments to be returned to the same person who saved it. Governments overspent the money meaning that the next generation is now paying for the pensioners. This is categorically the fault of those who voted in Governments who cannot look after the budget and those politicians who overspent in order to stay in power. We need to reduce the global population globally or the predictions of 105 national science academies will come true and we will be truly in a bad place without a paddle. Overpopulation is the worlds leading problem. Voluntary contraception, education and women's rights will allow us to reduce the population to a more sustainable level of around 2 billion with enough to go round for everyone.
Agree with your last sentence, though i don't know much about pensions outside of singapore's context (where its not even an actual pension). However, though I agree that the global population must decrease, we must try our best to reverse this trend in singapore. Maybe you are unfamiliar with our situation. Our fertility rate is now 0.81, lowest in the world, behind Japan and Macau. To supplement what will be the working population in 10 years time, we must depend on immigration. That mean 1 foreigner to 1 singaporean.
The global population must be managed. However, it must be done in a equal way and not where the citizen population of first world countries shrinks only to be swamped with those from immigrant populations whose populations continue to boom. Not against immigration or anything, but it has already created significant tension in Europe and parts of Asia.
Naomi Eng "The global population must be managed. However, it must be done in a equal way and not where the citizen population of first world countries shrinks only to be swamped with those from immigrant populations whose populations continue to boom." Then encourage every country, rich and poor to have smaller families by funding universal free contraception for all. It is what I do. You could have a policy in Singapore that those who arrive can only do so with 2 kids or less?
The policy you've suggested sounds a little hard to do, we don't want a fully-fledged two-child policy for immigrants over here. Not everyone wants to have less children, normally the more highly educated and with hectic lifestyles. Many countries have a way to go before reaching a highly educated female population. There are some religious issues with the use of contraceptives too... but yes, contraceptive should be cheaper, and in all countries, available to all.
don't agree
Wrong ! Numbers are boring , and people are even more boring , particularly this speaker !LOL
You are a pessimistic jackass
1) 2.5 Children per woman means that we continue to grow and will continue to do so for another 35 years at least. Hans Rosling is ecologically illiterate. He confuses population "growth" with carrying capacity.
2) In 2012, 105 national science academies agreed we are ALREADY overpopulated with 7 billion so even if we were at 2 children per woman today (which we won't be for another 35 years) we would still be overpopulated for a long time.
3) The average human uses 2.8 hectares of bioproductive land. However there are only 1.8 Hectares of land available per human. We are screwed, Hans thinks oil grows on trees. Realistically we can support 2 billion at Hans Rosling's consumption level.
4) We need most people to have less than 2 children globally or we have no hope whatsoever of beating poverty without screwing the planet and then ourselves.
+phillips78 Who is considering that earth is overpopulated? How? Consider how much we waste with food, energy and so on. If we can use these things I thing the earth is not overpopulated.
The thing that he is talking about is straight. You have to say that he is right in some points. The modern population is more threatened by low fertility than other things. Everybody is catch in the "modern" lifestyle which means do not care about family lifestyle and a lot of Europe and America countries have fertility below 2 which is pretty dangerous for their culture. You have to change it in some way or the biggest threat of their civilization will be theirselves.
Jakub Pospíšil 105 national science academies agree we are overpopulated. Reducing food wastage is not enough if we want everyone to escape poverty then everyone must choose t o have smaller families especially those in rich areas who have a larger impact per person. How exactly do you think that 7 billion people is in any way shape or form at risk from not breeding enough?! When the global population is sustainable ( requiring a reduction in family size through reducing unintended pregnancy and choice until we drop to 2 billion) then you can worry about culture. Being overpopulated means everyone culture is at risk along with democracy, the environment and everything else you value. We are just a tiny part of the whole ecosystem. Culture means nothing if there is no life support.
+phillips78 Really? First thing if we want to escape poverty the fertility is a just little thing. There is such a big inequality in income between countries that I think fertility is not a thing.
And come on there were so much scientist who said that this level of population is not sustainable and when we went through that point they said no this level is not sustainable.
It is just that I see in these times only countries that have problems with fertility. And who knows what impact will have China 1 child policy? (social problems, older population etc.)
We are going from extreme to extreme. And now I think we are in the second extreme.
Jakub Pospíšil No Country in the last 50 years has escaped poverty without first dropping its fertility. Thailand is a classic example: 1969 in poverty, / children per woman, little contraceptive Access. Today, 1-2 Kids per woman, full contraceptive access and a good average quality of life. There is inequality because there are too many people for the required resources for everyone to escape poverty.
we can build multi story acres and some of the 2.5 children die