Printable View
Two colours, red and grey, each representing half the world's total population. Quite the reminder!
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CP_ntoSUAAA3TXH.jpg:large
Can anyone confirm if this the best way to fit half the world's population into the smallest area? Is it possible to have an even smaller area provide that 3.7 Billion figure?
Compress out the space between atoms and fit everyone into a sugar cube?
I think the original image covers densest areas already so doubtful it could be altered.
Stop giving RyanAir ideas....Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob_B
Highly recommend this show: -
Don't Panic - World Population
He did one last week on the BBC about World Poverty that was also very good.
I dunno, I think that Prof Rosling skipped over some important bits of data. Namely around environment and that getting people to give up something they currently have is a very difficult challenge. He suggests that there is no moral argument that the richer developed nations who have a very high pollution per capita rate should prevent others who have a lower standard of life from polluting so. The issue is that people don't really behave morally on mass, history isn't full of examples of people willingly giving up what they have. Hell you could even argue the philosophical point that it's better to support a few too a good standard than more to a lower.
I feel he glosses over the fact that developing countries will have massive environmental impacts. He also omits the fact that the most developed have been reducing certain footprints whilst the inter-quartile ranges have been increasing them. This is especially poignant considering his conclusion.
And, that red area is pretty rich wealth-wise.
It would be more accurate to chart the correlation between population density vs resource density. For example the large swathes of Russia which are not suitable for human habitation.
Part of that red area is going through the same phase as we are in the US - the population is slowly going backwards, which is a good thing (I speak of both China and Japan).
Yes, there's a LOT of people there, but for the most part (if one excludes parts of India and Bangladesh) there's very little 'hunger'. Yes, there's what we in the west would call poverty, but that's an economic term that really doesn't meet the proper definition there - not a lot of money, but plenty (or at least enough) food. In addition, the SE Asians seem to be a little more capable in the population control department. At one point, I had a software contract with a prophylactic (that's condom - saving some the time of Googling it) company that dealt almost exclusively in SE Asia. The low end initial sales, at wholesale, was in the hundreds of millions. After 90 days, sales were in the 10's of billions. That's a lot of latex, folks. India. not so much. Never more than 300 million/quarter. Don't know if it's religious, or cultural, or ignorance... or all of the above. But India's population is on the rise, and China and Japan are on the decline.
I fully expect the map to change over Europe sooner rather than later (rather artificially, with a big red spot centered around Berlin), and I guess Africa won't be getting any more gray than it is, even though that population is on the decline, for multiple reasons.
For the top 2%, anyway....Quote:
Originally Posted by OilSheikh
I agree that they are heavily populated but the countries are definitely rich. Look at India, for example. It ranks 4th , whereas we rank 10!Quote:
Originally Posted by GuidoLS
Yet don't we give them money every year
Very interesting, thank you Gerrard.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerrard
According to Business Insider, India isn't even in the top 23, let alone #4 (Source). As far as the colloquial "WE" goes, I'm in the US, and we're supposedly ranked #7 per capita, whereas the UK is currently at 23. The only countries from the red area that seem to be on the list are -Quote:
Originally Posted by OilSheikh
3) Singapore
6) Hong Kong
17) Taiwan
and
22) Japan.
For that matter, whoever you got #4 for India must have been on some good hallucinogens... according to the same chart as above, India ranks at 130th in the world... Source. That's NOT a small or even slight disparity... that's someone drinking water and someone else plastered on tequila and absinthe...
It would be better if they used an undistorted map of the world:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...s-africa-wrong