May 12 2012: I agree, the basic system of face to face teaching has lasted for a long time for a good reason. I incorporate tech into a lot of my lesson since the government gave a laptop to every yr 9 student for the past 3 years. However it effectiveness is only as good as its supervision, it adds to the resources avaliable for effective learning but in no way replaces the face to face, feedback and social elements that traditional teaching provides.
May 9 2012: Thanks Scott for starting this conversation I was going to list all the hardships that helped me to grow but after reading everyone else's I realized mine were the same, at least in theme. Death of family and friends, sickness, divorce, the suffering of oneself and others and injustice. Rather than feeling dispare about everyone having the same problems I feel more encouraged and connected because on a fundermental level we are all the same, some lessons are best taught through hardship. Our own suffering in our story helps us to be empathic to the suffering of others. This reminder for me came at the right time, thanks again Scott :-)
May 9 2012: I agree glimpses of natural beauty won't change the human collective sence of intitlement. But it puts pressure on the way we satisfy it, technology that reduces our impact on the planet can be incorporated in to that intitlement. For example now I just don't expect a company to provide me with electricity but I also expect that they provide me with a green electricity option.
May 9 2012: I agree he is one of the coolest men ever! His life's work is amazing, you can't watch it and not be blown away by it, he is world famious but very humble in interviews and doesn't drive when he is in a city ( rides a push bike) a modern man at 87 (happy birthday for Tuesday Sir David if reading) . If you don't know his films you are missing out and you should get to know them.
Apr 24 2012: I agree that there are flaws, as there are with very many investigations but they can give us an idea and trends can be established. The flaws you pointed out are true however I do not think it makes the data not relevant and worth further, for example what factors caused the Central Africa Republic to buck the trend.
I'm interested if you have an idea on how someone could remove these flaws from this kind of study of "can money buy happyness?" without open more flaws.
Apr 16 2012: There have been innovations in treatment of tropical ulcers, stopping the spread of kuru, snake bite anti venom and research in to fruit bat diseases that have cross species implications including to humans. This all has significant government funding and in some cases cross organizational funding in the forms of joint partnerships between universities, NGO's or business to develope, manufacture and distribute treatment. And I am only talking off the top of my head about Australian CSIRO examples. I'm sure there would have to be more when taking a broader spectrum look at what has been done around the world with government help and or leadership.
Governments have multiple ways of manipulating institutions and business such as pharmsuticals companies to provide cheeper treatment and or to direct areas of research. Mechanisms such as scholarships, taxes and bulk buying of generic medication are just to name a few. To leave it up to business to decide everything that should be worked on then innovation would primarily be around profitable treatment and not cures for disease, this might be the case in some areas. However I'm sure it would be worse without government intervention. This goes back to my initial point that healthcare is not just a business but a human need and should be seen as a investment for all rather than a cost. Healthy populations become more wealthy and wealthy people can spend money on more profitable treatment for things such as baldness which in turn help Pharms bottom line and share price, it's all a big win win when taking a broader view.
Apr 15 2012: Innovation is not just developing of new and effective medication, which do exist for Malaria at least, which I have had twice. But they also exist for many of the neglected diseases in the developing world such as diorior, tiphoid, influenza etc.. All of these have effective medication and are big killers and disablers in many countries. Governments have been innovative in improving access to treatment in the developed nations such as in Australia where I live now (via systems such as medicare and the pharcutical benifits scheam). Not saying there is a one size fits all approach but innovation to access medication in the developing world is just as, if not more important than the development of new types of treatment.
Apr 15 2012: Goverments can do a lot to bring down the price of treatment, and increase access to treatment. Many of the diseases are curable and the most server effects can be avoided if treated early.
Cost and access are huge chananges in developing world and more innovation is needed to help overcome them. Until governments and other organization see spending on health and education as an investment rather than a cost, positive change is unlikely. Although it make perfect ecomoic sence to invest more.
Apr 15 2012: The problem is that heathcare is not just a business it is also a human need and healthy population is a good investment for all. Also with our very interconnect world someone's runny noise in Europe may makes it way to some remote village in PNG and give a person life treating reaction due to no previous immunity. But the same partways allow all desiease to spread, making gloable health treatment access important and worth investing in. Even to provide access to someone who can afford to pay for it. Pandemics are expensive to a society, a ecomemy and they are avoidable.
TEDCred score: +2.00 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.
A reply on Talk: José Bowen: Beethoven the businessman
A reply on Conversation: How has enduring some extreme hardship profoundly impacted your life?
A comment on Conversation: How has enduring some extreme hardship profoundly impacted your life?
A reply on Talk: Karen Bass: Unseen footage, untamed nature
A reply on Talk: Karen Bass: Unseen footage, untamed nature
A reply on Talk: Michael Norton: How to buy happiness
I'm interested if you have an idea on how someone could remove these flaws from this kind of study of "can money buy happyness?" without open more flaws.
A reply on Conversation: Why is there such little conversation on neglected diseases?
Governments have multiple ways of manipulating institutions and business such as pharmsuticals companies to provide cheeper treatment and or to direct areas of research. Mechanisms such as scholarships, taxes and bulk buying of generic medication are just to name a few. To leave it up to business to decide everything that should be worked on then innovation would primarily be around profitable treatment and not cures for disease, this might be the case in some areas. However I'm sure it would be worse without government intervention. This goes back to my initial point that healthcare is not just a business but a human need and should be seen as a investment for all rather than a cost. Healthy populations become more wealthy and wealthy people can spend money on more profitable treatment for things such as baldness which in turn help Pharms bottom line and share price, it's all a big win win when taking a broader view.
A reply on Conversation: Why is there such little conversation on neglected diseases?
A comment on Conversation: Why is there such little conversation on neglected diseases?
Cost and access are huge chananges in developing world and more innovation is needed to help overcome them. Until governments and other organization see spending on health and education as an investment rather than a cost, positive change is unlikely. Although it make perfect ecomoic sence to invest more.
A reply on Conversation: Why is there such little conversation on neglected diseases?