The first half of the 20th century was an absolute disaster in human affairs, a cataclysm. We had the First World War, the Great Depression, the Second World War and the rise of the communist nations. And each one of these forces split the world, tore the world apart, divided the world. And they threw up walls -- political walls, trade walls, transportation walls, communication walls, iron curtains -- which divided peoples and nations.
20世紀上半葉 無疑是人類史上的災難 那是一場浩劫 我們經歷了第一次世界大戰 經濟大蕭條 第二次世界大戰 以及共產國家的崛起 每一次的劇變 都使世界四分五裂、分崩離析, 並且加深世界的歧異 一道道的壁壘隨之而生 政治壁壘、貿易壁壘 運輸壁壘 通訊壁壘,還有鐵幕 分裂了人民和國家
It was only in the second half of the 20th century that we slowly began to pull ourselves out of this abyss. Trade walls began to come tumbling down. Here are some data on tariffs: starting at 40 percent, coming down to less than 5 percent. We globalized the world. And what does that mean? It means that we extended cooperation across national boundaries; we made the world more cooperative. Transportation walls came tumbling down. You know in 1950 the typical ship carried 5,000 to 10,000 tons worth of goods. Today a container ship can carry 150,000 tons; it can be manned with a smaller crew; and unloaded faster than ever before. Communication walls, I don't have to tell you -- the Internet -- have come tumbling down. And of course the iron curtains, political walls have come tumbling down.
直到20世紀下半葉, 我們才慢慢脫離 這個深淵 貿易壁壘開始瓦解 這裡是一些關稅數據 從一開始的40%降到少於5% 我們推動了全球化,這意味著什麼? 這意味著人類的合作 已經跨越國界 我們使這個世界更加合作無間 運輸壁壘也瓦解了 1950年,一艘普通大小的船 可以載運五千至一萬噸的貨物, 今天一艘貨櫃船就能載十五萬噸 需要的船員較少, 卸貨的速度也較快 通訊壁壘,不用說,因網際網路的興起 而瓦解 當然還有鐵幕的瓦解, 政治壁壘瓦解
Now all of this has been tremendous for the world. Trade has increased. Here is just a little bit of data. In 1990, exports from China to the United States: 15 billion dollars. By 2007: over 300 billion dollars. And perhaps most remarkably, at the beginning of the 21st century, really for the first time in modern history, growth extended to almost all parts of the world. So China, I've already mentioned, beginning around 1978, around the time of the death of Mao, growth -- ten percent a year. Year after year after year, absolutely incredible. Never before in human history have so many people been raised out of such great poverty as happened in China. China is the world's greatest anti-poverty program over the last three decades. India, starting a little bit later, but in 1990, begetting tremendous growth. Incomes at that time less than $1,000 per year. And over the next 18 years have almost tripled. Growth of six percent a year. Absolutely incredible. Now Africa, Sub-Saharan Africa -- Sub-Saharan Africa has been the area of the world most resistant to growth. And we can see the tragedy of Africa in the first few bars here. Growth was negative. People were actually getting poorer than their parents, and sometimes even poorer than their grandparents had been. But at the end of the 20th century, the beginning of the 21st century, we saw growth in Africa. And I think, as you'll see, there's reasons for optimism, because I believe that the best is yet to come. Now why.
這些改變都對世界意義重大 貿易變得更加頻繁 圖上是一些數據: 1990年,中國對美國的出口總額為 150億美元 到了2007年,則超過三千億美元 或許最驚人的是 21世紀初, 真的是現代史上頭一遭, 幾乎世界各地都出現了經濟成長 我剛剛提到的中國, 從1978年開始,大約是毛澤東過世的時候, 每年經濟增長率高達10% 年復一年都是如此 令人難以置信 人類史上從來沒有 像中國這樣, 這麼多人擺脫赤貧 在過去的三十年, 中國的扶貧政策是世界之最 印度的起步稍晚 但在1990年,經濟也大幅成長 當時平均年收入 低於一千美元 之後的十八年 增長了快三倍 每年增長達6%,相當不可思議 現在看到非洲 撒哈拉以南非洲 一直是世界上 最抗拒發展的地區 從前幾個長條我們可以看到 非洲的慘況 經濟是負成長的 新一代比他們的父母還要貧窮 有時候比他們的祖父母還不如 但到了20世紀末 21世紀初 非洲的經濟也開始起飛 所以我覺得我們有理由樂觀 我相信最美好的事正要發生 為什麼?
On the cutting edge today it's new ideas which are driving growth. And by that I mean it's products for which the research and development costs are really high, and the manufacturing costs are low. More than ever before it is these types of ideas which are driving growth on the cutting edge. Now ideas have this amazing property. Thomas Jefferson, I think, really expressed this quite well. He said, "He who receives an idea from me receives instruction himself, without lessening mine. As he who lights his candle at mine receives light without darkening me." Or to put it slightly differently: one apple feeds one man, but an idea can feed the world. Now this is not new. This is practically not new to TEDsters. This is practically the model of TED. But what is new is that the greater function of ideas is going to drive growth even more than ever before. This provides a reason why trade and globalization are even more important, more powerful than ever before, and are going to increase growth more than ever before.
在這個時代的尖端, 創意思考是經濟成長的原動力 我的意思是 產品的研發通常所費不貲, 但產品的製造費用則相對低廉 在這時代的尖端,正是這些新思維 在驅動成長 思想有一種很棒的特性 我覺得湯瑪斯.傑弗遜形容得相當貼切 他說:「我將思想傳授他人 他人之所得,亦無損於我之所有 猶如一人以我的燭火點燭 光亮與他同在,我卻不因此身處黑暗。」 換句話說, 一顆蘋果能滿足一人的口腹, 但一個思想可讓全世界受惠 這個並不是一個新的概念,對各位來說更加不是 事實上,這個概念就是TED的典範 大家不知道的是思想有更重要的功能, 也就是它將帶動比以往還要高的增長。 這就是為什麼 貿易和全球化 比以往更加重要也更有影響力, 而且將創造史上更高的經濟增長。
And to explain why this is so, I have a question. Suppose that there are two diseases: one of them is rare, the other one is common, but if they are not treated they are equally severe. If you had to choose, which would you rather have: the common disease or the rare disease? Common, the common -- I think that's absolutely right, and why? Because there are more drugs to treat common diseases than there are to treat rare diseases. The reason for this is incentives. It costs about the same to produce a new drug whether that drug treats 1,000 people, 100,000 people, or a million people. But the revenues are much greater if the drug treats a million people. So the incentives are much larger to produce drugs which treat more people. To put this differently: larger markets save lives. In this case misery truly does love company.
在進一步解釋之前,我想問問各位: 假設現在有兩種疾病 一種是罕見的,另一種是常見的 若不處理,兩者都會導致嚴重的後果 如果一定要選的話,你寧願得哪一種病? 罕見的還是常見的? 常見的。沒錯。 為什麼?因為治療常見疾病的藥物 比治療罕見疾病的多 原因就在於研發藥物的誘因 每一種新藥的研發成本都差不多 不管該藥物可以治療一千人 十萬人、還是一百萬人 但是治療百萬人的藥物利潤比較多 所以能研制療效 的誘因比較強 換句話說,較大的市場能拯救生命 愈多人可以同「病」相憐當然愈好
Now think about the following: if China and India were as rich as the United States is today, the market for cancer drugs would be eight times larger than it is now. Now we are not there yet, but it is happening. As other countries become richer the demand for these pharmaceuticals is going to increase tremendously. And that means an increase incentive to do research and development, which benefits everyone in the world. Larger markets increase the incentive to produce all kinds of ideas, whether it's software, whether it's a computer chip, whether it's a new design. For the Hollywood people in the audience, this even explains why action movies have larger budgets than comedies: it's because action movies translate easier into other languages and other cultures, so the market for those movies is larger. People are willing to invest more, and the budgets are larger.
想想看: 如果中國和印度能夠像現在的美國般富裕, 癌症藥物市場將會比現在大上八倍。 這個假設尚未成真,但不遠矣。 隨著愈來愈多國家開始富裕, 對這些藥物的需求 也將顯著上升 這意味著投入研發的誘因增加, 對全世界來說將是雨露均霑。 市場愈大, 創造思想的誘因愈多 不管是軟體、電腦晶片, 還是新設計,都是如此。 從台下好萊塢的觀眾角度來看, 這個道理更說明了為什麼 動作片的預算永遠比喜劇片的多 這是因為動作片比較容易 翻譯成其他語言和融入其他文化。 因此動作片的市場比較大, 投資者願意投資較多金錢, 而預算自然比較多。
Alright. Well if larger markets increase the incentive to produce new ideas, how do we maximize that incentive? It's by having one world market, by globalizing the world. The way I like to put this is: one idea. Ideas are meant to be shared, so one idea can serve one world, one market. One idea, one world, one market. Well how else can we create new ideas? That's one reason. Globalize trade. How else can we create new ideas? Well, more idea creators. Now idea creators, they come from all walks of life. Artists and innovators -- many of the people you've seen on this stage. I'm going to focus on scientists and engineers because I have some data on that, and I'm a data person.
好,既然大市場可以增加誘因 激發新思想, 那我們該如何使誘因發揮最大的效果呢? 就是藉由單一的全球市場和全球化。 我喜歡這麼說: 一個思想,思想原是用來分享的, 所以一個思想可以分享給一個世界、一個市場 一個思想、一個世界、一個市場。 我們還能如何創造新的思想? 方法之一是 全球化、貿易 那我們還能如何創造新的思想? 更多的創意人才 各行各業都有創意人才, 不管是藝術家還是改革者,當中很多人都曾站在這個舞台 我今天要特別提科學家和工程師 因為我有這方面的數據,我做什麼都講數據
Now, today, less than one-tenth of one percent of the world's population are scientists and engineers. (Laughter) The United States has been an idea leader. A large fraction of those people are in the United States. But the U.S. is losing its idea leadership. And for that I am very grateful. That is a good thing. It is fortunate that we are becoming less of an idea leader because for too long the United States, and a handful of other developed countries, have shouldered the entire burden of research and development. But consider the following: if the world as a whole were as wealthy as the United States is now there would be more than five times as many scientists and engineers contributing to ideas which benefit everyone, which are shared by everyone. I think of the great Indian mathematician, Ramanujan. How many Ramanujans are there in India today toiling in the fields, barely able to feed themselves, when they could be feeding the world? Now we're not there yet. But it is going to happen in this century. The real tragedy of the last century is this: if you think about the world's population as a giant computer, a massively parallel processor, then the great tragedy has been that billions of our processors have been off line. But in this century China is coming on line. India is coming on line. Africa is coming on line. We will see an Einstein in Africa in this century.
今天全世界的科學家和工程師 不到世界人口的千分之一 (笑聲) 美國一直是思想的先驅 科學和理工人才大部分都來自美國 但是美國的地位正漸漸被取代, 對此我很樂見其成 我覺得這是一件好事 幸好我們可以卸下一點引領思想的責任, 因為美國 和其他少數已開發國家 一直以來都一肩扛起 研發的工作 但想想看: 如果全世界和現在的美國一樣富裕, 科學家和工程師的人數會是現在的五倍以上, 他們將貢獻於人人都能受惠和 分享的思想 我想到印度偉大的數學家拉瑪奴江 印度現在還有多少個拉瑪奴江 他們原本可以帶給這個世界溫飽 現在卻只能在田裡苦幹,只求養活自己? 這世界還未到達同一富裕的時代, 但我相信21世紀就是時候 什麼是上個世紀最大的悲劇? 如果將世界人口 比喻為一個超級電腦,或巨型平行處理器 那最大的悲劇就是 當中好幾十億個處理器都沒有連上線 但本世紀,中國開始連上線 印度開始連上線 非洲也開始連上線 我們會在非洲見到另一個愛因斯坦
Here is just some data. This is China. 1996: less than one million new university students in China per year; 2006: over five million. Now think what this means. This means we all benefit when another country gets rich. We should not fear other countries becoming wealthy. That is something that we should embrace -- a wealthy China, a wealthy India, a wealthy Africa. We need a greater demand for ideas -- those larger markets I was talking about earlier -- and a greater supply of ideas for the world. Now you can see some of the reasons why I'm optimistic. Globalization is increasing the demand for ideas, the incentive to create new ideas. Investments in education are increasing the supply of new ideas.
我們看一些數據,這是中國 1996年,中國每年的大學新生 不到一百萬人 2006年則超過五百萬人 這意味著什麼? 這意味著,當其他國家變富裕,我們也跟著受惠 我們不該害怕其他國家變富有 而是應該歡迎 富裕的中國、富裕的印度、富裕的非洲 我們需要更多對思想的渴求, 那些更大的市場, 並為世界提供更多思想 這就是我為什麼這麼樂觀的原因 全球化使我們對思想的需求 以及創造思想的誘因增多 對教育的投資增加了新思想的供應
In fact if you look at world history you can see some reasons for optimism. From about the beginnings of humanity to 1500: zero economic growth, nothing. 1500 to 1800: maybe a little bit of economic growth, but less in a century than you expect to see in a year today. 1900s: maybe one percent. Twentieth century: a little bit over two percent. Twenty-first century could easily be 3.3, even higher percent. Even at that rate, by 2100 average GDP per capita in the world will be $200,000. That's not U.S. GDP per capita, which will be over a million, but world GDP per capita -- $200,000. That's not that far. We won't make it. But some of our grandchildren probably will. And I should say, I think this is a rather modest prediction. In Kurzweilian terms this is gloomy. In Kurzweilian terms I'm like the Eeyore of economic growth. (Laughter)
其實回頭看世界歷史, 各位會發現我們有更多理由保持樂觀 大約從人類起源開始 到1500年以前,全球經濟成長是零 1500年到1800年,可能有一點經濟成長 但一個世紀的成長率 比現在一年的成長率還要低 1900年代的經濟成長率可能是1% 20世紀的成長率可能比2%多一點 21世紀可能輕易就能達到3.3%,甚至更高 光以這樣的成長率 到了2100年,全球平均國內生產毛額 每人將會達20萬美元 美國的每人平均國內生產毛額會超過100萬美元 每人平均國內生產毛額達20萬美元 不算是遙不可及 我們等不到那時候 但是我們的子孫或許可以 而且我得說 這還是很保守的估計 用科茲威爾的術語來說,這叫悲慘的估計 用這比較,我根本是經濟界的屹耳(小熊維尼的悲觀驢子朋友) (笑聲)
Alright what about problems? What about a great depression? Well let's take a look. Let's take a look at the Great Depression. Here is GDP per capita from 1900 to 1929. Now let's imagine that you were an economist in 1929, trying to forecast future growth for the United States, not knowing that the economy was about to go off a cliff, not knowing that we were about to enter the greatest economic disaster certainly in the 20th century. What would you have predicted, not knowing this? If you had based your prediction, your forecast on 1900 to 1929 you'd have predicted something like this. If you'd been a little more optimistic -- say, based upon the Roaring Twenties -- you'd have said this. So what actually happened? We went off a cliff but we recovered. In fact in the second half of the 20th century growth was even higher than anything you would have predicted based upon the first half of the 20th century. So growth can wash away even what appears to be a great depression.
那過去的那些問題呢? 經濟大蕭條呢? 我們現在來看看經濟大蕭條 這是1900年到1929年 美國的每人平均國內生產毛額 現在各位想像自己是1929年的經濟學家, 試著要預測美國未來的經濟增長, 你不知道經濟馬上就要跌落谷底, 不知道我們就要進入 20世紀最大的經濟災難。 在不知道的情況下你會有什麼樣的預測? 如果你的預測或推算是建立在 1900年到1929年的資料上, 你的預測會是紅色那條線。 如果你比較樂觀, 如以咆哮的20年代為根據,那你的預測會是黑色那條線。 結果事實是什麼? 我們跌落谷底,但又爬了起來。 事實上在20世紀下半葉, 增長是比你基於20世紀上半葉 作的任何預期還要高。 所以就算遇上大蕭條 我們也能靠經濟增長扳回一城。
Alright. What else? Oil. Oil. This was a big topic. When I was writing up my notes oil was $140 per barrel. So people were asking a question. They were saying, "Is China drinking our milkshake?" (Laughter) And there is some truth to this, in the sense that we have something of a finite resource, and increased growth is going to push up demand for that. But I think I don't have to tell this audience that a higher price of oil is not necessarily a bad thing. Moreover, as everyone knows, look -- it's energy, not oil, which counts. And higher oil prices mean a greater incentive to invest in energy R&D. You can see this in the data. As oil prices go up, energy patents go up. The world is much better equipped to overcome an increase in the price of oil today, than ever in the past, because of what I'm talking about. One idea, one world, one market.
好,還有什麼? 石油,石油,這是一個大議題。 我還在寫講稿的時候,石油每桶是140塊美元。 那時候大家就問: 「中國在喝我們的奶昔嗎?」(改編自電影《黑金企業》的經典台詞) (笑聲) 這句話也有幾分道理, 因為有些資源並非取之不盡, 而經濟成長將會增加對資源的需求 但不用我說各位也知道, 高油價不見得是一件壞事。 而且大家都知道 重要的是能源,不是石油。 油價上漲代表 投資能源研發的誘因增加了。 各位可以從資料上看到 隨著油價上漲,能源專利也愈多。 今天這個世界更加有能力 去克服油價上漲的問題。 這是過去所無法比擬的。 原因就是我所說過的 一個思想、一個世界、一個市場
So I'm optimistic so long as we hew to these two ideas: to keep globalizing world markets, keep extending cooperation across national boundaries, and keep investing in education. Now the United States has a particularly important role to play in this: to keep our education system globalized, to keep our education system open to students from all over the world, because our education system is the candle that other students come to light their own candles. Now remember here what Jefferson said. Jefferson said, "When they come and light their candles at ours, they gain light, and we are not darkened." But Jefferson wasn't quite right, was he? Because the truth is, when they light their candles at ours, there is twice as much light available for everyone. So my view is: Be optimistic. Spread the ideas. Spread the light. Thank you. (Applause)
所以我很看好未來, 只要我們堅持以下兩點: 保持市場的全球化, 持續跨國界的合作, 並且繼續投資教育。 現在美國有一個 特別重要的角色 那就是使我們的教育系統全球化, 把我們的教育系統開放給世界各地的學生 因為我們的教育系統 就是那把蠟燭 用來提供其他學生點燃他們的蠟燭 記住傑弗遜曾說過的。 他說,如果有人 用我們的燭火點燭, 光亮與他們同在,我們卻不因此身處黑暗。 但傑弗遜說的也不完全對,不是嗎? 因為事實是 當他們用我們的燭火點蠟燭, 每個人都得到兩倍的光亮 所以我認為要保持樂觀 傳播思想,散播光明 謝謝。 (掌聲)