I'm going to talk about your mindset. Does your mindset correspond to my dataset? (Laughter) If not, one or the other needs upgrading, isn't it?
Ma kavatsen rääkida teie hoiakutest. Kas teie hoiakud vastavad minu andmestikule? (Naer) Kui ei, siis vajab üks või teine uuendamist, eks ole?
When I talk to my students about global issues, and I listen to them in the coffee break, they always talk about "we" and "them." And when they come back into the lecture room I ask them, "What do you mean with "we" and "them"? "Oh, it's very easy. It's the western world and it's the developing world," they say. "We learned it in college." And what is the definition then? "The definition? Everyone knows," they say.
Kui ma kõnelen oma tudengitega globaalsetel teemadel ning kuulan neid kohvipausi ajal, räägivad nad alati "meist" ja "neist". Tagasi loenguruumi tulles küsin neilt: "Mida te silmas peate, öeldes "meie" ja "nemad"?" "Väga lihtne. On Läänemaailm ja on arengumaad," vastavad nad. "Me oleme seda ülikoolis õppinud." Ja kuidas kõlaks definitsioon? "Definitsioon? Igaüks teab seda," ütlevad nad.
But then you know, I press them like this. So one girl said, very cleverly, "It's very easy. Western world is a long life in a small family. Developing world is a short life in a large family." And I like that definition, because it enabled me to transfer their mindset into the dataset. And here you have the dataset. So, you can see that what we have on this axis here is size of family. One, two, three, four, five children per woman on this axis. And here, length of life, life expectancy, 30, 40, 50. Exactly what the students said was their concept about the world.
Aga ma käin neile peale. Üks tüdruk ütles väga nutikalt: "Väga lihtne. Läänemaailm on pikk eluiga väikses perekonnas. Arengumaad on lühike eluiga suures perekonnas." Mulle meeldib see definitsioon, sest see võimaldas mul paigutada nende hoiakud konkreetsesse andmestikku. Ja siin te seda andmestikku näetegi. Nagu näete, on sellel teljel siin perekonna suurus. Üks, kaks, kolm, neli, viis last ühe naise kohta. Ja siin - elu pikkus, keskmine eluiga. 30, 40, 50. Täpselt see, mis tudengite sõnade järgi on nende arusaam maailmast.
And really this is about the bedroom. Whether the man and woman decide to have small family, and take care of their kids, and how long they will live. It's about the bathroom and the kitchen. If you have soap, water and food, you know, you can live long. And the students were right. It wasn't that the world consisted -- the world consisted here, of one set of countries over here, which had large families and short life. Developing world. And we had one set of countries up there which was the western world. They had small families and long life.
Küsimus on õieti magamistoas - kas mees ja naine tahavad väikest perekonda ja laste eest hoolitseda ja kui kaua nad elavad. Küsimus on vannitoas ja köögis. Kui sul on seepi, vett ja toitu, siis on sul võimalus elada kaua. Tudengitel oli õigus. Mitte selles, et maailm koosneb ühest komplektist riikidest siin, kus on suured perekonnad ja lühike eluiga - arengumaad - ja teisest komplektist riikidest seal üleval, mis on Läänemaailm, kellel on väikesed perekonnad ja pikk eluiga.
And you are going to see here the amazing thing that has happened in the world during my lifetime. Then the developing countries applied soap and water, vaccination. And all the developing world started to apply family planning. And partly to USA who help to provide technical advice and investment. And you see all the world moves over to a two child family, and a life with 60 to 70 years.
Ja nüüd te näete hämmastavat tõsiasja, mis on maailmas juhtunud minu eluea jooksul. Sel ajal võtsid arengumaad kasutusele seebi ja vee, vaktsiini, ja kogu kolmas maailm hakkas rakendama pereplaneerimist. Osalt aitas ka USA, pakkudes tehnilist nõu ning investeeringuid. Ja nagu näete, kogu maailm liigub kahelapselise pere poole, kus inimese eluiga on 60-70 aastat.
But some countries remain back in this area here. And you can see we still have Afghanistan down here. We have Liberia. We have Congo. So we have countries living there. So the problem I had is that the worldview that my students had corresponds to reality in the world the year their teachers were born. (Laughter) (Applause)
Aga mõned riigid jäävad ikkagi arengust maha - siin on meil endiselt Afganistan, Libeeria, Kongo. Nii et neid maid siiski veel on. Minu probleem oli see, et mu tudengite maailmavaade vastas reaalsusele sellel aastal, mil nende õpetajad sündisid. (naer) (aplaus)
And we, in fact, when we have played this over the world. I was at the Global Health Conference here in Washington last week, and I could see the wrong concept even active people in United States had, that they didn't realize the improvement of Mexico there, and China, in relation to United States. Look here when I move them forward. Here we go. They catch up. There's Mexico. It's on par with United States in these two social dimensions. There was less than five percent of the specialists in Global Health that was aware of this. This great nation, Mexico, has the problem that arms are coming from North, across the borders, so they had to stop that, because they have this strange relationship to the United States, you know.
Ja jälgides seda muutust üle kogu maailma - näiteks olin eelmisel nädalal ülemaailmsel tervisekonverentsil Washingtonis ja nägin, et see vale arusaam on sügavalt juurdunud isegi asjaga tegelevate inimeste seas USA-s. Nad ei mõistnud, kuivõrd on olukord paranenud Mehhikos ja Hiinas, võrreldes USA-ga. Vaadake nüüd, kui ma neid ajas edasi nihutan. Niiviisi. Nad jõuavad järele. Seal on Mehhiko. Neis kahes sotsiaaldimensioonis on ta USA-ga võrdväärne. Vähem kui viis protsenti ülemaailmse tervise spetsialistidest olid sellest teadlikud. Seda suurt rahvast, Mehhikot, ähvardavad põhjast üle piiride tulevad jõud. Nii et nad pidid selle ära lõpetama. Sest nagu te teate, on neil USA-ga küllalt kummaline suhe.
But if I would change this axis here, I would instead put income per person. Income per person. I can put that here. And we will then see a completely different picture. By the way, I'm teaching you how to use our website, Gapminder World, while I'm correcting this, because this is a free utility on the net. And when I now finally got it right, I can go back 200 years in history. And I can find United States up there. And I can let the other countries be shown. And now I have income per person on this axis. And United States only had some, one, two thousand dollars at that time. And the life expectancy was 35 to 40 years, on par with Afghanistan today.
Aga kui ma muudaksin seda telge siin ja muudaksin selle ühe inimese sissetulekuks - ma sisestan selle siia, sissetulek ühe inimese kohta - siis me näeme täiesti teist pilti. Muuseas, ma õpetan teid kasutama meie veebilehte, Gapminder World. Miks ma seda parandan? Sest see on tasuta programm internetis. Ja kui ma viimaks sain kõik õigesti paika, võin ma minna ajaloos 200 aastat tagasi. Siit ülevalt leian ma USA. Ma saan näidata teisi riike. Nüüd on mul teljel sissetulek ühe inimese kohta. USA-s oli see tol ajal umbes ainult 2000 dollarit. Keskmine eluiga oli 35-40 aastat, sama, mis Afganistanil täna.
And what has happened in the world, I will show now. This is instead of studying history for one year at university. You can watch me for one minute now and you'll see the whole thing. (Laughter) You can see how the brown bubbles, which is west Europe, and the yellow one, which is the United States, they get richer and richer and also start to get healthier and healthier. And this is now 100 years ago, where the rest of the world remains behind. Here we come. And that was the influenza. That's why we are so scared about flu, isn't it? It's still remembered. The fall of life expectancy. And then we come up. Not until independence started.
Nüüd näitan, mis on maailmas juhtunud. See asendab aastapikkust ajaloo õppimist ülikoolis. Te võite jälgida mind ühe minuti jooksul ja näete kõik ära. (Naer) Näete, kuidas pruunid mullid - Lääne-Euroopa - ja kollane mull - Ameerika Ühendriigid - saavad järjest rikkamaks ja rikkamaks ning nende tervis muutub paremaks ja paremaks. See on 100 aastat tagasi. Samal ajal, kui kogu ülejäänud maailm jääb maha. Sel ajal võttis maad Hispaania gripp. Sellepärast me ju kardamegi nii väga viiruseid? Seda mäletatakse siiani. Keskmise eluea lühenemine. Siin see jälle tõuseb. Ja mitte enne iseseisvuse saavutamist.
Look here You have China over there, you have India over there, and this is what has happened. Did you note there, that we have Mexico up there? Mexico is not at all on par with the United States, but they are quite close. And especially, it's interesting to see China and the United States during 200 years, because I have my oldest son now working for Google, after Google acquired this software. Because in fact, this is child labor. My son and his wife sat in a closet for many years and developed this. And my youngest son, who studied Chinese in Beijing. So they come in with the two perspectives I have, you know? And my son, youngest son who studied in Beijing, in China, he got a long-term perspective. Whereas when my oldest son, who works for Google, he should develop by quarter, or by half-year. Or Google is quite generous, so he can have one or two years to go.
Siin on Hiina ja siin on India. Juhtus nii. Märkate, et siin üleval on Mehhiko - ta ei ole USA-ga veel sugugi võrdne, aga nad on üsna lähestikku. Eriti huvitav on näha Hiinat ja USA-d kahesaja aasta jooksul. Mu vanem poeg töötab Google'is, sellest ajast saadik, kui Google omandas selle tarkvara. See on nagu lapse sünnitamine. Mu poeg ja ta naine istusid palju aastaid kapis ja arendasid seda välja. Ja mu noorem poeg õppis Pekingis hiina keelt. Nii et nende kaudu ristuvad kaks erinevat perspektiivi, mis mul on. Mu noorem poeg, see, kes Hiinas, Pekingis õppis, töötab pikaajalise perspektiiviga, samas kui vanem poeg, kes töötab Google'is, tegutseb kvartali või poolaasta kaupa. Samas Google on üsna helde, nii et võib-olla on tema kasutuses aasta või paar.
But in China they look generation after generation because they remember the very embarrassing period, for 100 years, when they went backwards. And then they would remember the first part of last century, which was really bad, and we could go by this so-called Great Leap Forward. But this was 1963. Mao Tse-Tung eventually brought health to China, and then he died, and then Deng Xiaoping started this amazing move forward.
Aga Hiinas vaadatakse asju põlvkondade kaupa, sest nad mäletavad väga piinlikku saja-aastast perioodi, mil nad läksid arengus tagasi. Neile tuleb ühtlasi meelde sajandi esimene pool, mis oli päris halb. Ja siis tuleb nii-öelda suur hüpe edasi. Aga aasta oli 1963. Mao Zedong tõi lõpuks Hiinasse tervise ja siis suri. Aga seejärel algatas Deng Xiaoping hämmastava edasise arengu.
Isn't it strange to see that the United States first grew the economy, and then gradually got rich? Whereas China could get healthy much earlier, because they applied the knowledge of education, nutrition, and then also benefits of penicillin and vaccines and family planning. And Asia could have social development before they got the economic development. So to me, as a public health professor, it's not strange that all these countries grow so fast now.
Kas pole kummaline näha, et USA ehitas kõigepealt üles majanduse ja rikastus siis järk-järgult, samas kui Hiina võis palju varem tervist parandada, sest nad kasutasid teadmisi haridusest, toitumisest ja ühtlasi ka penitsilliini, vaktsiinide ja pereplaneerimise hüvesid. Aasia oleks võinud läbi teha ühiskondliku arengu enne majandusliku arenguni jõudmist. Nii et minu kui tervisekaitse professori jaoks pole sugugi veider, et kõik need riigid nüüd nii kiiresti arenevad.
Because what you see here, what you see here is the flat world of Thomas Friedman, isn't it. It's not really, really flat. But the middle income countries -- and this is where I suggest to my students, stop using the concept "developing world." Because after all, talking about the developing world is like having two chapters in the history of the United States.
Sest siin te näete Thomas Friedmani lamedat maailma. Kas pole? See pole tegelikult nii lame, aga siin on keskmise sissetulekuga riigid - ja sel kohal soovitan ma oma tudengitel lakata kasutamast kontseptsiooni "arengumaadest". Sest lõppeks on arengumaadest rääkimine sama hea, kui jagada USA ajalugu kaheks peatükiks.
The last chapter is about present, and president Obama, and the other is about the past, where you cover everything from Washington to Eisenhower. Because Washington to Eisenhower, that is what we find in the developing world. We could actually go to Mayflower to Eisenhower, and that would be put together into a developing world, which is rightly growing its cities in a very amazing way, which have great entrepreneurs, but also have the collapsing countries.
Viimane peatükk oleks olevikust ja president Obamast ja esimene minevikust, mis katab kõike Washingtonist Eisenhowerini. Areng Washingtonist Eisenhowerini on sarnane sellele, mida näeme arengumaades. Sama hästi võiks see periood olla Mayflowerist Eisenhowerini kusjuures me liigitaksime riigi kuuluvaks arengumaailma, kus linnad kasvavad hämmastava kiirusega, kus on tohutud ettevõtted, aga ühtlasi ka kokkuvarisevad riigid.
So, how could we make better sense about this? Well, one way of trying is to see whether we could look at income distribution. This is the income distribution of peoples in the world, from $1. This is where you have food to eat. These people go to bed hungry. And this is the number of people. This is $10, whether you have a public or a private health service system. This is where you can provide health service for your family and school for your children, and this is OECD countries: Green, Latin America, East Europe. This is East Asia, and the light blue there is South Asia.
Nii et kuidas me võiksime seda paremini mõista? Üks viis on proovida vaadata sissetuleku jaotust. See on maailma rahvaste sissetuleku jaotus allates ühest dollarist. See tähendab, et sul on süüa. Need inimesed lähevad näljasena magama. See on inimeste arv. See on kümme dollarit - kas sul on avalik tervishoiusüsteem või erakindlustusel põhinev. Sellega võimaldad oma perele tervisekindlustuse ning lastele koolituse. Ja need on OECD riigid. Roheline - Ladina-Ameerika, siis Ida-Euroopa, Ida-Aasia, ja helesinine on Lõuna-Aasia.
And this is how the world changed. It changed like this. Can you see how it's growing? And how hundreds of millions and billions is coming out of poverty in Asia? And it goes over here? And I come now, into projections, but I have to stop at the door of Lehman Brothers there, you know, because -- (Laughter) that's where the projections are not valid any longer. Probably the world will do this. and then it will continue forward like this. But more or less, this is what will happen, and we have a world which cannot be looked upon as divided.
Ja kuidas maailm on muutunud. Niimoodi. Näete, kuidas see kasvab? Ja kuidas sajad miljonid ja miljardid inimesed Aasias tulevad vaesusest välja? Kuni sinnamaani välja. Nüüd jõuame prognoosideni. Aga ma pean katkestama Lehman Brothersi lävel, sest... (Naer) Sest sealtmaalt ei ole prognoos enam kehtiv. Tõenäoliselt toimub maailmas väike tagasiminek, aga siis minnakse niimoodi jälle edasi. Nii või teisiti, suures plaanis läheb umbes nii. Meil on maailm, mida ei saa vaadata tükkideks jagatuna.
We have the high income countries here, with the United States as a leading power; we have the emerging economies in the middle, which provide a lot of the funding for the bailout; and we have the low income countries here. Yeah, this is a fact that from where the money comes, they have been saving, you know, over the last decade. And here we have the low income countries where entrepreneurs are. And here we have the countries in collapse and war, like Afghanistan, Somalia, parts of Congo, Darfur. We have all this at the same time.
Siin on kõrge sissetulekuga riigid, millest esimene on USA. On esilekerkivaid majandussüsteeme, mis tagavad suure osa rahast kolmanda maailma võlgade käendamisel, ja siis on madala sissetulekuga riigid. Jah, see on fakt, et kust see raha pärit on. Nad on viimase kümnendi jooksul palju säästnud. Ja siin on meil madala sissetulekuga riigid, kus asuvad ettevõtjad. Ja siin on riigid, kus valitseb varing ja sõda, nagu Afganistan, Somaalia, osa Kongost, Darfur. Kõik see on samal ajal.
That's why it's so problematic to describe what has happened in the developing world. Because it's so different, what has happened there. And that's why I suggest a slightly different approach of what you would call it. And you have huge differences within countries also. I heard that your departments here were by regions. Here you have Sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia, East Asia, Arab states, East Europe, Latin America, and OECD. And on this axis, GDP. And on this, heath, child survival, and it doesn't come as a surprise that Africa south of Sahara is at the bottom.
Sellepärast on väga problemaatiline kirjeldada, mis on arengumaailmas toimunud. Sest kõik juhtunu on äärmiselt erinev. Sellepärast ma pakungi välja pisut teistsugust vaatepunkti sellele, mismoodi seda nimetada. Ka riikidesiseselt on tohutud erinevused. Mulle öeldi, et teil jaotatakse kõike regioonide kaupa. Siin on Sub-Sahaara Aafrika, Lõuna-Aasia, Ida-Aasia, Araabia riigid, Ida-Euroopa, Ladina-Ameerika ning OECD. See telg näitab SKP-d. See telg populatsiooni tervist, laste ellujäämust. Sugugi ei üllata, et Aafrika, Lõuna-Sahaara, on kõige all.
But when I split it, when I split it into country bubbles, the size of the bubbles here is the population. Then you see Sierra Leone and Mauritius, completely different. There is such a difference within Sub-Saharan Africa. And I can split the others. Here is the South Asian, Arab world. Now all your different departments. East Europe, Latin America, and OECD countries. And here were are. We have a continuum in the world. We cannot put it into two parts.
Aga kui ma selle osadeks jaotan - väikesteks riigimullideks - mullide suurus näitab populatsiooni. Näete, et Sierra Leone ja Mauritius on täiest erinevad. Selline erinevus Sub-Sahaara Aafrika siseselt. Ma võin ka teised tükkideks jagada. Lõuna-Aasia, Araabia maailma - kõik erinevad sektorid - Ida-Euroopa, Ladina-Ameerika ja OECD maad. Näete siis. Maailmas on kontiinum. Me ei saa seda eristada kaheks osaks.
It is Mayflower down here. It is Washington here, building, building countries. It's Lincoln here, advancing them. It's Eisenhower bringing modernity into the countries. And then it's United States today, up here. And we have countries all this way. Now, this is the important thing of understanding how the world has changed. At this point I decided to make a pause. (Laughter)
Siin all on Mayflower, siin Washington, kes muudkui ehitab ja ehitab riike, siin Lincoln, arendab neid edasi, siin Eisenhower, muudab need riigid kaasaegseks, ja siis tänane USA siin üleval. Ja erinevad riigid on erinevates staadiumites. See on oluline osa mõistmaks, kuidas maailm on muutunud. Siinkohal otsustasin ma teha pausi. (Naer)
And it is my task, on behalf of the rest of the world, to convey a thanks to the U.S. taxpayers, for Demographic Health Survey. Many are not aware of -- no, this is not a joke. This is very serious. It is due to USA's continuous sponsoring during 25 years of the very good methodology for measuring child mortality that we have a grasp of what's happening in the world. (Applause) And it is U.S. government at its best, without advocacy, providing facts, that it's useful for the society. And providing data free of charge on the internet, for the world to use. Thank you very much.
Ülejäänud maailma nimel on minu ülesanne anda edasi tänu ameerika maksumaksjale Demograafilise Terviseuuringu eest. Paljud ei tea, et - ei, see pole nali. See on väga tõsine asi. Tänu USA pidevale spondeerimisele 25 aasta jooksul ja väga heale metodoloogiale laste suremuse hindamises on meil umbkaudne arusaam, mis maailmas toimub. (Aplaus) See on USA valitsus oma parimal kujul, ilma propagandata, pakkudes ainult fakte, mis on ühiskonnale kasulikud. Pakkudes andmeid ilma tasuta, internetis, kogu maailmale kasutada. Suur aitäh.
Quite the opposite of the World Bank, who compiled data with government money, tax money, and then they sell it to add a little profit, in a very inefficient, Gutenberg way. (Applause) But the people doing that at the World Bank are among the best in the world. And they are highly skilled professionals. It's just that we would like to upgrade our international agencies to deal with the world in the modern way, as we do. And when it comes to free data and transparency, United States of America is one of the best. And that doesn't come easy from the mouth of a Swedish public health professor. (Laughter) And I'm not paid to come here, no.
Üsna vastupidiselt Maailmapangale, kes pani kokku andmestiku, kasutades selleks valitsuse ja maksude raha, ning siis müüs seda kasumi eesmärgil väga ebaefektiivsel, Guttenbergi moel. (Aplaus) Aga inimesed, kes seda Maailmapangas teevad, on oma ala parimad terves maailmas. Nad on väga kõrge kvalifikatsiooniga professionaalid. Lihtsalt me tahaksime uuendada oma rahvusvahelisi esindusi, et suhelda maailmaga kaasaegsel viisil. Ja mis puutub tasuta infosse ning läbipaistvusse, on USA parimate hulgas. Ja see ei tule ühelt rootsi tervisekaitse professorilt kergesti üle huulte. (Naer) Mulle pole makstud, et siia tulla.
I would like to show you what happens with the data, what we can show with this data. Look here. This is the world. With income down there and child mortality. And what has happened in the world? Since 1950, during the last 50 years we have had a fall in child mortality. And it is the DHS that makes it possible to know this. And we had an increase in income. And the blue former developing countries are mixing up with the former industrialized western world. We have a continuum. But we still have, of course, Congo, up there. We still have as poor countries as we have had, always, in history. And that's the bottom billion, where we've heard today about a completely new approach to do it.
Ma tahan näidata, mis juhtub nende andmetega - mida me saame neid kasutades näidata. Vaadake siia. See on maailm. Alumisel teljel on sissetulek ja teisel laste suremus. Ja mis on maailmas toimunud? 1950ndatest, viimase 50 aasta jooksul on laste suremus langenud. Me saame seda teada tänu Demograafilisele Terviseuuringule. Ühtlasi on suurenenud sissetulek. Ja sinised endised arengumaad segunevad endiste industrialiseerunud lääneriikidega. Meil on kontiinum. Aga samal ajal on meil veel ka näiteks Kongo, seal üleval - meil on alles sama vaesed riigid, nagu alati läbi ajaloo on olnud. See on viimane miljard, mille puhul me täna mõistame täiesti uut lähenemist.
And how fast has this happened? Well, MDG 4. The United States has not been so eager to use MDG 4. But you have been the main sponsor that has enabled us to measure it, because it's the only child mortality that we can measure. And we used to say that it should fall four percent per year. Let's see what Sweden has done. We used to boast about fast social progress. That's where we were, 1900. 1900, Sweden was there. Same child mortality as Bangladesh had, 1990, though they had lower income. They started very well. They used the aid well. They vaccinated the kids. They get better water. And they reduced child mortality, with an amazing 4.7 percent per year. They beat Sweden. I run Sweden the same 16 year period.
Kui kiiresti see juhtunud? MDG 4 - aastatuhande arengueesmärk 4. USA pole olnud eriti entusiastlik selle neljanda arengueesmärgi suhtes, aga ometi on olnud põhisponsor võimaldamaks meil seda mõõta. Sest ainult laste suremust me saame mõõta. MDG 4 ütleb, et see peaks langema neli protsenti aastas. Vaatame, mida rootslased on teinud. Me kiitlesime alati kiire ühiskondliku arenguga. Siin oleme meie aastal 1900. Aasta 1900, Rootsi. Sama laste suremus, mis Bangladeshil oli 1990. aastal. Kuigi neil oli madalam sissetulek. Nad alustasid väga hästi. Nad kasutasid abi tulemuslikult, nad vaktsineerisid lapsi, nad said paremat vett. Ja nad vähendasid laste suremust imetlusväärsel kombel 4,7%. Nad võitsid Rootsi ära. Ma jätkan Rootsiga pärast seda 16-aastast perioodi.
Second round, it's Sweden, 1916, against Egypt, 1990. Here we go. Once again the USA is part of the reason here. They get safe water, they get food for the poor, and they get malaria eradicated. 5.5 percent. They are faster than the millennium development goal.
Järgmine raund: Rootsi 1916 versus Egiptus 1990. Hakkab peale. Taaskord on USA osa põhjusest. Nad saavad kõlblikku vett ja süüa vaestele. Nad hävitavad malaaria. 5,5%. Nad on veel kiiremad kui aastatuhande arengueesmärk.
And third chance for Sweden, against Brazil here. Brazil here has amazing social improvement over the last 16 years, and they go faster than Sweden. This means that the world is converging. The middle income countries, the emerging economy, they are catching up. They are moving to cities, where they also get better assistance for that.
Kolmas võimalus Rootsi jaoks, vastane on Brasiilia. Brasiilia on läbi teinud hämmastava ühiskondliku arengu viimase 16 aasta jooksul. Nad liiguvad kiiremini kui Rootsi. See tähendab, et maailm koondub. Keskmise sissetulekuga riigid ja arengumaad jõuavad järele. Inimesed kolivad linnadesse, kus neil on võimalik paremat abi saada.
Well the Swedish students protest at this point. They say, "This is not fair, because these countries had vaccines and antibiotics that were not available for Sweden. We have to do real-time competition." Okay. I give you Singapore, the year I was born. Singapore had twice the child mortality of Sweden. It's the most tropical country in the world, a marshland on the equator. And here we go. It took a little time for them to get independent. But then they started to grow their economy. And they made the social investment. They got away malaria. They got a magnificent health system that beat both the U.S. and Sweden. We never thought it would happen that they would win over Sweden! (Applause)
Rootslased jällegi protesteerivad. Nad ütlevad: "See ei ole õiglane, sest neil riikidel oli vaktsiin ja antibiootikumid, mida Rootsis ei olnud. Me peame võistlema reaalajas." Olgu. Ma näitan teile Singapuri aastal, mil ma sündisin. Singapuril oli kaks korda suurem laste suremus kui Rootsis. See on maailma kõige troopilisem maa. Ekvatoriaalne soine maa. Nii. Neil võttis pisut aega, et saada iseseisvaks, aga siis hakkasid nad ehitama üles majandust ning investeerisid ühiskonda. Nad said lahti malaariast, neil on suurepärane tervishoiusüsteem, mis seljatas nii USA kui ka Rootsi. Me ei uskunud ju, et nad võiksid võita Rootsit! (Aplaus)
All these green countries are achieving millennium development goals. These yellow are just about to be doing this. These red are the countries that doesn't do it, and the policy has to be improved. Not simplistic extrapolation. We have to really find a way of supporting those countries in a better way. We have to respect the middle income countries on what they are doing. And we have to fact-base the whole way we look at the world.
Kõik need rohelised riigid saavutavad aastatuhande arengueesmärke. Kollased on sellele lähedal. Punased ei tee seda ja sellega seoses on vaja midagi muuta. Pole vaja lihtsustatud üldistust. Meil on tõesti tarvis leida viis neid riike paremini toetada. Meil tuleb respekteerida keskmise sissetulekuga riike selles, mida nad teevad, ja me peame oma maailmanägemuse toetama faktidele.
This is dollar per person. This is HIV in the countries. The blue is Africa. The size of the bubbles is how many are HIV affected. You see the tragedy in South Africa there. About 20 percent of the adult population are infected. And in spite of them having quite a high income, they have a huge number of HIV infected. But you also see that there are African countries down here. There is no such thing as an HIV epidemic in Africa. There's a number, five to 10 countries in Africa that has the same level as Sweden and United States. And there are others who are extremely high.
See on dollar inimese kohta. See on HIV maades. Sinine on Aafrika. Mullide suurus näitab, kui palju on HIV-nakatunuid. Näete Lõuna-Aafrika tragöödiat. Umbes 20% täiskasvanud rahvastikust on nakatunud. Sõltumata sellest, et neil on üsna kõrge sissetulek, on neil väga palju HIV-positiivseid. Aga näete ka neid Aafrika riike siin all. Sellist asja nagu HIV-epideemia Aafrikas ei ole olemas. On osa riike, 5-10 maad Aafrikas, mille tase on sama, mis Rootsil ja USA-l. Ja on teised, mille tase on äärmiselt kõrge.
And I will show you that what has happened in one of the best countries, with the most vibrant economy in Africa and a good governance, Botswana. They have a very high level. It's coming down. But now it's not falling, because there, with help from PEPFAR, it's working with treatment. And people are not dying. And you can see it's not that easy, that it is war which caused this. Because here, in Congo, there is war. And here, in Zambia, there is peace.
Ma näitan, mis on juhtunud ühes kõige paremas riigis, millel on väga elav majandus, väga hea valitsus, see on Botswana. Neil on väga kõrge haigustase. See langes. Aga nüüd enam ei lange. Sest seal osutab abi PEPFAR, nad pakuvad ravi ning inimesed ei sure. Te näete, et see ei ole nii üheselt võetav, nagu oleks sõda selle põhjustanud, sest siin, Kongos, on sõda, ja siin, Sambias, on rahu.
And it's not the economy. Richer country has a little higher. If I split Tanzania in its income, the richer 20 percent in Tanzania has more HIV than the poorest one. And it's really different within each country. Look at the provinces of Kenya. They are very different. And this is the situation you see. It's not deep poverty. It's the special situation, probably of concurrent sexual partnership among part of the heterosexual population in some countries, or some parts of countries, in south and eastern Africa.
Asi pole ka majanduses. Rikkal riigil on veidi kõrgem tase. Kui ma jagan Tansaania sissetuleku põhjal osadeks, siis rikkamas 20 protsendis Tansaaniast on rohkem HIV-d, kui kõige vaesemas. See on riigisiseselt erinev. Vaadake erinevad Keenia maakondi. Need on väga erinevad. Te näete seda olukorda. See ei ole tohutu vaesus. See on teistmoodi olukord. Tõenäoliselt polügaamne seksuaalsuhe mingi osa heteroseksuaalse rahvastiku seas mõnes riigis või riigiosades Lõuna- ja Ida-Aafrikas.
Don't make it Africa. Don't make it a race issue. Make it a local issue. And do prevention at each place, in the way it can be done there. So to just end up, there are things of suffering in the one billion poorest, which we don't know. Those who live beyond the cellphone, those who have yet to see a computer, those who have no electricity at home.
Ärge nähke selles kogu Aafrikat. Ärge tehke sellest rassiteemat. Vaadake seda kui lokaalset probleemi ja püüdke haigestumist ära hoida igal pool nii, nagu just seal saab. Nii et lõpetuseks. Ühe miljardi kõige vaesemate hulgas on veel kannatusi, millest me midagi ei tea. Need on inimesed, kes elavad mobiililevist väljas, kes pole veel näinud arvutit, kel pole kodus elektrit.
This is the disease, Konzo, I spent 20 years elucidating in Africa. It's caused by fast processing of toxic cassava root in famine situation. It's similar to the pellagra epidemic in Mississippi in the '30s. It's similar to other nutritional diseases. It will never affect a rich person.
See on haigus nimega konzo, mille kohta ma kahekümne aasta jooksul Aafrikas selgitustööd tegin. Seda põhjustab mürgise maniokijuure kiire töötlus näljahädaolukorras. See sarnaneb pellagrale kolmekümnendatel aastatel Mississippis või teistele toitumisega seotud haigustele. See ei taba kunagi rikast inimest.
We have seen it here in Mozambique. This is the epidemic in Mozambique. This is an epidemic in northern Tanzania. You never heard about the disease. But it's much more than Ebola that has been affected by this disease. Cause crippling throughout the world. And over the last two years, 2,000 people has been crippled in the southern tip of Bandundu region. That used to be the illegal diamond trade, from the UNITA-dominated area in Angola. That has now disappeared, and they are now in great economic problem. And one week ago, for the first time, there were four lines on the Internet.
Me oleme näinud seda Mosambiigis, seal on see epideemiline. See on epideemia Põhja-Tansaanias. Te ei ole kunagi sellest haigusest kuulnud, aga võrreldes ebolaga on see palju rohkemaid mõjutanud, põhjustanud sandistumist üle terve maailma. Viimase kahe aasta jooksul on 2000 inimest invaliidiks jäänud Bandunda territooriumi lõunapoolses otsas. Seal toimus kunagi ebaseaduslik teemantikauplemine, kui UNITA partei valitses veel ala Angoolas. See nüüd on kadunud. Nad on praegu suurtes majanduslikes raskustes. Nädal aega tagasi oli sellest esimest korda internetis neli rida kirjutatud.
Don't get confused of the progress of the emerging economies and the great capacity of people in the middle income countries and in peaceful low income countries. There is still mystery in one billion. And we have to have more concepts than just developing countries and developing world. We need a new mindset. The world is converging, but -- but -- but not the bottom billion. They are still as poor as they've ever been. It's not sustainable, and it will not happen around one superpower. But you will remain one of the most important superpowers, and the most hopeful superpower, for the time to be. And this institution will have a very crucial role, not for United States, but for the world. So you have a very bad name, State Department. This is not the State Department. It's the World Department. And we have a high hope in you. Thank you very much. (Applause)
Ärge sattuge segadusse arengumaade majanduse progressist ja sellest, kui võimekad on keskmise sissetulekuga riikide ja rahus elavate madala sissetulekuga riikide rahvad. Üks miljard on endiselt tume ala. Meil on vaja toekamat kontseptsiooni kui üksnes arengumaad ja arengumaailm. Meil on vaja uusi hoiakuid. Maailm on hakanud koonduma. Aga, aga, aga mitte kõige alumine miljard. Nemad on endiselt sama vaesed nagu alati. See ei ole jätkusuutlik ja seda ei muuda üks ülijõud. Aga teie jääte üheks kõige olulisemaks ülijõuks ja esialgu ka kõige lootustandvamaks. Ja sel institutsioonil on äärmiselt oluline roll - mitte USA jaoks, vaid kogu maailma jaoks. Teie nimi ei ole kohane, te ei ole mitte välisministeerium, vaid maailmaministeerium. Ja meil on teie suhtes suured lootused. Suur aitäh. (Aplaus)