Poverty of 100
The graph above is a representation of my guess, m classes average guess and the actual answer of how many people live in poverty (less than 2usd/day). I held a much more realistic view than the res of my class in the statistic. I know that the unfortunate are a dominant amount of people but I know that our world has moved in the direction where labor in general is needed more and more and even if they are not getting paid much, 2 dollars isn't much at all. The statistic is still staggering. 48% of people in poverty is still a horrible statistic and is suprising for our day in age.
One statistic that I felt really confident about was drinking water. I know that there have been huge leaps in cheap humanitarian alternatives to drinking water. What I did not expect was the huge leaps in such advancements. To achieve such a record is amazing, The class were pessimist with these statistics I guess I expect more of the world community.
As with the water statistic this one suprised me similiarly. I knew electricty has become much more accesible but advances have become surprising, and as with the water statistic the class was full of pessimists. We are getting to a point where things we take for granted are being taken for granted elsewhere and this creates an illusion that we live the same. Just because you have electricity doesn't means it's on 24 hours a day nor do you have the supplies to actually use it. These statistics are skewed as are all stats but I like that these stats can even be justified. This wasn't possible ten years ago. Maybe in ten years there stats will be real.
The sections I was most accurate in were the “owning vs. not owning a computer” and age categories. For the age I think I was accurate because the age division seems to be the same almost anywhere you look. In every statistical set of data you’ll find that the age separations are pretty consistent. Because of this, I recognized seeing the numbers fairly often and used memory to take my guess. For the technology section, I simply assumed/knew most people in the world didn’t have access to a computer like we do at SLA. I picked the simplest ratio (90 to 10) and that was close enough to the real answer (88 to 12).
I didn’t get much right but I think the incorrect guess that was most surprising was the gender and drinking water categories. Usually when I look at schools, there's more girls than boys in a class. That has been mostly true for me since first grade. Seeing that we’re actually split right down the middle shocked me because I had never seen that ratio before. The drinking water was a shock because in lower school we did an assignment and found that only about 3% of the water in the world was drinkable. Because I this I assumed that there would be more people without water than with it and not the other way around.
My predictions weren’t split evenly but there was enough in the right category (in my opinion). I think this is because the city of Philadelphia doesn’t give me an accurate outlook on the world. Philadelphia and SLA project statistics and ratios that are much different from the actual world. If someone only saw one type of people wherever they went they would think the entire world was filled with those types of people, that's what SLA and Philadelphia have done to me. In some aspects they're an accurate portrayal of the word but in most aspects they're not.
For one of the graphs, I chose to do the one with the technology. For the world of 100, when it came to pick how many people would have cell phones and how many wouldn't, I went off from the current time right now. Now days 9 out of 10 people has a cell phone so therefore I chose that 70% would have cell phones and 30% wouldn't.
For the male literacy, I wanted to chose something that's different from this world. For instance it is common for someone to say that men are lazy or illiterate. That's why I chose more men that could read and write then men that couldn't. I chose that because if there was a world with more men not knowing how to read and write then that world would be at risk because it would have a lot of illiterate people.
For the poverty part I chose that more people would live on than 2 dollar a day then people that would live on less than 2 dollar a day. I hate seeing people who struggles everyday just to get what they want that's why I chose more people would live on more than 2 dollar a day because they would have jobs and it would be easier for them to buy their personal needs. Also there would be some poor people but more rich people then poor so the rich people can help the poor ones and that will increase the love they would have for each other.
Overall, the answer for which I was most accurate was internet usage (where my guess was overestimated by only one person). This is most likely due to my technological experience and understanding of the internet. The answers for which I was least accurate were with literacy and electricity. I underestimated the percentage of households with electricity and similarly did so with education. The best attribution for such a result is that I have seen many activist programs for increasing overall literacy and technology access across the world; this caused me to over-emphasize these issues. The answer for which I was most shocked was that 75% of the world currently subscribes to a cell phone. This was most interesting as many other values for technology access are much lower. Thus, cell phones have become so widespread that they are a great way of expanding communication and internet access across the world.
I was closest with muslim, other and non-religious, which was not all that surprising because I was fairly certain that a large chunk of the 100 would affiliate with the Muslim religion given all of the Middle-Eastern demographics. I was, however, not expecting to be so far off with Buddhist and Christian. In my mind those are the fairly equal because of the number of countries that might believe them as a main religion.
The most interesting part of this one was the number of people who spoke other languages, I always knew that there were other languages but I was unaware of just how many and how prominent they were in the world. I was surprised by how few spoke Arabic and Chinese (even though Chinese still had a higher number across the board) because I thought those were spoken more widely. If fewer languages were in Other, it definitely wouldn't have been as high. I was also surprised by how many points Malay-Indonesia and how few English got. English because though only a few countries speak it as the main language, I thought many spoke it as a secondary language.
As far as geography goes, I should have thought more ahead of the amount of people in Asia and how few people live in North America given that North America is basically only two countries and Asia has a huge amount with some of the most populated cities in the world. Given that thought process though, I was counting on Latin America because of the highly populated cities. I was most surprised by the amount of people who live in North America because it seems like one of the main places people immigrate to from other countries.
Analysis of Total
I was surprisingly close with certain parts of technology, for instance the amount of people who own computers (22) and are internet users (30) were spot on. With that said, I went into those with a fairly cynical view of the world. Thinking of the amount of people who I've met in various countries all use the internet, though they might not own a computer necessarily. I understood that a lot of the world is impoverished, but didn't realize until the answers came back what it means to be privileged in certain countries versus others. Given these views, I was really surprised at how far away I was from guessing the poverty in the world. The question was how many people live on more than 2 U.S dollars per day (52) and how many live on less (48). Though I'm relieved (and at the same time disturbed) that it's about half and half, I understand that 2 U.S dollars per day is almost nothing the United States. It's almost a forth of minimus wage per hour in this country, which is really not enough to live off of. Most people in our school spend more than 2 dollars on food every day.
Another category I was interested in was Urban and Rural dwellers. My guess was 70 would be urban dwellers and 30 rural; however, I was off again. The real statistics are urban 51 and rural 49. This caught me by surprise. I thought because cities are such a huge market for jobs and international affairs they would be more populated with people who live, work, and raise a family there. That the amount of people living in rural areas would be fewer because of fewer job opportunities and because of generally fewer people to more land, whereas cities tend to be the opposite.
When tallying the amount of people per category, I realized that I just don't know much about the living environments, income, death rates, form of government, etc of those in the surrounding countries.
For the language graph i basically thought this was an interesting graph because my answerswhere close to the correct answers. The whole process to this was kinda hard because for my answers i didn't know how much i should have put for this language, so i just thought about what i see now, and thats mostly english speaking and spanish speaking, that's why i made them both the highest from my choices.
I was surprised when i seen that my answers were close to the correct answers and the class average, so i already knew that my graph made sense.
This graph is Electricity, and basically you would be looking at how many people would and would not have electricity. Im not surprised that my answers were close to the correct answers because in all my graphs i had close answers, but if you see the class average actually had the most of not having electricity and the correct had the lowest, i would actually thing the the correct was going to be more then what they have up there.
In ma Bar Chart #1: Languages, has 10 categories and i've noticed that my answers was kinda close to the Class Average and My answers was way off from the Correct answers.
Bar Chart #2: Age, has 3 categories and i've noticed that My Answers were some what close to the Class Averages and the Correct answers.
Bar Chart #3: Electricity, has 2 categories and i've noticed that My Answers and The Correct Answers were so close to each other and the Class Averages were so low, the rest weren't close to the class average. Not surprised though.
Me llamo Father McEnroe. Yo soy un cura/ el sacerdote en la clase media. Mis valores son que soy el director de una escuela católica para niños. Mis creencias son que todos deberian recibir los derechos y privelegios mismos. Para mi, deberían recibirlos sin embargo la raza, la origen étnico, el género, ó las creencias. En otras palabras, soy un igualitario. Soy un católico, y creo en dios. Soy el cura/ el sacerdote de una iglesia en Chile. Los realidades de mi época son muy feas. El gobierno es muy inestable, y los razones detras del caos en Chile estan causando tensión entre los Chileanos y el gobierno/ el militario. Entonces, esta época esta resultando en una época muy violenta y miedoso.
Como lo veo yo, cuando Pablo Picasso usó solo blanco, negro y gris, estaba omitiendo el detalle del color, porque ya hay muchísimo detalle con las personajes. Si tendría muchísmo detalle con las personas y el color, sería bastante. Estoy de acuerdo con su decisión a no usar muchos colores. Casi todos los seres humanos y animales en este mural no son muy normál, y son muy feos. Hay unas cosas ordinarios, como una bela, una ventana, una espada, una bombilla, y tambien hay animales y personas. Sin embargo, las partes del cuerpo de la mayoria de las personas en este pedazo de arte son muy extraños; no son la forma correcta, no son del tamaño correcto, las uñas de los pies y manos no son de la forma o tamaño correcto, y sus caras son muy muy feas. Hay unas animales que miran como dos o tres animales. Los cuellos de casi todos las personajes son alterados y torcido. Hay mucho detalle, pero falta mucha color.
En Chile durante el año 1973, Pinochet inició un golpe de estádo hacia Allende, con el permiso del E.E.U.U. Antes que eso, todo de Chile estaban protestando con manifestaciónes. El gobierno de Allende luchába para contener los manifestaciónes, y el ganó. Aunque ganó contra los Chileános, usó metodos horibles para ganar. Sería mejor si usó unos tácticos menos horíbles. Torturabanlos, matabanlos, y en generál, uso violencia para ganar. Así lo ve Allende: No importa como nosotros eliminanlos, Lo más importante es que eliminamos los partidarios. Cuando yo pienso del golpe de estado de 1973, la cosa que viene a mente primero es tristesa. La guerra se desgarra todo la comunidad, y destruye la paz. Es una verguenza. Ahora, voy a hablar de que representa o simboliza los objetos en el cuadro de arte Guernica, por Pablo Picasso. Veo muchas personas y animales que son muy tristes y en la anguista. Estos emociónes podrían ser causados por el hecho que hay muchas cosas muy miedosos pasando en Chile en esta epoca. Las personajes que miren muy tristes podrian ser tan tristes porque son muy agitados con la situacion politico en Chile. Pablo Picasso podría haber pintado esta obra para expresar sus opiniones sobre muchas temas diferentes, como el gobierno, los clases economicas (la clase alta, la clase obrera, etc.), y sus creencias religiosas. La obra me hace sentir muy triste.
Pienso que Guernica por Pablo Picasso es una obra fantastica, y que transmite unas mensajes muy interesantes. Escogé a Guernica porque ya sabía un poco sobre la obra antes de escribir esta analisis. Me llama la atención porque hay unas personajes muy extraños. Soy en acuerdo con el pintor.
This bar graph compares my predictions of global poverty to class averages and real statistics. I was surprised to see that more people in the world live on more than 2 dollars a day than less, but after thinking more about it, I believe that this wasn't an accurate way of measuring poverty. Although the portion of the country that lives on less than 2 USD a day is small, I think that even if you live on less than 7 USD, your still fairly poor.
This is the comparison of Urban dwellers VS. Rural Dwellers. Initially I made the inference that more people would live in cities because the were so densely populated, but I didn't go with my instinct because I figured there is more rural land than urban globally. I was fairly off form the real data but I'm not entirely surprised.
Languages spoken was probably the most surprising data for me to analyze. I always thought that Arabic, English, and Spanish were some of the more spoken languages around the world. Although China is a huge country, I didn't think that the percentage of people that spoke chinese would be larger than Arabic or English. My class average showed that many of my peers believed English was the most spoken language.
My Video answers the questions of how exactly individuals bring about change and for what purpose. My video also looks how how systemic change occurs and why it does.
I felt the best way I could show what I think causes change would be using a visual representation. I felt that just writing an explanation would be boring so I wanted it to be something to look at with a little captions to read.
When change happens I believe it is caused by actions that a group of people or person do not agree with. The group/person react with actions that may or may not change it.
Does the current president agree with Teddy Roosevelt and what he thought about monopolies?
When looking through the data that the class came up with, the actual averages and my own, I was pretty shocked. When doing this survey, I tried to keep in mind that not all countries are like America but also not all are the complete opposite either. When it came to the question "Those who do not have access to clean drinking water." and "Those who have access to drinking water." it took me awhile to come up with percentages. At first, I wanted to give a high percentage to those who do have access to clean water, but then I remembered that come countries/places do not, so I lowered my percentage.
After comparing my percentages to the classes, I thought "okay, well we're pretty much on the same page." Once i saw how low the percentage was for those who do not have access to drinking water, I was shocked. I expected it to be higher, but then I was glad because the percentage I had was high. Not only were my percentages high for this graph, but I placed a high percentage for males who would have a secondary education.
From my understanding, most people complete high school. I didn't have knowledge for those who were in other countries, but I assumed that more people would attend school than not. When I looked at the class average, mine was higher. Once I looked at the actual averages I was confused. The real average is much higher than the class' average and as well as my own. About 65% of males do not attend secondary education, which is shocking. However, once I went on to look at my next graph (poverty) it made sense as to why the numbers come out the way they do .
I said that more people lived on more than $2 a day than those who lived on less than $2 a day. 2 dollars isn't much and yearly, it comes out to about $730. In the United States this is beyond poor.
When looking at the class average, it was split close to the middle as usual. But when looking at the real averages, it was almost split down the middle between the two as well. I didn't expect for that to happen, but when I realized how much poverty there is, it made more sense as to why the secondary education averages came out to how they did .
For my graphs, I wasn't really accurate for any of them but the closest one was for poverty. Most of my knowledge is off of what I experience in my country besides things I've seen in movies or hear about. As mention ed, the graph for secondary education shocked me the most because I just assumed that most people went to high school, but once seeing the poverty it made sense. Not knowing about other places and countries threw me off and I was just going by what I experience myself and things I've heard.
Yo soy el papa de Gonzalo. Estoy de la clase alta, pero no soy completamente un momio. No estoy izquierdista también, soy como en la mitad. Por lo tanto, no quiero luchar para los comunistas ni los capitalistas. Yo cree en los oportunidades iguales para los pobres y los ricos, pero no quiero vivir en un país socialista. Pienso que el socialismo, y Allende esta bueno para la mayoría de Chile, pero no para mi, y por eso quiero mover a un otro país, como Italia. Estoy de acuerdo con el cura, Father McEnroe, y su decisión de poner los personas del clase obrera en nuestra escuela por gratis.
El pintura es “El Portador de los Flores” por Diego Rivera. Los colores son my brillantes, pero al mismo tiempo son oscuros. Los flores, y la ropa de el hombre esta muy brillante, pero la ropa de la mujer es muy oscuro. El tono de el pintura es muy oscuro y triste, aunque están colores brillantes, y flores. Los flores parecen ser malo, y feo, en vez de bien y bonito, si no porque no miran bueno, pero porque son llevado por esto hombre que parece que sufra mucho. El dibujo representa un hombre que lleva muchos flores, y mira que es demasiado pesado para el, y necesita la ayuda otra mujer. Los dos miran como indígenas, y llevan ropa muy simple, pero bonita. Están en un lugar muy simple, y genérico, en vez de algo famoso, y por eso la
atención esta totalmente en los personas y objetos en la dibujo, en vez de el fondo.
En 1973, estaba viviendo en Chile, mi patria, con mi familia, y criada. Soy rico, pero nuestro presidente era socialista, que era malo para mi y las personas del clase alta. Era mucho tensión entre los comunistas que soportaban a Allende, y los capitalistas, que no estaban de acuerdo con Allende. Recuerde el día cuando el general Pinochet lanzo un golpe de estado contra Allende, porque quiere derrocar el gobierno de Allende, y poner su propio. Ellos dijeron que Allende se suicidio. Para mi, el hombre llevando los flores representa la clase obrera, y la mujer ayudando al hombre representa el socialismo y la gobierno de Allende. No creo que el socialismo es malo, solo creo que el socialismo es malo para mi, pero bueno para las personas pobres. El obra traje la mensaje de que los personas pobres necesitan ayuda, porque sin ayuda van a caer debajo del gran pesado del trabajo que necesitan hacer. También traje la mensaje que los personas de la clase obrera hace su trabajo para las personas del clase alta, porque los flores son un lujuria para las personas ricos. Creo que Diego Rivera pinto eso pintura porque quería demostrar el trabajo duro que los personas pobres hace para las personas ricas, y que las personas pobres son un grupo muy apoyazo de otros, y que ayuda a otros personas de pocos recursos. Creo que los flores son algo que el va a vender a mi, o alguien de mi familia. Me haga que siente muy afortunado para ser del clase alta, y me aprecia el trabajo de las personas del clase obrera.
A mi me gusta este obre mucho. Escogí este obra porque tenia un mensaje muy grande e importante. El mensaje es que los personas pobres hagan mucho trabajo para los personas ricos. Estoy de acuerdo con esto mensaje, porque sin personas pobres, yo no será rico.