Hello! I am a social investment supporter. My journey started last year when I read Hans Rosling's book: Factfulness: Ten Reasons We're Wrong About the World -- and Why Things Are Better Than You Think. According to Hans, the best investment opportunities are in the emerging markets of Asia and Africa. He described how we should look at statistics to make smart business decisions. I especially liked how he was optimistic about the future of the world and how countries are working hard to get out of poverty. It's not an investing book per se but it gives a good insight on where you might want to focus your attention if you want to make a difference in this world. It also solidified my rule to invest in the Philippines only and not be distracted by any foreign investment product (as I am currently based abroad).
Here's a TEDtalk as an intro to Hans Rosling: https://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_reveals_new_insights_on_poverty/
I further asked myself how could his ideas be particularly applicable in the Philippines, where a lot of my countrymen are still living in poverty? Fortunately, I found Vince Rapisura on Facebook and he constantly discusses being a "Social Investor." Before meeting him, I have never heard anything about Social or Impact investing. I thought investing was just to make my money work for me. But through him, I learned that investing can create more value than just mere profit. We can select investments that have a conscious goal of making a positive impact on society. Vince's company, SEDPI, is focused on such ventures and his presentations are on his website: https://vincerapisura.com/impact-investing-handouts/
I am still reading more books about the topic and my search got me to Banker To The Poor: Micro-Lending and the Battle Against World Poverty. It was written by Muhammad Yunus and he earned a Nobel Peace Prize for his work in Bangladesh. I think his concepts are pretty similar to what Vince is doing with his company.
Let me also share this episode about Tagum Cooperative (which Vince has been raving about recently) and I must say their work and mission are inspiring: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQbtbORwUfE
Sorry, I am just blabbing about my recent reading/watching list but to answer your question, yes, socially responsible investments have been on my mind lately and I got excited when I saw your question. I admit that I still have an index fund and I know that some companies there don't have the best reputations, so I am slowly transitioning and studying more materials in order to invest in enterprises that I can understand and have the same principles as I do. It is a hard task but hopefully, I would get there. If you ever have a chance to attend a seminar by Vince, I'd say go for it.
I try to shut off the hysterics as much as possible. NEVER watch tv news and especially none of the dedicated news channels.
Also read and think about things like this book.
relevant to the implied context.
Completely agree haha here's the book I've read of his:
Factfulness: Ten Reasons We're Wrong About the World--and Why Things Are Better Than You Think https://www.amazon.com/dp/1250107814/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_GPmeDbYNGYJ9V
If you are on kindle then get in a bunch of samples because non-fiction is weird sometimes. In no particular order:
The Uninhabitable Earth
Getting Things Done
The War of Art
Astrophysics for People in a Hurry
If you find this data (and the growth and prosperity it represents) interesting, you should check out Factfulness by Hans Rosling. It's an easy but great read about your probably out-of-date perceptions of the world, and how you can be better about them.
People have always been treated like shit, though. As I understand it, what's changed is our exposure. With 24/7 media/internet, we're just seeing things we wouldn't have seen before. They were still happening before. We just didn't see them. It's also much easier to focus on specific types of discourse and information and that can make it seem like such information is increasing in amount. It's not. We're just exposing ourselves to more of it. If I started following r/Malta, it'd be tempting in a couple months to slide into the thinking that shit is "suddenly" heading south there. All the bad stories. All the abuses. In reality, it was always there because people are dicks regardless. Collectively, from what I understand, though, things are overall getting better in a lot of ways. I don't know how much bias is in it, but someone recommended the book Factfulness the other day. Haven't ordered it yet, but I'm going to because personally I'd like a little positivity in my geopolitical forecasts for once.
Quality on life is, on average, increasing all over the world.
Some things are getting worse, and for certain people life is shit, but on average humanity is better off than ever.
I really recommend book called Factfullness.
Extreme poverty is actually the lowest than it has ever been, and it's getting better everyday.
We are not perfect yet, and there's still a lot to be done, but I do have a lot of hope for the future.
This book will possibly change how you view the world:
If you look at the image, above "China" you see a vague text: "data doubts", so they know this data has issues. All data is from the UN btw. You can download this app and play around. And if you're interested, but book Factfulness is a great read, about the state of the world and mostly how the western view is often very wrong about it.
Factfulness: Ten Reasons We're Wrong About the World--and Why Things Are Better Than You Think
Hans Rosling provides an exhaustive rebuttal to that question in Factfulness:
Here's a speech he gives on the topic:
To make it as short as possible: if you're concerned about family sizes, the best path forward is, counterintuitively, improving health and reducing infant mortality, not the opposite. Parents seem to compensate for high infant mortality and high poverty with larger families, but naturally adjust family sizes downward as conditions improve. That trend seems to hold in countries all around the world, dozens of examples so far without counterexamples. (I.e., Malthus was wrong, according to all the data we have.)
But his book is still really worth reading, it bolsters his argument with much more data.
Spoiler: The world is actually getting a lot better really fast.
If you're looking for a more global outlook on the longer term future, then this book is a great place. You can read it for free, per Bill Gates' donation to graduated of the class of 2018, here: https://www.amazon.com/Factfulness-Reasons-World-Things-Bett...
Here's a quick quiz for you to test if your knowledge of the world is better than a chimp's: http://forms.gapminder.org/s3/test-2018
You should read the book Factfullness.
You are overly pessimistic and you make an assumption that “Mother Nature is all about balance”. Where is there proof of this? There is no such thing as Mother Nature.
> also many people don't understand or exaggerate that developed and undeveloped part, years ago i was with a friend of mine and we were talking to some girl from germany for fun, and she asked us "do you in syria have cars and phones like us?"
That just means 'developed' and 'underdeveloped' are poor labels, or that 'underdeveloped' contains a much wider group than the other one. Factfulness separated people in 4 income groups, perhaps this is better with you?:
> Level 1: People live on less than $2 a day. Rosling estimates that one billion people are living at or below this threshold. They get around on their own two barefoot feet, cook over an open flame like a cookfire, fetch water in a bucket, and sleep on the ground.
This is what most people understand if they hear the word underdeveloped/developing. Basically, tribes and very conservative lifestyles.
> Level 2: This is the income group where the majority of the world's people live. They get by on between $2 and $8 a day and might have some possessions like a bicycle, a mattress, or a gas canister for cooking at home.
This is the stereotypical view of Eastern Europe, India, Southeast Asia, and Latin America in movies, and while this might be true in those regions for rural areas, most of the people living there are level 3 and 4.
> Level 3: This is the second most populous category on Rosling's list, after level 2. People in level 3 live on anywhere from $8 a day to $32. They have running water, might own a motorbike or car, and their meals are a rich and colorful mix of foods from day to day. They also probably have electricity and a fridge, which makes things like studying and eating enough varied nutrients easier.
What you were talking about are countries in Level 3.
> Level 4: Like level 1, roughly one billion of the world's people live on this level. They make $32 a day or more and have things like running water (both hot and cold) at home, a vehicle in the driveway, and plenty of nutrients on their plate. They've also likely had the chance to finish twelve years of school, or more.
Basically, the people who want to help.
You're not wrong. The timeframes vary based on what societal dimension you're discussing at a given point, but many aspects of global society are significantly better today than in the recent and distant past. Education levels, equality, access to food, mortality rates, life expectancies, literacy, and so on.
I'd you're not familiar with it, I'd recommend the book Factfulness . Pretty good book on this topic of perspective vs reality.
(Edit - fixed link)
>Besides, living centuries only makes sense if chances are reasonably big quality of life will get better. Looking at the planet I think the reverse is plausible.
Why? Almost everything for humanity is improving. Check out this website , that covers this topic.
It’s not your typical investor book but I’d recommend Factfulness by Hans Rosling. When becoming a good investor the first step is to have a fact based world view so you can make rational investment decisions based on the data & not the hype or emotion. Bill Gates says it’s his top read.