Why can’t topics like these be not trending at all?Whatever he says is true and topic we would be discussing about this in less than 30 years.Of course we all know that what the rich makes all the decisions and common people were blamed for everything!
0:07 🌍 The speaker will discuss the biggest disappointment in their professional life related to impact finance. 1:18 🌱 Despite trillions invested in impact finance, we are further away from meeting sustainable development goals for 2030. 2:00 🔄 Impact investing in renewable energy has not made the increase in energy consumption climate neutral. 3:01 🌍 Climate change will make parts of Europe non-inhabitable by 2040, leading to climate refugees. 4:06 🤥 The lie that there's no trade-off between economic wealth and saving the planet hinders progress. 5:15 💰 Financial impact investors prioritize returns over societal impact, complaining about lack of opportunities. 6:08 🌍 Society is hesitant to pay for societal impact and prefers to shift responsibility to governments and institutions. 7:11 ⭕ Breaking the cycle requires individuals to demand more from products, consumption, and asset managers. 8:19 🌐 The impact investment community should engineer financial instruments for true sustainability, not just wait for opportunities. 9:55 🔄 The choice is ours: either actively change perspectives for a regenerative society or passively wait for inevitable consequences.
Looking for a discussion. I realize that investing in renewable energy isn't balancing out the world's increasing energy consumption but wouldn't this incentivize us to make change in other ways ON TOP of impact investing? I'm just thinking, throwing impact investment strategies out of the window doesn't sound effective. There is no single solution to the biggest issues we face worldwide such as climate change. Issues of this magnitude require solutions on many levels. Edit: How do we "actively change perspectives for a regenerative society"?
Exactly what I thought when he mentioned this. We cannot solve for the larger issues today but if we start making a dent in them and continuously increase it every year, the impact can be mitigated by 2040
It's clear now there simply no in system solution. we must go beyond market and commerce, get resource and technology directly to the people, trade free “We can not solve our problems with the same level of thinking that created them.” -Albert Einstein
Why is it always us to play the biggest role as individual consumers? Why not the real-big ones while they recklessly does everything without considering the impact? Why not the big-ones investments are not regulated?
You want to sit around and wait for regulations to go into play? Because even if they do, companies usually don't have to abide by the regulations for years after they are set in place. Phasing out harmful substances and practices should be done immediately, not in 5 years
No I just want to point out that the quaintiy as mathmatical value is not applicable in this formula where the consumers quantity acceepted big. The big quantitiy which is not by individuals but by wealth is the companies. The reason to put rules into work to take 5 years as your result is bureaucracy which is also created by the BIG-ONEs. It is not like in the cartoons that people can change the world, not anymore for so long...
@@nedir2620 and the only thing companies care about is growth and profits. There aren't profits if people don't buy things. There are billions of people that can make an impact by seriously just buying a little bit less. If something isn't selling, you stop investing money into making it.
I believe I should only invest on things that only satisfy me in some way, especially my wants. I just need to be careful about not to ignore my own needs. Investing for to be someone others need will just get in the way of doing what I want. Am I correct in any I say?
@otdamilolaoyewusi8380 those are still abstract ideas without concrete steps for implementation. People will continue buying what they've always bought unless they have explicit steps to direct their dollar to companies who can affect positive change on the environment. I.e., "here's a link to a list online of consumer goods that are locally sourced and carbon neutral." Could people google that themselves? Yes. Often, do they? No.
That's a great idea. You can take that step and do it. You can partner with other people as well. You have just expanded on his ideas and practised collective responsibility, which leads to collective progress. 👏🏾
@@otdamilolaoyewusi8380 hahahaha lead to collective progress, it's seem a joke! The biggest problems is from biggests companies and market's impositions. The engineer of society works through TV, outdoors and algorithms. If you think one people or fews groups will "lead" the change world without overthrow the responsible institutions for it, you really need to study a lot about you are saying.
That was the incredible skill in the art of talking but saying nothing. He could've said one sentence and his point would've been made. By the way, absolutely no stats to back up his idea. It was a pure ramble.
The "funny" thing, concerning desertification and migrants fleeing because of droughts and worsening weather: heard that 20+ years before. Also from transferring responsibility from the dovernment to the private sector - aka: the story of the carbon footprint, how to duck any action from the government towards the private sector. Well, 20 years later we know how well that worked...
Invest in smaller green companies and action plans to preserve our environment and natures health instead of money hungry big corps that just want to sell
Consumers are unfortunately so lazy they would rather blame companies for their decisions instead of themselves. Hello BOTH are to blame. Maybe they'll finally stop that and focus on their individual choices when the world is on fire. Enjoy your Stanley cups while you can.... Eventually there won't be any water to use them for lol. Funnily enough, the poor are the most environmentally conscious bc they literally can't afford to buy junk. We basically need a decade long depression
I think his point investing is marketing nowadays R only for profits yet society that’s sustainable is a paradigm shift, a total revolution of capitalist centrists.
Climate change become deteriorated year by year , limited of fund may slow down the road to support the world replacing fossil fuel with renewable energy. Science and innovative technology don't move fast enough and the slow action of world to mitigate climate change is in much regret.
The problem is consumption. All academics across the world need to stop promoting the concept of GDP growth as a North Star, given how it impacts allocation of capital by governments and individuals. Let’s make young people understand the real cost of perpetual growth. Especially in the developed world. The truth is we are too many people across the world and individuals can no longer impact the system. Stop telling people to consume less energy, when actually industries and rich industrialists are consuming the most energy. They are growing richer, they are not paying taxes, income growth is not happening, and meanwhile because goods are priced artificially low because of these tax incentives (but not to a level to keep up with stagnant income levels) the rich are consuming much more than they really need to. The alternative is - you slow down growth, you let people revolt for higher wages, you let governments fall apart, you let the human population decline and then maybe we reach sustainability. Prime example is EU. I see how they have tried to counter climate change with better policies, with recycling efforts. But their per capita energy consumption is still the highest in the world and keeps increasing. Rather their governments should tell them - go live in a better climate so that you don’t need so much heating in the winter. This is how human civilisation evolved. This was a major driver for colonisation. Europe had no resources and their climate / geography was not conducive to population growth. But this time - go there to survive and not to exploit. Add to the economies with knowledge and effort and not merely through consumption. They will have to do this anyway in a few generations. Ideal would be if we could break up all nations into smaller regions that could be truly self governed. But people in power (government and corporations) would of course never want that. It limits their power and allows a true free market. With our knowledge today - micro markets could flourish or decline basis the collective will. But no one would be able to claim information asymmetry and gain an advantage. I understand how impractical that sounds. But the smaller democracies are the only ones that have flourished politically, socially and economically. The logistics are unimaginable. But this is what the world needs. Free trade works - if there is no other factor determining it. A nuclear power can’t have free trade with a non nuclear state. US and Canada who had the backing of European states as they evolved can’t claim to have equitable trade relations with Mexico, where there is still a lot of the indigenous influence. Stop discussing current politics and economics devoid of history. If you do want to be all about the present - rid yourselves of the benefits that come with being a collective but apparently federal superpower.
Why can’t topics like these be not trending at all?Whatever he says is true and topic we would be discussing about this in less than 30 years.Of course we all know that what the rich makes all the decisions and common people were blamed for everything!
Because World Works on fu** with me and get some money 💰🙌
Ipp'
Ipp'
Because we live under capitalism and this goes against its vaues and narratives
0:07 🌍 The speaker will discuss the biggest disappointment in their professional life related to impact finance.
1:18 🌱 Despite trillions invested in impact finance, we are further away from meeting sustainable development goals for 2030.
2:00 🔄 Impact investing in renewable energy has not made the increase in energy consumption climate neutral.
3:01 🌍 Climate change will make parts of Europe non-inhabitable by 2040, leading to climate refugees.
4:06 🤥 The lie that there's no trade-off between economic wealth and saving the planet hinders progress.
5:15 💰 Financial impact investors prioritize returns over societal impact, complaining about lack of opportunities.
6:08 🌍 Society is hesitant to pay for societal impact and prefers to shift responsibility to governments and institutions.
7:11 ⭕ Breaking the cycle requires individuals to demand more from products, consumption, and asset managers.
8:19 🌐 The impact investment community should engineer financial instruments for true sustainability, not just wait for opportunities.
9:55 🔄 The choice is ours: either actively change perspectives for a regenerative society or passively wait for inevitable consequences.
Very helpful thank you 💚
Thank you for this 😊
Looking for a discussion. I realize that investing in renewable energy isn't balancing out the world's increasing energy consumption but wouldn't this incentivize us to make change in other ways ON TOP of impact investing? I'm just thinking, throwing impact investment strategies out of the window doesn't sound effective. There is no single solution to the biggest issues we face worldwide such as climate change. Issues of this magnitude require solutions on many levels.
Edit: How do we "actively change perspectives for a regenerative society"?
Exactly what I thought when he mentioned this. We cannot solve for the larger issues today but if we start making a dent in them and continuously increase it every year, the impact can be mitigated by 2040
Vey insightful TEDx ! This video should be trending way more than it is !
It's clear now there simply no in system solution. we must go beyond market and commerce, get resource and technology directly to the people, trade free
“We can not solve our problems with the same level of thinking that created them.” -Albert Einstein
He may seem ambiguous, but if you understand the finance sector even in the slightest you’ll be able to read between the lines.
What is he actually saying? In between the lines
Why is it always us to play the biggest role as individual consumers? Why not the real-big ones while they recklessly does everything without considering the impact? Why not the big-ones investments are not regulated?
You want to sit around and wait for regulations to go into play? Because even if they do, companies usually don't have to abide by the regulations for years after they are set in place. Phasing out harmful substances and practices should be done immediately, not in 5 years
No I just want to point out that the quaintiy as mathmatical value is not applicable in this formula where the consumers quantity acceepted big. The big quantitiy which is not by individuals but by wealth is the companies. The reason to put rules into work to take 5 years as your result is bureaucracy which is also created by the BIG-ONEs. It is not like in the cartoons that people can change the world, not anymore for so long...
@@nedir2620 and the only thing companies care about is growth and profits. There aren't profits if people don't buy things. There are billions of people that can make an impact by seriously just buying a little bit less. If something isn't selling, you stop investing money into making it.
I believe I should only invest on things that only satisfy me in some way, especially my wants. I just need to be careful about not to ignore my own needs. Investing for to be someone others need will just get in the way of doing what I want. Am I correct in any I say?
Thank you!To do the best for to all❤😍🌍
Greediness at its peak.. people are using people for self growth.
He has a good point but offered 0 ways to implement individuals taking charge on this issue rather than large institutions.
He says, buy better. Demand for products and services that are people and planet friendly.
@otdamilolaoyewusi8380 those are still abstract ideas without concrete steps for implementation. People will continue buying what they've always bought unless they have explicit steps to direct their dollar to companies who can affect positive change on the environment. I.e., "here's a link to a list online of consumer goods that are locally sourced and carbon neutral." Could people google that themselves? Yes. Often, do they? No.
That's a great idea. You can take that step and do it. You can partner with other people as well. You have just expanded on his ideas and practised collective responsibility, which leads to collective progress. 👏🏾
@@otdamilolaoyewusi8380 hahahaha lead to collective progress, it's seem a joke! The biggest problems is from biggests companies and market's impositions. The engineer of society works through TV, outdoors and algorithms. If you think one people or fews groups will "lead" the change world without overthrow the responsible institutions for it, you really need to study a lot about you are saying.
That was the incredible skill in the art of talking but saying nothing. He could've said one sentence and his point would've been made. By the way, absolutely no stats to back up his idea. It was a pure ramble.
Spoken like a true bootlicker. The stock market won’t save you from a climate disaster buddy.
The "funny" thing, concerning desertification and migrants fleeing because of droughts and worsening weather: heard that 20+ years before. Also from transferring responsibility from the dovernment to the private sector - aka: the story of the carbon footprint, how to duck any action from the government towards the private sector. Well, 20 years later we know how well that worked...
Motivational
Can someone explain to me what he’s saying as if I’m a 15 year old that has a trust fund and wants to save the world in 10 years?
Invest in smaller green companies and action plans to preserve our environment and natures health instead of money hungry big corps that just want to sell
sorry to say but we're doomed
That’s CRAZY that THIS is the first TEDx talk of Pluto in Aquarius for the next 15 years.
Good point. I plan to bookmark this talk and listen to it on repeat.
Consumers are unfortunately so lazy they would rather blame companies for their decisions instead of themselves. Hello BOTH are to blame. Maybe they'll finally stop that and focus on their individual choices when the world is on fire. Enjoy your Stanley cups while you can.... Eventually there won't be any water to use them for lol.
Funnily enough, the poor are the most environmentally conscious bc they literally can't afford to buy junk. We basically need a decade long depression
So what are you going to do to save z the world?
I think his point investing is marketing nowadays R only for profits yet society that’s sustainable is a paradigm shift, a total revolution of capitalist centrists.
🎉🎉🎉🎉
This channel is good gvie me Mr Muhammad.
Climate change become deteriorated year by year , limited of fund may slow down the road to support the world replacing fossil fuel with renewable energy. Science and innovative technology don't move fast enough and the slow action of world to mitigate climate change is in much regret.
👍🏼👍🏼✅👏🏻👏🏻
how ya doing
You simply cannot some people have to be poor so others can be rich
Then , you my friend, are an enemy of the public for so your mind is too corrupt.
30k views, 800 likes says it all. Very dull.
doom and gloom and no real answers. Yawn. You gotta do better
he is maybe right but he offers not a single Solution.
He does offer a solution, but he recognises that we proba ly wont like it!
O to to
The problem is consumption. All academics across the world need to stop promoting the concept of GDP growth as a North Star, given how it impacts allocation of capital by governments and individuals. Let’s make young people understand the real cost of perpetual growth. Especially in the developed world. The truth is we are too many people across the world and individuals can no longer impact the system. Stop telling people to consume less energy, when actually industries and rich industrialists are consuming the most energy. They are growing richer, they are not paying taxes, income growth is not happening, and meanwhile because goods are priced artificially low because of these tax incentives (but not to a level to keep up with stagnant income levels) the rich are consuming much more than they really need to. The alternative is - you slow down growth, you let people revolt for higher wages, you let governments fall apart, you let the human population decline and then maybe we reach sustainability. Prime example is EU. I see how they have tried to counter climate change with better policies, with recycling efforts. But their per capita energy consumption is still the highest in the world and keeps increasing. Rather their governments should tell them - go live in a better climate so that you don’t need so much heating in the winter. This is how human civilisation evolved. This was a major driver for colonisation. Europe had no resources and their climate / geography was not conducive to population growth. But this time - go there to survive and not to exploit. Add to the economies with knowledge and effort and not merely through consumption. They will have to do this anyway in a few generations. Ideal would be if we could break up all nations into smaller regions that could be truly self governed. But people in power (government and corporations) would of course never want that. It limits their power and allows a true free market. With our knowledge today - micro markets could flourish or decline basis the collective will. But no one would be able to claim information asymmetry and gain an advantage. I understand how impractical that sounds. But the smaller democracies are the only ones that have flourished politically, socially and economically. The logistics are unimaginable. But this is what the world needs. Free trade works - if there is no other factor determining it. A nuclear power can’t have free trade with a non nuclear state. US and Canada who had the backing of European states as they evolved can’t claim to have equitable trade relations with Mexico, where there is still a lot of the indigenous influence. Stop discussing current politics and economics devoid of history. If you do want to be all about the present - rid yourselves of the benefits that come with being a collective but apparently federal superpower.