And there is a fuller picture (more countries and a look at past data) available in this OECD paper.

It’s the second graph in the paper.

https://www.oecd.org/els/soc/SF_2_3_Age_mothers_childbirth.pdf

In Australia the consumer laws don’t allow banks to charge fees that don’t reflect costs. Online transactions are cheaper than checks to process so the fees are cheaper. Full stop.

> you basically have to

I’m not talking about “you”. I’m talking about the whole country not moving on. You (the country) are very conservative in many ways.

This is nuts. Why are so many Americans using checks? Even young Americans! In Australia we are about to kill them off because only about 0.1% of transactions are done using checks. In New Zealand they have got rid of them.

Hilarious that you were so busy attacking me that you didn’t notice I’d actually made an error 😂

Oops, thanks I get it now. It’s not very obvious though as can be seen from other comments.

It’s what we a here for isn’t it? We are all striving for beautiful data, well presented and clearly described. My apologies if that’s distressing for you.

Doesn’t say that though.

My point is that the graph is concocted to make Latin American production appear more significant than it is. It’s not a careful analysis, it’s just spin.

You got production mixed up with consumption. Australia actually is the 4th largest consumer of cheese per capita in the world. We are behind EU (27 countries counted as 1), US and Canada. https://www.statista.com/statistics/527195/consumption-of-cheese-per-capita-worldwide-country/

Domestic production of cheese is limited by the amount of dairy farming land available.

What about the rest of the world? Why indicate “8 European countries off the chart” as if they are the only ones? For example, Australian production is about 48 thousand tonnes p.a.

Quality mates?

You are reading it wrong. It literally has the whole world there.

So there was data with no label on the portal? Find that hard to believe when I followed the link.

If you are only giving data for selected countries you say “for selected countries” and don’t show unlabelled data.

Where does the data come from? Where is Beaverly Hills City? Is it fictitious? Is this just a pile of crap?

It’s not beautiful data if you use codes in place of normal communication. There isn’t even a key.

What’s interesting is the comparisons, for the countries I can recognise anyway.

No point? All these graphs presented together for no reason? Not to allow comparisons? Just a random assemblage of unrelated data?

What has “American” got to do with understanding “fratnp” or “grebntw”? What country are you from and what language or codified standard is this? Does the whole world understand it and not this poor ignorant Australian?

This is terrible. The worst things are.

1. The scales are all different. Why not make it per capita?
2. Half the country names are indecipherable. Why not use normal English descriptions? Wtf is “fratnp” or “isr”?

But I’m Westerosi!

No, just actually saying, for OP’s benefit, that it’s why the comment says “bastard”

You left out an important detail — he was a bastard.

I’m getting the idea that English is not your first language. So your title should say, “Top 20 countries with the highest number of primary school teachers per thousand inhabitants”.

Yes, there doesn’t seem to be a relationship between population and your measure. If you are actually interested in the teacher:student ratio in a classroom this doesn’t even get you close.

Notice that the UESCO data is focussed on developing nations. Many advanced nations are missing from the data. This makes the “top 20” idea flawed because it’s not top 20 in the world just top 20 in the patchy data.

What do you mean “more”? More than what? More than the next country on the scale?

And how does the population relate? What is the point of presenting these two things on the same graph when “teachers per thousand inhabitants” is already taking into account population?

Koalas are the same. Well, not the same, but they also don’t usually need to drink water and get water from the leaves they eat. The word “koala” comes from a word in the Australian Aboriginal Dharug language gula, meaning no water.

Bushfire and extreme weather does sometimes drive them to seek water.

The source reports total calories supplied to the community not total calories consumed by an individual.

So let’s hope Czechia pours a lot of its beer down the drain rather than drinking it all.

Yes… “predictions” that anything will happen “soon” are all yet to be realized 🤷🏼‍♂️

Do you realize how relatively well off the Indian people in the picture are compared with a similar crowd 20 years ago? Look at them.