Switch Theme:

The world in 2067?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in in
[MOD]
Otiose in a Niche






Hyderabad, India

So around 1964 Isaac Asmiov wrote an essay predicting the world of 2014 (50 years into his future). It was a gutsy thing to do since he was/in one of the most celebrated science fiction and general science writers of all time and 50 years is far enough into the future for him to be wildly wrong and close enough for his fans to see him proven wrong

http://www.nytimes.com/books/97/03/23/lifetimes/asi-v-fair.html

Well I have no great reputation as a futurist to put at risk so I thought I'd throw the question to the floor.

What will the world be like in 2067?

My initial thoughts

1-There's 200 countries in the world today (give or take, depending on who you ask), I predict 400 in the next 50 years and that the biggest countries will be the ones most likely to split (I can see the USA splitting 3 or more ways). A risky prediction since two independence bids were shut down in the last week but I stand by it. Basically keeping a country together requires being strong all the time, pulling one apart requires the government being weak only once.

2-Of course being a country will be a lot less relevant. Transnational organizations like the EU, NAFTA and the UN will continue to tie down countries with a thousand little threads. Even those that opt out (Brexit) won't gain much since they still have to play by EU rules to trade with their neighbors.

3-The closest thing to destiny we have is demographics. The most accurate stuff in Asimov's essay were the population predictions. So I expect the demographic collapse of the 'rich world' (Western Europe, Japan, South Korea) to continue and immigration to continue to rise. More urbanization, fewer farmers.

4-War among states will be rare, while war within states or with non-state actors (ISIS) will be more common. Wars will become really polarized with casualty-adverse rich groups using more drones against insurgents who have little tech. Terrorism will become (even more) common as a way to balance the scales.

So that's my start, what else we got?

 
   
Made in nl
Pragmatic Primus Commanding Cult Forces






With the way things are going right now in the world, I am pretty sure that by 2067, WW3 will have already been fought.
How the world will look like after that I don't know, but I suspect that the major powers of today (US, EU, Russia, China) will be severely weakened. After that, I could very likely see an increased role for international organisations. People would want to prevent such a horrific war from occurring again, which may provide the impetus for giving the UN a lot more actual power and authority.
Of course, this could just lead to increased tension between nationalist and internationalist ideologies.
I can also foresee a conflict between the rich Western world and the poor part of the world, as the demographic decline of the West continues and immigration increases. The outcome of this conflict, if it happens, seems quite predictable to me though, considering that wealth and power is all on one side. Even with a declining population, Western elites will be able to maintain their grip on world power. Advanced technology will make up for their small population size.
And regarding technology, I could very well see increased automation leading to a fundamentally different system of economy. Also, people will live probably live longer and we will have all kinds of cool gadgets. And flying cars.

Error 404: Interesting signature not found

 
   
Made in gb
Wolf Guard Bodyguard in Terminator Armor




I think that unless something is done very quickly, environmental degradation (global warming, pollution & destruction of biospheres) and its cause, overpopulation, will cause most third world (food) infrastructure to collapse, leading to famine and war over the few resources left there.
This, in turn, will lead to mass migrations into the perceived safe and rich western world.

Whether or not the mass migration is allowed in or halted will determine whether the West suffers a similar fate or manages to escape the worst of the collapse.

With the current move towards ever greater polarisation in politics, however, I fear that governments will remain deadlocked, and as the world collapses around us we'll continue to squabble about minor issues as most of the world's population dies, before settling on a (lower) average population.
Hopefully, afterwards Western style birth control (1-2 children per family, enough to keep the population stable, not enough for the explosive population growth we have now) will become the global standard, rather than the exception.

This may need a bit more than 50 years though.
   
Made in us
[DCM]
-






-

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
So around 1964 Isaac Asmiov wrote an essay predicting the world of 2014 (50 years into his future). It was a gutsy thing to do since he was/in one of the most celebrated science fiction and general science writers of all time and 50 years is far enough into the future for him to be wildly wrong and close enough for his fans to see him proven wrong

http://www.nytimes.com/books/97/03/23/lifetimes/asi-v-fair.html

Well I have no great reputation as a futurist to put at risk so I thought I'd throw the question to the floor.

What will the world be like in 2067?

My initial thoughts

1-There's 200 countries in the world today (give or take, depending on who you ask), I predict 400 in the next 50 years and that the biggest countries will be the ones most likely to split (I can see the USA splitting 3 or more ways). A risky prediction since two independence bids were shut down in the last week but I stand by it. Basically keeping a country together requires being strong all the time, pulling one apart requires the government being weak only once.


You think that in 50 years the USA will be 3 separate countries?

I really don't see that happening in the next 50 years...

But other than that, you're predictions look pretty good - and you haven't even written a single SF Novel, as far as we know!

   
Made in in
[MOD]
Otiose in a Niche






Hyderabad, India

Bran Dawri wrote:
I think that unless something is done very quickly, environmental degradation (global warming, pollution & destruction of biospheres) and its cause, overpopulation, will cause most third world (food) infrastructure to collapse, leading to famine and war over the few resources left there.
This, in turn, will lead to mass migrations into the perceived safe and rich western world.



Not to disagree but let me throw out something scary. Having spent a lot of time in the developing world one thing I notice is most people's food comes from somewhere pretty close. I remember having dinner with a newspaper editor in Guyana and him showing me his chicken coops.

While in the developed world our food is the end product of a very complex system of transportation and processing.

A sudden shock would do a lot more to disrupt that system than the rather robust localized systems i've seen.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Alpharius wrote:


You think that in 50 years the USA will be 3 separate countries?

I really don't see that happening in the next 50 years...

But other than that, you're predictions look pretty good - and you haven't even written a single SF Novel, as far as we know!


It ain't no fun if you don't say something daring!

By 2067, we could be looking at Star Wars Episode XXXII The Force Goes To Bed!

As for the US breaking up, I can see Hawaii and Puerto Rico leaving easy. Texas or California maybe. And a big old crack up for the lower 48? I wouldn't consider it impossible. I remember a story by Dr Asimov predicated the Cold War continuing another 200 years. Yugoslavia and then the Soviet Union caught a lot of folks off guard, is changing the American map really impossible?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/10/31 16:33:12


 
   
Made in gb
Highlord with a Blackstone Fortress






Adrift within the vortex of my imagination.

We will be lucky to have a functional global society that far into the 21st century.

We will have very bloody resource wars, massive ethnic unrest, mas migration and heavy destabilisation.
As western nations buckle under others will become Islamified, Balkanised, turn far right or all three.

At some point during all this the global economy will collapse.

Nuclear war at some point is not inconceivable, WMD based terror attacks are increasingly likely to the pojnt that it is a matter of not if but where.

Our politicians will still want to back the easy path, short term politics will triumph as long as possible, debt will spiral, warnings ignored and futures squandered. Voters will similarly reject harsh realities in favour of promises of 'jam today'. The wrong people will end up with the blame.

n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.

It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. 
   
Made in us
[DCM]
-






-

 Orlanth wrote:
We will be lucky to have a functional global society that far into the 21st century.

We will have very bloody resource wars, massive ethnic unrest, mas migration and heavy destabilisation.
As western nations buckle under others will become Islamified, Balkanised, turn far right or all three.

At some point during all this the global economy will collapse.

Nuclear war at some point is not inconceivable, WMD based terror attacks are increasingly likely to the pojnt that it is a matter of not if but where.

Our politicians will still want to back the easy path, short term politics will triumph as long as possible, debt will spiral, warnings ignored and futures squandered. Voters will similarly reject harsh realities in favour of promises of 'jam today'. The wrong people will end up with the blame.


Good thing most of us will be dead by then?

Sheesh...

   
Made in gb
Master Engineer with a Brace of Pistols






I think the next fifty years will be incredibly tough but I live in hope that we’ll be ok. It’s always darkest before the dawn. I’ll be 78 if I make it that far, and I hope I do.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/10/31 17:14:55


 
   
Made in us
Did Fulgrim Just Behead Ferrus?





Fort Worth, TX

 Alpharius wrote:


Good thing most of us will be dead by then?

Sheesh...


I think the sad truth is that is exactly the belief that motivates most politicians, business leaders, and other wealthy/influential people. They're rich enough to not be impacted by the initial problems, and they'll be dead before the gak really hits the fan.

"Through the darkness of future past, the magician longs to see.
One chants out between two worlds: Fire, walk with me."
- Twin Peaks
"You listen to me. While I will admit to a certain cynicism, the fact is that I am a naysayer and hatchetman in the fight against violence. I pride myself in taking a punch and I'll gladly take another because I choose to live my life in the company of Gandhi and King. My concerns are global. I reject absolutely revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method... is love. I love you Sheriff Truman." - Twin Peaks 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut





 Future War Cultist wrote:
I think the next fifty years will be incredibly tough but I live in hope that we’ll be ok. It’s always darkest before the dawn. I’ll be 78 if I make it that far, and I hope I do.


It's actually this sort of thinking that gets us into the mess in the first place.

In the end as a populace we are acting like animals with big brains that have the ability to exploit the world like no other. But like any animal population if it grows too large and resources become too thin then that population dwindles from either famine, pestilence or conflict.

Despite warnings things are not being heeded. Climate change is accelerating and only a third of the carbon reductions have been committed to that need to be made. On the other hand I do think we will become less reliant on imports of energy because many of the places are currently unstable. This does have ramifications. Many middle east countries rely on oil and the money that brings. Switch that off and suddenly there is no money, that will generate civil unrest and given a lot of this land is barren will likely result in increased waves of migration (on top of that caused by climate change with sea level rises and growth of deserts etc) -look at Venezuela for example.

So what I'd predict is this. Climate change will continue unabated - last years unexpected increase in CO2 despite a levelling out of emissions is concerning. It may indicate we have hit a tipping point where feedback mechanisms are coming into play (melting of permafrost and release of methane for example). This will warm the planet, sea levels will slowly rise, weather will become more extreme. Some areas will become less inhabitable (most near the equator) where large numbers of poor people live. That will result in significant global migration. How that is managed is something we will have to learn to deal with (although if Wrexit and the president who shall not be named) is to go by might not be an easy transition for some people.

"Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. " - V

I've just supported the Permanent European Union Citizenship initiative. Please do the same and spread the word!

"It's not a problem if you don't look up." - Dakka's approach to politics 
   
Made in ch
Legendary Dogfighter





RNAS Rockall

People will be burning their ArmyFab kits in protest at 40k 22nd edition after the Pasta Militiamen codex gets buffed so much that the T'A'O'U 2^15 ClimateShock Suit ceases to be relevant.

Codexes will still cost more than most models.

Finecast will be looked back on fondly, now that recreational petroleum products are prohibited.

Some people find the idea that other people can be happy offensive, and will prefer causing harm to self improvement.  
   
Made in us
Battlefield Tourist




MN (Currently in WY)

Wow, maybe we are having political issues in Western cultures due to the culture of Nihilism?

This thread is exhibit A.

From the article:
What will the World's Fair of 2014 be like?


I think Isaac might have been a bit disappointed to find out that there was no World's Fair in 2014. :(

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/10/31 21:06:15


Support Blood and Spectacles Publishing:
https://www.patreon.com/Bloodandspectaclespublishing 
   
Made in gb
Wolf Guard Bodyguard in Terminator Armor




22nd? It'll be at least the 49th edition by then.
   
Made in us
Ragin' Ork Dreadnought




Monarchy of TBD

By 2067, custom genetic engineering will be taking place. Competitive sports will divide into augmented and normal divisions, briefly, before the normal divisions dwindle and it becomes all augmented all the time. Helmets will have VR cameras within them, and players will be compensated by the number of people streaming their POV. The Olympics will be waged by people that many will no longer consider human, as they are tailor made organisms well outside of the human norms of body type.

Other than intelligence buffs, metabolism modifiers, and appearance enhancements the wealthy will avoid any overt signs of genetic engineering, and privacy laws will be put into place to avoid anyone's genetic engineering status from being involuntarily shared. Scholarships or sponsor ships will be available to exceptional normal human individuals to gift their genetic material as the basis of a competitive entity.

There will be at least one space hotel, and someone will have tried asteroid mining. I suspect the industry will be characterized as a combination of crowd funding scams and improbable success stories the world hasn't seen since the early internet days of the .com boom.

Klawz-Ramming is a subset of citrus fruit?
Gwar- "And everyone wants a bigger Spleen!"
Mercurial wrote:
I admire your aplomb and instate you as Baron of the Seas and Lord Marshall of Privateers.
Orkeosaurus wrote:Star Trek also said we'd have X-Wings by now. We all see how that prediction turned out.
Orkeosaurus, on homophobia, the nature of homosexuality, and the greatness of George Takei.
English doesn't borrow from other languages. It follows them down dark alleyways and mugs them for loose grammar.

 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





North Carolina

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
So around 1964 Isaac Asmiov wrote an essay predicting the world of 2014 (50 years into his future). It was a gutsy thing to do since he was/in one of the most celebrated science fiction and general science writers of all time and 50 years is far enough into the future for him to be wildly wrong and close enough for his fans to see him proven wrong

http://www.nytimes.com/books/97/03/23/lifetimes/asi-v-fair.html

Well I have no great reputation as a futurist to put at risk so I thought I'd throw the question to the floor.

What will the world be like in 2067?

My initial thoughts

1-There's 200 countries in the world today (give or take, depending on who you ask), I predict 400 in the next 50 years and that the biggest countries will be the ones most likely to split (I can see the USA splitting 3 or more ways). A risky prediction since two independence bids were shut down in the last week but I stand by it. Basically keeping a country together requires being strong all the time, pulling one apart requires the government being weak only once.

2-Of course being a country will be a lot less relevant. Transnational organizations like the EU, NAFTA and the UN will continue to tie down countries with a thousand little threads. Even those that opt out (Brexit) won't gain much since they still have to play by EU rules to trade with their neighbors.

3-The closest thing to destiny we have is demographics. The most accurate stuff in Asimov's essay were the population predictions. So I expect the demographic collapse of the 'rich world' (Western Europe, Japan, South Korea) to continue and immigration to continue to rise. More urbanization, fewer farmers.

4-War among states will be rare, while war within states or with non-state actors (ISIS) will be more common. Wars will become really polarized with casualty-adverse rich groups using more drones against insurgents who have little tech. Terrorism will become (even more) common as a way to balance the scales.

So that's my start, what else we got?




I thought about offering some possibilities (from my cynical and jaded view; history favors the pessimist, after all). But in the interests of being a good sport, I will offer two.


1. Australia will be destroyed by the emus, who will rise up and finish the job. They will try to take New Zealand, but they will be blunted by heroic Kiwi Resistance Army. The kiwis will use their smaller size to wage an effective insurgency against the larger emus.

2. Weed Man will be ousted in Canada for his failure to provide free weed to every Canadian of legal stoner age.


That is all.




Proud Purveyor Of The Unconventional In 40k 
   
Made in au
The Dread Evil Lord Varlak





You don't have to go back 50 years to notice that future forecasting produces awful results. Just go back 10 years to 2007 to see some awful forecasts that were miles off the mark. Thing is, our forecasts are almost always about the things we're really concerned about right now. But the things we're really concerned about are also the things that we put effort in to resolving. So those trends are exactly the ones that are most likely to end.

For instance, running out of food for the growing population has been a major concern throughout the post-war period. But because we've been aware of the problem we've put a lot of resources in to increasing crop yields and opening up new land to farming. As a result there's more surplus and wasted food produced now than ever before. Another example is hitting peak oil, which we've been calling as just around the corner for decades now - but a combination of higher oil prices and effective research has opened up more reserves to exploitation and allowed us to shift to NG and other oil replacements.

Basically, the things we're worried about right now we're almost certainly going to solve. The new issues will be stuff we didn't see coming.

So with that in mind, I predict...

There will be a new energy future where a mix of renewables steadily replaces greenhouse emitting sources. As battery tech becomes cheap most energy in the developed world becomes locally produced by solar, stored and then used locally. This new model effectively breaks the diminishing returns on energy production and in combination with increased automation drives a new surge in productivity.

The world's population will peak sometime before 2070, driven mostly through economic growth and women's equality programs in the developed world. The increase in food production up to that time will exceed the population growth.

Political stability will maintain, through a combination of isolating and containing specific negative world actors.

The current push to independence (whether its Brexit style or Catalonia style) will peter out within the next few years, as the newly seperated countries gain nothing from the process.

The current growing income inequality will be resolved, through a combination of expanded tax and transfer systems, and changing culture regarding the accumulation of mega-wealth.

Some new stuff will come out of the blue and have wild, unpredictable results that will screw up some of the above and also create a whole new set of problems we didn't even know we could have.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/11/01 01:59:50


“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”

Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something. 
   
Made in gb
Highlord with a Blackstone Fortress






Adrift within the vortex of my imagination.

Smart analysis, don't agree with all of it but the thinking is basically sound.

The main error is that some of the disaster predictions were longer term and are yet to produce their fruit, but the fruit is ripening.

Concerns about deforestation from the 70's onwards are on schedule, they were not wrong, they just weren't predicting events would come to a head just around the corner.

n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.

It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. 
   
Made in us
Storm Trooper with Maglight





Don't care enough really.

Feed the poor war gamer with money.  
   
Made in se
Swift Swooping Hawk





I could definitely see a collapse, the world of today shares more than a few similarities with the late Bronze Age Mediterranean before the Bronze Age collapse, and with the late Roman Empire before its fall. A big difference is that today, the whole world is interconnected and interdependent, while back then, there were several civilisation clusters in the world, so that the Mediterranean could collapse while East Asia or Mesoamerica didn't. It could also go along as usual, with technology rapidly improving (and accelerating) like it has since the Industrial Revolution.

 NenkotaMoon wrote:
Don't care enough really.


Enough to comment, apparently?

Craftworld Sciatháin 4180 pts  
   
Made in au
The Dread Evil Lord Varlak





 Orlanth wrote:
Smart analysis, don't agree with all of it but the thinking is basically sound.

The main error is that some of the disaster predictions were longer term and are yet to produce their fruit, but the fruit is ripening.

Concerns about deforestation from the 70's onwards are on schedule, they were not wrong, they just weren't predicting events would come to a head just around the corner.


That's a fair point. To expand my first claim, I'd say that in many cases where the issue is identified early on when we don't act to resolve it, we at least have time to adapt to it. In many cases there is a trade off, where we identify that solving the problem is more expensive or politically harder than just learning to cope, and we choose that. The point being that a lot of forecasting seems to assume known issues and trends will continue until we hit a cliff and fall off it, but that's not something with a lot of history behind it. Most of the time when we fall off a cliff its because we had no idea it was coming.

“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”

Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something. 
   
Made in us
Battlefield Tourist




MN (Currently in WY)

Reading the original article by ole Isaac, he got a surprising amount of stuff pretty accurately considering he was guessing 50 years into the future based on a World's Fair from 1964!


This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/11/01 13:25:51


Support Blood and Spectacles Publishing:
https://www.patreon.com/Bloodandspectaclespublishing 
   
Made in gb
Highlord with a Blackstone Fortress






Adrift within the vortex of my imagination.

 sebster wrote:
 Orlanth wrote:
Smart analysis, don't agree with all of it but the thinking is basically sound.

The main error is that some of the disaster predictions were longer term and are yet to produce their fruit, but the fruit is ripening.

Concerns about deforestation from the 70's onwards are on schedule, they were not wrong, they just weren't predicting events would come to a head just around the corner.


That's a fair point. To expand my first claim, I'd say that in many cases where the issue is identified early on when we don't act to resolve it, we at least have time to adapt to it. In many cases there is a trade off, where we identify that solving the problem is more expensive or politically harder than just learning to cope, and we choose that. The point being that a lot of forecasting seems to assume known issues and trends will continue until we hit a cliff and fall off it, but that's not something with a lot of history behind it. Most of the time when we fall off a cliff its because we had no idea it was coming.


I see your point, and your initial argument that most of the perceived problems for the future are projections of current crises is a fair one. I have had to rethink my initial post as it fell into that mental trap.

Many of the problems might well be fixed and replaced by others, but by no means all. I think we need to quantify which incoming disasters are ongoing projections over several generations, and have a tracking of prediction. If long term awareness is not producing results or dovetails to a category where it is politically convenient not to apply results we can see the danger areas better.

It is this last point which is most important and shows where we differ in our thinking. You appear, correct me if I am wrong, to believe that man will develop either the technology or the will to deal with crisis issues and will be facing unrevealed threats. I can concur only up to a point, technology solves many issues, but most of our crises are where political expediency makes a solution impractical. Many of our problems will come to a head because human greed and pride gets in the way.

Environmental problems are a key example, I think nearly all of them boil down to a simple problem, the more you manage dwindling resources the more incentive there is for others to overharvest them. For example, if you introduce fishing quotas, the price of fish goes up due to supply/demand and livelihoods of fishermen are threatened. So people illegally fish, selling the fish for more and getting progressively richer and thus more motivated to ignore quotas or restrictions.
Deforestation follows a similar pattern as does carbon emissions and other environmental issues.

The other major bugbear has an identical root, national debt and short term focus for fiscal policy. Nobody likes austerity in any form, and people vote for the party offering immediate benefit. So there is no incentive for long term financial thinking in democratic politics, long term planning is punished by the electorate and opens windows for money saved to be squandered by an oncoming leader promising an immediate upturn. There is no way around this without suspending voting rights or somehow educating the electorate as to the benefits of financial patience. The potential good news here is that the global financial system is entirely managed and entirely artificial, and can be reset. Its a dichotomy, monetary crises are both devastating and illusory. So we cannot predict if a collapse will result in a catastrophe or a fizzle and reset. The latter may well be desired but would disempower the elites so is only likely in more extreme circumstances.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Easy E wrote:
Reading the original article by ole Isaac, he got a surprising amount of stuff pretty accurately considering he was guessing 50 years into the future based on a World's Fair from 1964!


Visionary.

Here is another one, Arthur C Clarke predicts internet society:




This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/11/01 15:41:42


n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.

It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. 
   
Made in au
The Dread Evil Lord Varlak





 Orlanth wrote:
I see your point, and your initial argument that most of the perceived problems for the future are projections of current crises is a fair one. I have had to rethink my initial post as it fell into that mental trap.

Many of the problems might well be fixed and replaced by others, but by no means all. I think we need to quantify which incoming disasters are ongoing projections over several generations, and have a tracking of prediction. If long term awareness is not producing results or dovetails to a category where it is politically convenient not to apply results we can see the danger areas better.

It is this last point which is most important and shows where we differ in our thinking. You appear, correct me if I am wrong, to believe that man will develop either the technology or the will to deal with crisis issues and will be facing unrevealed threats. I can concur only up to a point, technology solves many issues, but most of our crises are where political expediency makes a solution impractical. Many of our problems will come to a head because human greed and pride gets in the way.


I probably gave the impression that I think technology or will alone will stop anything we can see coming, but I think its a bit more complex than that. I think that when we are aware of a problem, then in addition to technology and government policy there is also a level of social adjustment, people modifying their own behaviour.

An example is housing and debt leveraging in the finance sector, which caused the GFC. Before then people were aware of the risks of a housing crash but there was general ignorance about how much off balance sheet exposure there was in the greater finance sector, through derivative financial products. After the crisis there were huge calls to do something, and while bits and pieces were done in many countries, nothing real was done anywhere that would prevent the same. And of course there's no technological fix to the issue. But what did happen is that investors are now hyper-aware of off-balance sheet exposures, and any board that can't give a satisfactory answer to its potential derivative exposures will not last long. Because people are now aware of the issue individuals themselves adjust. As a result we're not going to see that same financial shock flowing through the system a second time.

Instead we'll get a whole new economic meltdown based around something new

Environmental problems are a key example, I think nearly all of them boil down to a simple problem, the more you manage dwindling resources the more incentive there is for others to overharvest them. For example, if you introduce fishing quotas, the price of fish goes up due to supply/demand and livelihoods of fishermen are threatened. So people illegally fish, selling the fish for more and getting progressively richer and thus more motivated to ignore quotas or restrictions.
Deforestation follows a similar pattern as does carbon emissions and other environmental issues.


I've seen some amazing work done in commercial fish farms, both as harvested stock and to repopulate areas. With deforestation its more complex, and even though we now have large scale commercial timber it hasn't solved the issue.

But those are just examples, I get your overall point and it is fair. It is certainly true that quotas and controls in themselves are not sufficient. Nor are the tech issues I mentioned above sufficient by themselves. But a combination of policy, tech and cultural changes are sufficient, I believe, if we are aware of the problem ahead of time.

The other major bugbear has an identical root, national debt and short term focus for fiscal policy. Nobody likes austerity in any form, and people vote for the party offering immediate benefit. So there is no incentive for long term financial thinking in democratic politics, long term planning is punished by the electorate and opens windows for money saved to be squandered by an oncoming leader promising an immediate upturn. There is no way around this without suspending voting rights or somehow educating the electorate as to the benefits of financial patience. The potential good news here is that the global financial system is entirely managed and entirely artificial, and can be reset. Its a dichotomy, monetary crises are both devastating and illusory. So we cannot predict if a collapse will result in a catastrophe or a fizzle and reset. The latter may well be desired but would disempower the elites so is only likely in more extreme circumstances.


That's a very good line 'monetary crises are both devastating and illusory'. I am going to steal that. I don't entirely agree with the rest - long term government debt is an issue, but this isn't really because the public doesn't worry about it. In fact the public often ranks government debt a much higher priority than macro-economists. I think this is because the public doesn't understand how total economic growth reduces the pressure of government debt. That doesn't mean all debt is good and that debt can go as high as whatever (which unfortunately is something some people will claim), but solutions that are popular with the public will often cause more harm to growth than they'd reduce debt.

Ultimately the issue with government debt isn't that we need more responsibility, its that we need a better informed debate.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/11/02 02:39:52


“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”

Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something. 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 Kid_Kyoto wrote:


1-There's 200 countries in the world today (give or take, depending on who you ask), I predict 400 in the next 50 years and that the biggest countries will be the ones most likely to split (I can see the USA splitting 3 or more ways). A risky prediction since two independence bids were shut down in the last week but I stand by it. Basically keeping a country together requires being strong all the time, pulling one apart requires the government being weak only once.

2-Of course being a country will be a lot less relevant. Transnational organizations like the EU, NAFTA and the UN will continue to tie down countries with a thousand little threads. Even those that opt out (Brexit) won't gain much since they still have to play by EU rules to trade with their neighbors.

3-The closest thing to destiny we have is demographics. The most accurate stuff in Asimov's essay were the population predictions. So I expect the demographic collapse of the 'rich world' (Western Europe, Japan, South Korea) to continue and immigration to continue to rise. More urbanization, fewer farmers.

4-War among states will be rare, while war within states or with non-state actors (ISIS) will be more common. Wars will become really polarized with casualty-adverse rich groups using more drones against insurgents who have little tech. Terrorism will become (even more) common as a way to balance the scales.

So that's my start, what else we got?



On #2, It may the pessimist in me, or the dystopian vision I have for the future, but I see less power in nations and organizations like the EU/NATO/UN, etc. and more power going to corporations. We may not be the United States of BP, but we may be in all but name given the sway many large companies have over the US government in particular (and I honestly don't know how much sway they have in other countries)
   
Made in us
Battlefield Tourist




MN (Currently in WY)

My prediction is Shadowrun minus the magic and metas.

Support Blood and Spectacles Publishing:
https://www.patreon.com/Bloodandspectaclespublishing 
   
Made in gb
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar





We'll all be evading oversized radioactive bugs and monsters, fighting our neighbours for the last packs of Blamco's Mac and Cheese, Salisbury Steak and Sugar Bombs; and waging war against each in the name of bastardized early 20th Century ideologies - the Brotherhood of Fascism and the Antifa Legion.

Because War...War never changes.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Springfield, VA

At the risk of going OT, I do question that wisdom.

War has changed radically.

Unless we're all just angry men with cowhide armour trying to storm a wooden palisade by building a dirt ramp up to it.
   
Made in ca
Insect-Infested Nurgle Chaos Lord






I predict hipsters will be viewing Holograms ironically in 2067.

Gwar! wrote:Huh, I had no idea Graham McNeillm Dav Torpe and Pete Haines posted on Dakka. Hi Graham McNeillm Dav Torpe and Pete Haines!!!!!!!!!!!!! Can I have an Autograph!


Kanluwen wrote:
Hell, I'm not that bothered by the Stormraven. Why? Because, as it stands right now, it's "limited use".When it's shoehorned in to the Codex: Space Marines, then yeah. I'll be irked.


When I'm editing alot, you know I have a gakload of homework to (not) do. 
   
Made in gb
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar





 Unit1126PLL wrote:
At the risk of going OT, I do question that wisdom.

War has changed radically.

Unless we're all just angry men with cowhide armour trying to storm a wooden palisade by building a dirt ramp up to it.


I see you missed the reference?
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Springfield, VA

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
At the risk of going OT, I do question that wisdom.

War has changed radically.

Unless we're all just angry men with cowhide armour trying to storm a wooden palisade by building a dirt ramp up to it.


I see you missed the reference?


No no I know it's fallout.

I just think fallout is silly for saying so. Being a popular game series does not allow one to abandon logic in pursuit of pithy silliness.
   
 
Forum Index » Off-Topic Forum
Go to: