How will the world look in 2050?

spankey

Peachtree Warrior
Joined
Jan 16, 2004
Messages
323
Location
Atlanta, GA
So where do you think this is all heading in the world? :confused:
What will Europe/the Americas/Asia/Australia/Africa look like demographically and socially?
What wil the world's religions look like?
What will the global climate look like?
What will be different and what will stay the same?
Will the world be more peaceful or less.

I will state my ideas further down the thread. I am curious as to others opinions.
 
Well, if the 60s/70s/80s scifi I'm currently reading is any indication:

1) People will have punch cards with all their pertinent info on it
2) There will be no Internet or any similar mass communication device
3) People will watch TV all the time (ok, that one is likely)
4) People will be so open-minded and carefree about sex that they'll need to remind the reader constantly that they're open-minded and carefree about it :shakehead
 
IMO, USA will be in decline, with india and china the new superpowers. There will probably be a major war, and unless there is a nuclear war, the climate will stay roughly the same. There will probably be the same level of tension, but in different places. Australia will probably be still be ignored by the world powers.
 
In all seriousness, hopefully:

--We'll have started colonizing other planets/satellites
--There will be no 3rd-World countries
--Jenna Bush will be midway through her third term as President-General of the United Nations

(ok, mostly serious)
 
I believe that things will remain roughly the same, with the exception to the introduction of a new source of energy that will eventually replace fossil fuels.
 
I just bought a very interesting book where some very famous scientists make conjectures about the world 50yrs from now... maybe you should pick it up!

"The Next Fifty Years: Science in the First Half of the Twenty-First Century" edited by John Brockman
 
Based on my calculations, bellbottoms will be back in style exactly 50.5 years from now after going in and out of style in 2009, 2031 and 2046.

My bets for the world's most powerful nation state 50 years from now are, in this order: the US, India, China, the EU. That said, I still think the probability of the US being number one is greater than 50%. It just has a better chance of being number one than anyone else.

Why I put India ahead of China

I put India before China as it has a British legal system, a better education system than China (from what I know) and an increasingly service based economy.

Why I put the US ahead of China and India

1. I don't think 50 years is a long enough time to lift enough people in India and China out of poverty. China and India's GDPs may surpass the US's but even if this happens the US may still have more surplus GDP (I’ll define surplus GDP as wealth available for power projection) as a large portion of India and China's will be controlled / tied up by economic entities that are either a drag on the economy or don't have enough surplus wealth available to be effectively taxed. This argument relies somewhat on the assumption that China and India will develop welfare systems or at least limited welfare systems.

To use an extreme example to illustrate my logic:

Country A represents the US

Country B represents China or India

Country A has 10 people who make $1000 per year

Country B has 200 people who make $100 per year

It takes $500 per year to placate / sustain citizen of country A

It takes $90 dollars per year to placate / sustain a citizen of country B

Country A has a GDP of 10*1000 = $10000

Country B has a GDP of 100*200 = $20000

Country A has ($1000-$500) * 10 = $5000 surplus wealth

Country B has ($100-$90) * 200 = $2000 surplus wealth


2. Both India and China have daunting environmental problems (the US isn't exactly squeaky clean but the US's environmental sin, greenhouse gasses, hurts the entire world not just the US). China and India also have a shortage of arable land.

3. Three years from now, George W Bush will be constitutionally barred from running the US.

4. Of any country in the world, the US still has the best ability to attract and retain talented people.

5. Of the four candidates for major powers, the US has by far the most unoccupied land available for suburban housing and office parks.

6. The US university system

7. See probability logic under why I put the EU last

8. I’m an American and thus likely biased towards the US.

Why I put the EU last

I put the EU last as it just doesn’t have the demographics or open real-estate (i.e. open land) to compete with the US in the long run. It’s likely that the EU could be ahead of China and / or India in terms of power but unless something catastrophic happens to the US, I just can’t see it passing the United States. I put India and China ahead in probability to be number one as their power potential is more uncertain than the EU’s. Math is probably the best way to explain my logic here. See below:

My Probability Logic:

Assuming the US, China, India and the EU are the only nations in the running to be number one, in order to be number one a nation must be more powerful than the other three. It follows that the EU’s probability of being the most powerful = the probability that the EU is more powerful than India * the probability that the EU is more powerful than China * the probability that the EU is more powerful than the US.

The EU’s probability is then: Medium number (probability it’s more powerful than China) * Medium number (probability it’s more powerful than India) * very low prob (probability it’s more powerful than the US)

So: High / Medium Prob * High / Medium Prob * Very Low Prob = Very Low Probability

The Math for India or China is Medium Prob (prob more powerful than India (for China) or prob more powerful than China (for India)) * Medium Prob (prob more powerful than the EU) * Medium Prob (prob more powerful than the US) = Low probability .

The Math for the US is: Medium Prob (more powerful than China) * Medium Prob (more powerful than India) * Very High Prob (more powerful than the EU)= Probably not over 50%but still higher than anyone else

Hope that makes sense. Hopefully 50 year from now no one will care what nation is the most powerful but I don’t see that happening.
 
Perfection said:
white fluffy.

more like glowing green acid filled!
 
Fifty said:
more like glowing green acid filled!
While I admit that it would be awesome, I find your prediction unrealistic.
 
Perfection said:
While I admit that it would be awesome, I find your prediction unrealistic.

WRONG!

Meterologists have been recording the GGG (Green Glowing Gradient) for several generations now and have seen it steadily climbing.

suck on that.
 
Fifty said:
WRONG!

Meterologists have been recording the GGG (Green Glowing Gradient) for several generations now and have seen it steadily climbing.

suck on that.

Steadily by how much? Too vague. Something can be growing steadily at .00000000000001%
 



Welcome to the future!
 
ChrTh said:
Steadily by how much? Too vague. Something can be growing steadily at .00000000000001%

Way to argue semantics instead of my obvious point :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

In any case, my post was a satirical attempt to raise awareness for two problems facing our world today: pollution and nuclear technology. While the GGG isn't, in all honest, an actual statistic, it does highlight two problems that will be of increasing relevence as we push further forward into the new millenium.

Nuclear technology, as we are all painfully aware after such horrific catastrophes as Hiroshima, Nagasaki, and the Chernobyl disaster, is a mixed blessing. While the promise of nuclear power continues to grow, we also face the very real threat of a rogue terrorist securing nuclear weaponry. The horrific nuclear threat is symbolized by the glowing aspect of my hypothetical futuristic clouds.

Beyond the obvoius nuclear threat, there is an obvious threat of acid rain and pollution. Acid is generally represented as green, and as such it played an important roll in my symbolic notion of "glowing green clouds"

As you can see, the plague of the future threatens to consume us all. If we are to flourish--nay--if we are even to survive in the 21st century, we must encourage a conservationist approach that attempts to synergize our species' efforts with the vast menagerie of non-human life, both plant and animal. If we are too avoid the disaster that befell our friends from the once great Red Planet, it is IMPERITIVE that we do not allow ourself to be consumed by the materialistic consumer greed that could indeed become our downfall.



onward and upward,
Fifty
 
Fifty said:
Way to argue semantics instead of my obvious point :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

In any case, my post was a satirical attempt to raise awareness for two problems facing our world today: pollution and nuclear technology. While the GGG isn't, in all honest, an actual statistic, it does highlight two problems that will be of increasing relevence as we push further forward into the new millenium.

Nuclear technology, as we are all painfully aware after such horrific catastrophes as Hiroshima, Nagasaki, and the Chernobyl disaster, is a mixed blessing. While the promise of nuclear power continues to grow, we also face the very real threat of a rogue terrorist securing nuclear weaponry. The horrific nuclear threat is symbolized by the glowing aspect of my hypothetical futuristic clouds.

Beyond the obvoius nuclear threat, there is an obvious threat of acid rain and pollution. Acid is generally represented as green, and as such it played an important roll in my symbolic notion of "glowing green clouds"

As you can see, the plague of the future threatens to consume us all. If we are to flourish--nay--if we are even to survive in the 21st century, we must encourage a conservationist approach that attempts to synergize our species' efforts with the vast menagerie of non-human life, both plant and animal. If we are too avoid the disaster that befell our friends from the once great Red Planet, it is IMPERITIVE that we do not allow ourself to be consumed by the materialistic consumer greed that could indeed become our downfall.



onward and upward,
Fifty

I wasn't arguing semantics, I was arguing RELEVANCE. You didn't HAVE an obvious point, you had an alliterative phrase that sounds, frankly, made up. Your previous post was vague and essentially useless. You provided no real argument outside of "WRONG" (which is a contradiction, not an argument). However, you have responded with a well-formed relevant post. Next time, start with the well-formed relevant post, it'll make people take you more serious.

EDIT: Of course phrases like "friends from the once great Red Planet" will cause people to take you less serious.

SECOND EDIT: You know something, screw that. You provide no real argument, you make up the name of something that you have no evidence exists, claim its climbing steadily even though it doesn't exist ... and have the nerve to accuse me of arguing semantics? WTFIUWT? Next time, try arguing facts instead of delusional fictions.
 
ChrTh said:
I wasn't arguing semantics, I was arguing RELEVANCE. You didn't HAVE an obvious point, you had an alliterative phrase that sounds, frankly, made up. Your previous post was vague and essentially useless. You provided no real argument outside of "WRONG" (which is a contradiction, not an argument). However, you have responded with a well-formed relevant post. Next time, start with the well-formed relevant post, it'll make people take you more serious.

EDIT: Of course phrases like "friends from the once great Red Planet" will cause people to take you less serious.

I assumed that my target demographic would have the inference capability to extrapolate the subtle and nuanced symbolism behind my "Fiftian Cloud" as I have dubbed it. Obviously I was wrong, and for that I am sorry.

PS: Why don't you take an astronomy course and learn about a little something called "canali" on Mars before you apply dubious edits.
 
 
Fifty said:
I assumed that my target demographic would have the inference capability to extrapolate the subtle and nuanced symbolism behind my "Fiftian Cloud" as I have dubbed it. Obviously I was wrong, and for that I am sorry.

PS: Why don't you take an astronomy course and learn about a little something called "canali" on Mars before you apply dubious edits.

HAHAHAHAHAHA :lol: :rotfl: How can anyone take you serious again? HAHAHAHAHAHA

EDIT: Phew, thanks, I needed that laugh. Oh man I may not stop smiling for a week after that. PS, go check my second edit.
 
Top Bottom