Megachange : the world in 2050

[Tyrannical]

If the wealthy 5% stopped sharing their technology with the undeveloped world we'd have no over population problem.

If the undeveloped world was given the level of education we have, and the opportunity to develop economies like ours, it would be indistinguishable from us, including the rate of population growth.

Your racism disgusts me.

I agree with the disgust at his racism, but the indistinguishable part worries me...

Population growth, quite probably, but there are cultural dynamics which could make the trajectories of many third world countries (given equal technologies) a damn sight different to ours...

What? Are you trying to argue that if African societies attained European levels of education and affluence, they still could be breeding like rabbits in the Australian Alps? Seriously?



Maaaaate...

You're a mathematician. Try statistics in combination with empirical sociology.

No, I'm saying that Africans lack the cognitive ability and behavioral characteristics to attain European levels of education and affluence, and the reason for that is genetic instead of societal.

And where are these Australian Alps you speak of?

[Hermit]

If the wealthy 5% stopped sharing their technology with the undeveloped world we'd have no over population problem.

If the undeveloped world was given the level of education we have, and the opportunity to develop economies like ours, it would be indistinguishable from us, including the rate of population growth.

Your racism disgusts me.

And your naivety amuses me.

We are under no obligation to "give" anything to the undeveloped world, in fact it would be quite foolish to freely give to them the advantages we have worked so hard to "earn". These scary World crises such as over population, global warming, and rising commodity prices is directly related to us giving to the undeveloped world.

There is no evidence that "they" would be indistinguishable from us if given an education and the vague notion of "opportunity". Blacks certainly don't behave or contribute to society similarly to Whites regardless of what education or opportunities are provided.

In the last sentence, the veil of amused cynicism is dropped, and the naked, hate-filled eyes of the beast stare out at a world seen in black and white...

Quite. There is plenty of evidence that "they" would be indistinguishable from us if given an education and the vague notion of "opportunity", both statistically as well as anecdotally. Oh! Look at that current US president. And, oh, look at the birthrate of middle-class blacks. And the crime rate of the members of the same stratum. And the education level. And...

I am not naive, Tyr. You are the stereotypical racist.

[Hermit]

If the wealthy 5% stopped sharing their technology with the undeveloped world we'd have no over population problem.

If the undeveloped world was given the level of education we have, and the opportunity to develop economies like ours, it would be indistinguishable from us, including the rate of population growth.

Your racism disgusts me.

I agree with the disgust at his racism, but the indistinguishable part worries me...

Population growth, quite probably, but there are cultural dynamics which could make the trajectories of many third world countries (given equal technologies) a damn sight different to ours...

What? Are you trying to argue that if African societies attained European levels of education and affluence, they still could be breeding like rabbits in the Australian Alps? Seriously?



Maaaaate...

You're a mathematician. Try statistics in combination with empirical sociology.

No, the population growth aspect is most probably addressed by technological change and education, but that is not the only important parameter in the socio-political trajectory of a given country. What I was complaining about was your broad-brush use of the word "indistinguishable"...

Yeah, broad brush indeed. Sorry. But in this context, might you just be splitting hairs?

[FBM]

Rum, this is a reminder that this post contains a personal attack on another member. Please play nice. Thanks.

[Hermit]

No, I'm saying that Africans lack the cognitive ability and behavioral characteristics to attain European levels of education and affluence, and the reason for that is genetic instead of societal.

As I said, you're an out and out racist. I bet you think The Bell Curve expounds valid scientific statements. And ffs, behavioural characteristics are conditionable by definition.

And where are these Australian Alps you speak of?

Let google be your friend. Or don't you have sufficient cognitive ability to consult that tool?

[Tyrannical]

Quite. There is plenty of evidence that "they" would be indistinguishable from us if given an education and the vague notion of "opportunity", both statistically as well as anecdotally. Oh! Look at that current US president. And, oh, look at the birthrate of middle-class blacks. And the crime rate of the members of the same stratum. And the education level. And...

I am not naive, Tyr. You are the stereotypical racist.

What is a stereotypical racist?
Someone who believes that genes are hereditary and that genes influences behavior and cognitive ability

And what of the demographics of "middle-class blacks" ?
Do you have any statistical information comparing blacks / whites on those data points from similar socioeconomic backgrounds?

I can dig up some studies, but for both IQ and SAT scores, poor whites still significantly out score rich blacks.

[Rum]

I suspect a lot of the doom laden predictions here are based on what is likely to happen to the so called developed world - our bit - as the 'developing world' catches up. You just have to go shopping to see what competition for consumables and food, now the subject of competitive buying in places like Brazil, China and much of the Far East. Much of their populace I am sure, see a brighter future, whereas much of the wealth we are used to, certainly in Europe will probably be eroded to the point were we are relatively nearer that of the developing world.

Having witnessed first hand the amazing things that have happened in the last 60 years I look to the future with a mixture of fear and excitement. More of the latter than the former though.

[Tyrannical]

And ffs, behavioural characteristics are conditionable by definition.

That statement is absolutely ludicrous.

The study is called Behavioral Genetics, pioneered by Francis Galton.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavioural_genetics

Racism is based on hard science and genetics. Egalitarianism is based off some Christian Saint's belief in God, which is kind of embarrassing for an atheist to believe in

[mistermack]

I suspect a lot of the doom laden predictions here are based on what is likely to happen to the so called developed world - our bit - as the 'developing world' catches up. You just have to go shopping to see what competition for consumables and food, now the subject of competitive buying in places like Brazil, China and much of the Far East. Much of their populace I am sure, see a brighter future, whereas much of the wealth we are used to, certainly in Europe will probably be eroded to the point were we are relatively nearer that of the developing world.

Having witnessed first hand the amazing things that have happened in the last 60 years I look to the future with a mixture of fear and excitement. More of the latter than the former though.

I think that the gloom over the demand for resources by the emerging nations is overplayed a bit.
Markets mean that higher demand means higher prices. In the short term.
But in the longer term, sustained higher prices means production will rise. If there's long-term money in it, people will invest in higher production, right the way down the supply chain.
As in oil. Higher prices mean that deepwater drilling, and shale oil and gas, and things like fracking, become viable.

But that principle applies to most forms of production.
Higher demand for computers hasn't meant that the rich nations have to pay more. Quite the reverse.

[Atheist-Lite]

Rum is fortunate in never having studied complex systems pushed beyond their safe parameters and not having to live through the nightmare to come in this century. It is his generation whose naive worldview proved so inadequate that it has created the coming human catastrophe, the coming avoidable tragedy which is now inevitable. Instead of showing any remorse at his generations wrong doing he continues to show the naive blind optimism of a earlier time as he looks to the future with a mixture of fear and excitement. More of the latter than the former though...

[Hermit]

Higher demand for computers hasn't meant that the rich nations have to pay more.

Not while supply can meet demand. Did you read my comment about the price of memory chips above?

When demand exceeds supply prices will rise. That's what is beginning to happen with fossil fuels now, and the flow-on effect will be exponential. Get used to it. Apart from undergoing the usual undulations there won't be any improvements in the situation.

[mistermack]

Higher demand for computers hasn't meant that the rich nations have to pay more.

Not while supply can meet demand. Did you read my comment about the price of memory chips above?

When demand exceeds supply prices will rise. That's what is beginning to happen with fossil fuels now, and the flow-on effect will be exponential. Get used to it. Apart from undergoing the usual undulations there won't be any improvements in the situation.

No I didn't, but I just did.
Of course, some things like tiger bone have a limit to what can be produced. But the memory chip thing, as well as the Thailand floods affecting hard-disk prices, are just a problem of monopoly, and should be addressed.
( I think there's another at the moment, a fire in a Denmark factory halting car production in the US).

But in general, this principle has always been argued, and never materialised.
Generally, as the poor get a bit richer, the rich get even richer.

As China and India gets richer, they are buying many more Rolls Royces and Jags.

The fuel thing is a special case. There are alternatives to gas and oil, that will kick in when the price rises, stopping the rise from being "exponential", but the lead time is great to most of them, and the price is volatile, and can drop dramatically, as well as rise.
That's what makes the investment in the alternatives such a headache.
But that's just energy, it's not the same for most things.

[Coito ergo sum]

People will travel a lot less, because of the cost of fuel, and the lack of need for face to face contact, due to the improved net.

Just the one response here.
I note that there is, today, a whole range of electric cars entering the market. The cost of running an electric car, in terms of 'fuel' (electricity for recharge) is very much less than petroleum products. New technologies, due to be introduced way before 2050, should permit great range and rapid recharge of such cars.

So, do you not think, MM, that this factor would alter your above prediction?

Price goes up when demand goes up. So, the price of electricity will go up as the number of electric cars go up. It's low now, because hardly anybody drives electric cars.

There will, if electric vehicles become popular, be a corresponding decrease in the price of gasoline, as the demand for gasoline goes down.

[macdoc]

Sure and there really is a tooth fairy.

[Tyrannical]

Raw materials follows the low hanging fruit model, as we have seen in oil exploration. Once the easily exploitable sources are gone, exploitation become more expensive. At some point resources become finite, and you need to be selfish to survive. Us first worlders would be much better off if we were selfish sooner rather than later.