Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
At a very big picture scale, we've hit the point where the macro level benefit of extracting resources to drive economic and human population growth is less than the cost of such extraction and its associated pollution and other externalized costs, and the cost of providing the now very large population its standard of living.
It is now too costly to even maintain the real economy and real living standards as they are, thus everything becomes more expensive, more and more people fall into poverty, famines occur from food shortages/price hikes, more and more are killed or uprooted or financially devastated from more frequent and severe natural disasters.
Thats the latest update to the World 3 model, from 'The Limits to Growth', originally done by MIT back in the 1960s.
Recalibration23 is the latest revision.
Main difference is the old 'pollution' metric was just replaced with co2 level, which is much easier to measure accurately.
...
This is why everything is obscenely financialized.
Overwhelming financialization is a very good historical indicator that a civilization level collapse is about to occur, and it also coincides with an absurd wealth disparity, as financialization necessarily cannibalizes the remaining real economy, concentrates wealth, and makes the investment done by the smaller and smaller oligarch class less and less profitable and rational, chasing insane schemes and blowing up bubbles.
...
Here's standard of living:
In 2050, average human standard of living will be roughly where it was in the Great Depression / WW2.
And about a billion people will have died, largely from famine/overbearing food costs, and natural disasters, intensified by global warming.
The labor market is a free market - this means that prices are regulated by supply and demand.
If people have fewer children, there will be fewer workers, and therefore lower supply in working hours. This will mean wages would go up - and quite significantly. This is why i think it would make sense to implement policies to encourage people to have fewer children, or at least not standing in the way of DINKs (double income no kids). Because i want to keep the quality of life up.
So i guess, yes, it does make sense if the population number drops (peacefully). High unemployment rates typically precede social unrests, and i foresee high unemployment rates around 2040. Because economic growth is slowing down, and it is unlikely that it can be brought back to the rapid pace it had in the 1960s.
But it is economic growth that causes the most demand for workers. Simply maintaining things does not require such a high work input.
You forsee high unemployment around 2040?
Who are you?
What model are you using?
... Here's the actual paper I am showing images from, I'm willing to bet its just a little bit more advanced and comprehensive than the IS LM graph from your first macro econ class in college.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jiec.13442
We are not talking about natural declines in human population growth being the single change, where we hold everything else ceterus paribus and then go from there.
We are talking about a systems dynamics model with multiple factors that all affect each other simultaneously, actually based on historical empirical data, taking into account the externalities and caveats and complications that are so often glossed over by pop econ, the stuff you don't get to until you get a masters or phd.
We are talking about a complex systems collapse that indicates mass die off from famines, food prices hitting the stratosphere, increasing climate disruption.
Maintaining a system in a steady, no growth state actually does become more expensive and labor intensive after less and less farmers can afford fertilizer, the farmland keeps burning down or flooding, less and less logistics can afford gas prices, unmaintained basic infrastructure falls apart, that kinda stuff.
Have you seen this?
https://actuaries.org.uk/document-library/thought-leadership/thought-leadership-campaigns/climate-papers/planetary-solvency-finding-our-balance-with-nature/
Somewhere around 25% less world GDP than now in 2070 from climate change destroying everything.
Not 25% less world GDP growth, 25% lower absolute world GDP.
This is coming from the UK's most credible association of actuaries, the folks that actually do all the complicated, summated math from the micro level up, that most economists just hand wave attempt to explain from the macro level down.
EDIT: Take a look at that first graph I posted and note how one of the axes labels is Non Renewable Natural Resources
The entire infinite growth paradigm of most mainstream economics is untethered to reality, often handwaved away with 'oh technology will just make everything better, everything more efficient'.
Everything crashes when its not cost effective to extract the resources the system requires to function, then parts of the system just start shutting down.
You're describing a very scary future... What would you say we can do to prepare for it?
Fuck if I know, play Fallout games with the difficulty turned up on a self imposed ironman mode.
Or figure out how to signal to the Vulcans that we need help.
That's very helpful, thanks lol
I genuinely wish I had better advice, but if climate experts explaining, for 20+ years, how fucked we will be if we do not drastically change has achieved negligibly effective results, I am not going to be able to come up with anything that will actually fix the problem.
I am disabled. I live off of SSDI. Fixed income.
If Trump cancels that, I'm dead.
If not, my plan is to try to move to Minnesota.
Low fire risk, relatively low flooding risk, lots of access to water, at least for now its a blue state, and it is the least expensive blue state to live in (that isn't the desert of New Mexico).
Also has a decent range of assistance for poors like me, a rental rebate program... but who knows what'll happen if Trump just cancels all the federal funding for all that.
Has a lower required common income to rent ratio, 2.5x compared to 3x in most of the rest of the non climate disaster zone parts of the US.
If I can give any useful individual advice it would be to form a mutual aid network with your friends and family, and go check out some predicted climate danger maps, move somewhere that's low on that but also affordable, learn how to cook from raw ingredients, learn how to mend and maintain things like appliances, vehicles, clothes, etc.
All my friends and family were QAnon MAGAtards, or hysterical, irresponsible, backstabbing hypocrites, or both, so I'm SoL on the 'have a support network' front, but I can at least move somewhere better for me.
That's fair enough! It's indeed hard to prepare fully for what's to come.
Just a few ideas of stuff you can learn that could come in handy during a societal collapse.
Start learning about homesteading, soil science and sustainable farming techniques. Look up 1 acre farming plans.
Have a look at open source ecology's global village construction set.
Get into beekeeping.
Learn how to make rope.
Learn how to make a primitive kiln and forge.
Get a guide to edible plants in your area.
I don't think there's a lot you can do ... a lot of problems are big and complex, like food getting expensive, a staggering economy, ... but what you can do is to talk with your friends and build social connections. If it doesn't change reality, at least it makes you feel better :) and i mean it, lots of mental health problems (that are so widespread today) can be at least alleviated by social contact. And maybe gives society a little bit of extra stability ... if people are connected in meaningful ways.
Apart from that, i can only pray that people take the world and the future seriously, and think twice before they put children into this world.