0
0

[–] SocialJusticePanda ago 

The way things are going I bet we will be swinging from trees throwing shit at each other.

Chicago

0
0

[–] Vhaine ago 

The Culture.

0
0

[–] therealkrispy ago 

All I'll say is this, if the Western world embargoes China, China doesn't eat.

0
1

[–] Mathurin1911 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Yes.

Continuing minor advances in automation and energy generation enable food production on scales we cannot imagine, with the slow reduction in work requirements and an increasingly easy life resulting in lower birth rates (as can already be seen in western nations) that might be a problem if increased automation didnt make caring for the elderly much less labor intensive.

0
0

[–] AmaleksHairyAss ago 

Aging is cured, but only as fast as we can handle it. Sensible stewardship of the planet becomes a political necessity. Population growth is slow and steady into 2050, and new technologies easily keep up with the demand on resources. Artificial intelligence and mechanization raise the global standard of living. Wide use of solar power with desalinization and modern genetically manipulated plants and animals bring the cost of food down so low a small stipend is granted worldwide for those who need it, and the stipend is sufficient to feed each recipient. New technologies empower the poor and rather than forcing the issue (and risking pitchfork time) the global elite give way to some extent.

The liberals are right in their claims about allowing immigrants: it turns out having a job and a home and enough to eat is enough to turn European Muslims away from extremism. Having lost that avenue of attack and under increasingly intelligent mechanized surveillance Muslim extremism is slowly chipped away. Religious terror attacks happen occasionally, but become small, rare, unsupported by any real organization, and conducted by obviously insane people.

As it becomes obvious unaugmented humans are completely eclipsed by the abilities of robots work stops being seen as desirable, and capitalist values begin to decline. It's no longer seen as shameful to live on welfare. Welfare is also not an unbearable burden on society, no matter how many people choose to accept it. People spend their time volunteering, seeking self-enrichment, or just drinking beer and watching sports. Several government programs try, unsuccessfully, to motivate this last group but it's not seen as economically urgent.

Governments tread a careful line between the demands of the rich and the needs of the poor. Sociology meets chaos theory in several powerful models run in supercomputers and it turns out to be much cheaper to just let people do what they want. As predicted by these models while some people choose to do very little one person in a thousand is a highly motivated and talented inventor, artist, philosopher, programmer, or other innovator. These people carry the burden of mankind's continued success, and they carry it well. They are richly rewarded. Because each human now has that chance the arts and sciences flourish. And so looking up from the decadence of an uncaring world the best and brightest, the adventuresome, ambitious, and discontent look to the stars and begin the gargantuan task of building humanity's first generation ship.

0
0

[–] R34p_Th3_Wh0r1w1nd ago 

Simply no. All you have to do is math to figure out the earth doesn't have 100 years left in it. Population increase yearly, projected from current population numbers, we are looking at 88 million increase this year alone. We are creeping up on 8,000,000,000 people on the planet. In 100 years that number more then doubles. Too many people, not enough resources.

0
0

[–] Eunideen ago 

Yeah. People have less kids, less kids leads to a smaller carbon footprint. One great Idea would be to reduce unplanned pregnancies. About 45% of pregnancies in the US are unintended, so preventing those could have a very positive effect. Unintended pregnancies often lead to the children being born into poverty, difficult family situations, etc. I think offering free vasectomies for all men would greatly reduce unplanned pregnancy, and alongside that reduce the amount of children in poverty or broken families. It would also reduce our country's environmental effect, as every new person contributes to energy usage, food usage, and the use of other resources

0
1

[–] carlinco 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Professional ones? Lots. But they don't get read as often, as they are not so spectacular. They are mostly about measures to defeat disease, hunger, very large family sizes, and so on.

Sci-fi? Also lots. But not too interesting for people who prefer dystopian sci-fi.

Me personally: I'm sure Earth could easily handle 100 billion people with current technology. And then we should expand into space. If we get immortal and able to improve without limits (transhumanism), we should limit population growth somewhat. But also allow people to spend years or decades travelling to other star systems and do as they please there.

0
1

[–] Thisismyvoatusername 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

I really, truly do not understand the people who are convinced we are in imminent danger of overpopulating the planet and all dying of starvation and disease. Have they never studied the history of such forecasts?

load more comments ▼ (10 remaining)