How will look the world in 2100?

[BITCOIN4X]

Planet Earth, at least in terms of resource consumption, is already very dangerously endangered today because we spend much more in one year than the earth can realistically produce in order to maintain balance.

Will this be a reason for world government to minimize future threats? The biggest threat to planet Earth is extinction and thats for sure.

The problem here is not in the overpopulation, but in the unequal distribution of resources in the form of food, technology and wealth in general. If 10% of the population controls 90% of resources and wealth, then they are a problem that not only destroys people as a species, but also their environment. Unfortunately, humans are the only species of living beings that consciously destroy the place where they live, perhaps because some rich people think that one day they will live on Mars anyway.

Its scary but human are the most blamed species and must be responsible for what happen on earth. About mars, I dont think it would be the right place for the human species if the earth was doomed and I didnt even know where the right place was for the human species at that time.

[1715544044]

1715544044

[1715544044]

1715544044

[1715544044]

1715544044

[1715544044]

1715544044

[1715544044]

1715544044

[1715544044]

1715544044

[beerlover]

You do realize that governmental affects and boundaries do happen and that is why some stuff slow down right? I mean India is not a super rich country, sure there are worse countries in the world but it can't survive on 1.5 billion for too long, most of the time when nations reach that point they start to go down.

Look at china for example and their child situation, that is why they are going down and will probably go down even faster with that rule, maybe India will put that too? Or Nigeria going up that much thanks to better economical situation but at around 733 million? That is not going to be reached at all. All of these numbers are probably calculated on "if everything continues like this, this will be the result" but I do not think everything will continue like that.

[audaciousbeing]

With all of these projections flying here and there, if there is anything Coronavirus have taught us is that plans and projections can be derailed and there is nothing anyone can do about it. Whoever thoughts that 2020 would be like this no one saw it coming but here we are. For me 2100 is still a long way to go and who knows maybe we would have moved to the moon or maybe the population of the world would have reduced drastically with several issues we are still battling with. There is still trade war going on, threat of nuclear power from countries, climate change is another factor.

Those that would be here in 2100 should take care of their projections. It's not as if government would start planning towards that.

[exstasie]

However, in the future, most hard work will be done by robots (which we can see today), so perhaps the consequences for the economy in terms of labor shortages will not be as pronounced as today.

Actually, this is one of the scarier possibilities to me. You can think of job automation as a way of fixing labor shortages. Another way to think of them: there will be fewer and fewer jobs for humans. Without a major expansion UBI or similar welfare programs, and/or some kind of transition to socialization or cooperative ownership of private property, this could be catastrophic for the world's poor.

In a capitalist economy, how are humans supposed to sustain themselves when there aren't enough jobs to go around?

[Haunebu]

No one knows. This is the simple answer. Honestly, no one can predict how the world will look like tomorrow which is why these predictions and statistics are pointless based on a wide array of assumptions and observations.

Our planet could get get screwed completely thanks to meteors or global warming or multiple pandemics etc which is why thinking about 2100 is out of the question.

The present matters the most if you ask me. The past and future do matter a lot obviously, but the present should be our primary focus. The proper question should be 'How is the world today?'.

[Latviand]

However, in the future, most hard work will be done by robots (which we can see today), so perhaps the consequences for the economy in terms of labor shortages will not be as pronounced as today.

Actually, this is one of the scarier possibilities to me. You can think of job automation as a way of fixing labor shortages. Another way to think of them: there will be fewer and fewer jobs for humans. Without a major expansion UBI or similar welfare programs, and/or some kind of transition to socialization or cooperative ownership of private property, this could be catastrophic for the world's poor.

In a capitalist economy, how are humans supposed to sustain themselves when there aren't enough jobs to go around?

That's really what I hate in a concept where robots will dominate our purposes here in this world. In 2100, if we engaged in super futuristic technologies, probably humans will have a hard time to live for themselves. We are lucky enough to live in this year 2020 even though there's a pandemic that we are experiencing, at least, we can still work for ourselves. Imagine those people who would live in year 2100, that's a huge struggle for them. AI takeover can soon happen once we don't give importance to a human labor in that year. There are a lot of possibilities so that we should become more mindful about our inventions. We should focus on a human importance so that people will not have a hard time working for their own survival.

[okala]

Before 2100 we must have had many changes in our economy and blockchain technology will be adopted in all faces of life. I seeing this technology ruling many generations as the world may not have best technology than it. It is most secure, reliable ways of safe, transmit and using information.

[exstasie]

You can think of job automation as a way of fixing labor shortages. Another way to think of them: there will be fewer and fewer jobs for humans. Without a major expansion UBI or similar welfare programs, and/or some kind of transition to socialization or cooperative ownership of private property, this could be catastrophic for the world's poor.

In a capitalist economy, how are humans supposed to sustain themselves when there aren't enough jobs to go around?

That's really what I hate in a concept where robots will dominate our purposes here in this world. In 2100, if we engaged in super futuristic technologies, probably humans will have a hard time to live for themselves. We are lucky enough to live in this year 2020 even though there's a pandemic that we are experiencing, at least, we can still work for ourselves. Imagine those people who would live in year 2100, that's a huge struggle for them.

Under the current economic paradigm, yes.

The rationale for capitalism as an acceptable system hinges on it sustaining the working population. If it can't even do that, political momentum will build behind something else. If you don't feed the people, they will riot.

The peaceful route is a system like UBI, where a stipend would provide for basic necessities, funded for by corporate taxes. The other route is a revolution of sorts.

[Lucius]

However, in the future, most hard work will be done by robots (which we can see today), so perhaps the consequences for the economy in terms of labor shortages will not be as pronounced as today.

Actually, this is one of the scarier possibilities to me. You can think of job automation as a way of fixing labor shortages. Another way to think of them: there will be fewer and fewer jobs for humans. Without a major expansion UBI or similar welfare programs, and/or some kind of transition to socialization or cooperative ownership of private property, this could be catastrophic for the world's poor.

In a capitalist economy, how are humans supposed to sustain themselves when there aren't enough jobs to go around?

This process has already begun, and unfortunately for people it will not stop because making a profit is always in the first place. Take Hungary for example, their economy grew by about 5% last year and their industry lost 23 000 jobs. Predictions say that due to the robotization of production, the country will lose about 200 000 jobs in the next 10 years.

I know of many examples where production systems in factories are 90% automated, and owners are thrilled because robots are very profitable in the long run, do not go on vacation, sick leave or seek an increase in their labor rights. I think that the automation of production facilities will greatly affect not only the poor, but also the entire pension system, which is already in crisis if we see that people are being forced to work longer - that is, trying to implement policies from work to the cemetery.

https://learningenglish.voanews.com/a/robots-replace-human-workers-in-eastern-europe/5328102.html

[abhiseshakana]

Actually, this is one of the scarier possibilities to me. You can think of job automation as a way of fixing labor shortages. Another way to think of them: there will be fewer and fewer jobs for humans. Without a major expansion UBI or similar welfare programs, and/or some kind of transition to socialization or cooperative ownership of private property, this could be catastrophic for the world's poor.

It could be said that labor-intensive industries are no longer relevant in the industrial revolution 4.0. unfortunately, many countries are too late to anticipate this transition. In the future, repetitive jobs are easily replaced by robots and affected by automation. So the nature of technology 4.0 is a disruptive technology.

Only a few countries have technology-based basic education. To face competition with robots, education is needed that focuses on developing emotional intelligence, not only sharpening intelligence quotient. We will lose if competing IQ with robots. Jobs and memorizing knowledge can be replaced by AI. Human skills that are not easily replaced by empathy, creativity, and analytical expertise on complex problems. We must be able to educate humans who are not only memorizing, doing manual work but who are able to do analytical work, creativity, a complex problem solving, this can be done by humans through brain and heart interaction.

In a capitalist economy, how are humans supposed to sustain themselves when there aren't enough jobs to go around?

In the world of capitalism, if you want to survive, job seekers and opportunity seekers must be able to read what the market wants. The closest to the job provider criteria, which will survive.

[NavI_027]

However, in the future, most hard work will be done by robots (which we can see today)[...]

Actually, this is one of the scarier possibilities to me. You can think of job automation as a way of fixing labor shortages. Another way to think of them: there will be fewer and fewer jobs for humans. [...]

That's really what I hate in a concept where robots will dominate our purposes here in this world. In 2100, if we engaged in super futuristic technologies, probably humans will have a hard time to live for themselves. [...]

Don't get me wrong guys, I also think that AI domination would be possible but happening only for the next 80 years? Hmmm, I highly doubt. I still do believe that our world will run mainly by manpower at least in the near future. I don't know if I'm the only one feeling this but I think the pace of technological changes are not so fast. How ironic that smartphone and other gadgets are updating its specs every couple of months but problems on public transportation on many countries seems never ending (like here). That is just only one of the examples we can think of. IMHO what's happening is that men are really crazy on improving the leisure part of living but slow on fulfilling the basic needs. Unlike Japan which is now living in the year 2030 lmao (just kidding).

My own insight regarding this topic is this.. The rich becomes richer and the poor becomes poorer. Money is power. If you don't have it, you lose .

[Josefjix]

Before 2100 we must have had many changes in our economy and blockchain technology will be adopted in all faces of life. I seeing this technology ruling many generations as the world may not have best technology than it. It is most secure, reliable ways of safe, transmit and using information.

There are other emerging technologies which are leveraging on blockchain and hoping to be at the top level with blockchain, electrical cars and other safer technology to reduce the impact of social pollution and help boost the human immune system and expand lifespan further. If human beings live more and age more; the adoption of blockchain is a sure way of expanding its growth across all sectors of the human economy.


In the case of biodiversity and conservation ecosystem would be safer for the organisms that produce needed nutrients for food production and starvation would defeated to a minimal extent. My predictions, actually.

[bearexin]

We can only make presumption on things that are going to happen in the future based on what we are experiencing now.
But, the truth still remains that we can’t predict the future, though it’s good that we don’t neglect the things that are happening around us now, because in some ways the data we have can help us make the right decisions.

It’s just like this pandemic, if last year or two years anyone was told that there is going to be a pandemic that will come out and start killing people, nobody would have believed that. Well, here we are and that’s what’s happening today.

Some people are saying the highly populated nations will build their economy stronger whereas some others are speculating possible collapse just because dense population. China is world second largest country in area hence they are good with largest population whereas India is world only 8th largest country in area and when it becomes highly populated then its economy may not grow like China.

[yhiaali3]

Nice study, but I think it is largely theoretical and unrealistic, because there are a lot of unexpected things that can happen and change everything, for example the Corona virus that is circulating in the world now no one expected to happen and has led to major human and economic changes .
Another issue that has not been taken into consideration is wars and forced migration that occur due to wars, as happened in Syria, for example, and which led to a large mass migration to Europe and the world.
One last thing, though, is that no one can predict it, but it can happen and can change everything, which is the emergence of a third world war, which many people warn of and if it happens it will lead to major changes in the economy, climate, population and even politics.

[Negotiation]

People live in hope This year the virus has caused a lot of damage in the world By 2021, people will have to go through many difficult challenges There is a danger of running out of oil gas and drinking water With natural disasters. But hopefully people will get an improved vaccine at this time People can have unexpected success in dealing with the disease The average life expectancy of a person can increase to around 60 years The infant mortality rate will be greatly reduced.

Artificial intelligence technology will be in the hands of people by 2021. Researchers believe that the development of artificial intelligence will be able to completely change the nature of human civilization.

[samcrypto]

The population will continue to grow and I have to agree that China and India will place on top considering their land area and their current population. This assumption can happen, but no one knows what's the future of humanity after this pandemic and after all the tragedy we're experiencing right now.

I'm more curious about our future in the next 5 years and how the affected countries will rise again considering that we are on a major recession. I'm still optimistic that the future of my family and children will not be in danger because I know people learned a lot from this pandemic and hoping as well that we start living good and protect the nature at all cost.

[michellee]

The data that you use right now will not be compatible with the future because there will be so many things that can happen in the future, which is not relevant. The data will be the data without we know what will happen in the future. If you say that will be a way to prevent the worst thing that might happen in the future, I think we can do something from now, so we can avoid that. For example, if we don't want to have another worst experience like Covid-19, we must take care of our health from now on, we must have a healthy life and consume healthy food.

[exstasie]

In a capitalist economy, how are humans supposed to sustain themselves when there aren't enough jobs to go around?

In the world of capitalism, if you want to survive, job seekers and opportunity seekers must be able to read what the market wants. The closest to the job provider criteria, which will survive.

I don't think that addresses the fundamental issue. Regarding the labor market, the cream will always rise to the top. That doesn't mean huge chunks of society won't be left behind by automation.

Optimists mock these worries with comparisons to the Luddites. Like Keynesians, they think our economies are guaranteed to have perpetual growth that will always create enough jobs to compensate for automation.

To those people, I'd say first, read this article: Luddites have been getting a bad rap for 200 years. But, turns out, they were right

I think AI presents a more dangerous threat than the Luddites ever knew. We're not just talking about replacing some low-skilled manual laborers anymore. It's possible that large chunks of professionals, white collar workers, creatives, etc. will become redundant as well.

I just don't know if this situation is sustainable without serious and deep market interventions.

[Chrystora123]

Nice study, but I think it is largely theoretical and unrealistic, because there are a lot of unexpected things that can happen and change everything, for example the Corona virus that is circulating in the world now no one expected to happen and has led to major human and economic changes .
Another issue that has not been taken into consideration is wars and forced migration that occur due to wars, as happened in Syria, for example, and which led to a large mass migration to Europe and the world.
One last thing, though, is that no one can predict it, but it can happen and can change everything, which is the emergence of a third world war, which many people warn of and if it happens it will lead to major changes in the economy, climate, population and even politics.

the predictions that are issued are definitely not haphazard, scientists must make comparisons from the past and present then consult with anthropologists to decide what changes will occur in humans in the future..  apart from the chaos that is happening right now (war and disease outbreaks), in the end, everything will return to normal, for example this "Pandemic" which is happening right now, will definitely end until the best treatment is found, the world will return to passionate and life will return to normal as usual in each area..

[Alert31]

I think the world in 2100 will become less populated because of a huge number of death now caused by the pandemic. The economy of every country will recover slowly and those country in your graph may not be followed because US nation will do everything to recover and sustain their economy at the top among other countries. It is not depends on the number of population but on how to manage the economy after the pandemic.