As soon as we really know the facts you would think that we would all begin to behave very differently, of course.
If we could, would not your heart swell with something far from anger. We might see our power of duty as custodians to the world that we all live in.
Instead nothing much happens, except swallow high words on what needs to be done to achieve change in order to see the real power, the real dignity, our real responsibility in the world.
Over the next couple of decades the world will be facing new problems (in addition to the well-known challenges of creating economic growth and maintaining social stability), some of which cannot be easily solved by the market.
Forty years from now, how much will energy cost? What will happen with the climate? Most importantly, will you be richer?
Let me tell you it is more important that you are satisfied with life than whether you are somewhat richer or poorer.
Empirically, for some, income is the sole determinant of life satisfaction. But for the majority, a whole host of factors influence our well-being—job, health, family, community, prospects for the future—in addition to income.
It is the sum total of all aspects of life that determine your wellbeing, both now and in the future.
If humanity rose to the occasion and ran a rational world how much better life would be for all of us and the generation to come.
Many argue that this does not matter because we are leaving for future generations a whole lot of capital, infrastructure, and technology. But to paraphrase the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, “People cannot succeed in ecosystems that fail.”
The prime example is the climate challenge.
It is a truly global problem:
The forecast maximum in 2080 is above the threshold that world leaders agreed would place us in the danger zone for runaway climate change; but it is important to realize this is a politically negotiated goal. Views differed, and still differ, on what will be safe. Or in other words, what will hurt us.
Does it matter?
Will the world of 2052 be a better world?
From a psychological perspective, probably no, because the future prospects in 2052 will be grim because of the increasingly uneven distribution of income and wealth that has built up over time as a natural consequence of the free market.
In my opinion there will be huge differences between people. But on average the world will be a better place.
It’s important to note that people 40 years from now will judge their circumstance more on how it has changed from their own recent past than from our vantage point of today.
Even the most diehard liberalists appear to agree that redistribution is something that is not automatically undertaken by the market by itself, but needs to be done via political action
In order to reduce some of the tension implicit in the rapid increase in inequity in the capitalist world.
It’s time to commence down the road of re thinking how or world works and reconsider what kind of world we want to live in.
Although we refer to most of it as civilization it is anything but civilized.
We have being killing each other and everything around us since time millennium.
It’s no wonder that the social arrangements up to the present have largely failed to produce a peaceful and productive world.
While we appear to be technically advanced our values and behaviours are not.
The possibility of an optimistic future is in stark contrast to our current social,economic,and environmental dilemmas.
If we stay the present course, the familiar cycles of crime, economic booms and busts, wars, and further environmental destruction are inevitable.
Will the young generation calmly accept the Debt and pension burden of the old.
No. The simplest reason is they don’t have to. In the rich world, particularly, the first generation that has rung up a huge national debt and established a huge unfunded pension scheme is about to retire.
The interesting, to say the least, question is whether the next generation will be willing to carry this burden and peacefully pay the debt and peacefully pay the pensions. I repeat my answer: I think not.
At the moment we have an unsustainable world, where the environment is going to have a bigger than ever say in shape our behavior.
Where our global monetary system is going to become obsolete, and increasingly insufficient to meet the needs of most people.
Where the banking , media, criminal justice systems, and world Organisations are tools of social control managed by the established political and economic elite.
We need a redesign of all our cultures. We need to up date to the new era of technological revolution.
Our problems are mostly of our own making and now it is the time to come together under a new World Organisation to resolve them.
In 2052 a full 60% of the energy used will still be fossil. As a result climate damage will be growing fast, as will the unavoidable costs for repair of that damage. Paradoxically this means that humanity will choose to pay bills for repair after the crises, rather than paying the same amount of money for renewable energy ahead of time and avoiding the damage.
We all know that if we continued willy nilly with the I am all right jack scenario we are heading for a cesspool of troubles that will put our very existence in question.
There are numerous solutions but the hard fact is man is incapable of acting as one. Furthermore no one wants to pay for change. Not a Country , not a Government, not a social system.
It’s true that all the money in the world will make no difference if we don’t change.
It is also true that any change will have to just and fair to all.
If you have not looked at the below video you should do so.
You might think that the only thing that matter is a Job.
It is the only way in which the individual can get part of the societal pie—without engaging in theft. Society—at least in the long run—will do its utmost to ensure there are jobs, typically by seeking rapid economic growth. But we know from recent history that this is a taxing task, and that politicians often fail.
This video misses the big question. Who is going to pay.
Here is the answer: Profit for Profit’s Sake. We must place a world Aid commission on all High Frequency Trading, on all Foreign Exchange transactions (over $20,000), on all Sovereign Wealth Funds Acquisitions, on all Hedge Funds, on all Lotto Wins. Curbing greed is a first and very important step in that direction.
(see previous posts) —— 0.005% will do the trick. A perpetual Fund to address all our problems fairly spread over what is causing our problem in the first place.
Technologies will not save us.
All contributions other than like are needed.