
Dusk, Dawn, and High Noon - The coming New World - FluidDjango
http://www.rand.org/publications/randreview/issues/2011/winter/dusk-dawn.html
======
adaml_623
Strange that they are projecting 38 years ahead and assuming there are no
large paradigm shifts that change the figures. Even though one of the biggest
game changers ever (China's 1 child policy) directly influenced what they are
talking about.

They are not considering possible global wars or plagues, new energy or food
sources, AI, robotics or dramatic changes to global national boundaries.

I guess this kind of report is accurate given it's assumptions but I think
it's only interesting as a "this is what might might happen if nothing
interesting happens for the next 38 years".

------
skrish
Key takeaway from article: Working age population vs. dependents has a huge
bearing on the national economies in the following decades.

* Education & quality of it will have a huge bearing on each of these nations. \- In my view this is where India has the biggest risk. Quality of education, not just in schools but what we are teaching the kids (what they learn by observing this generation as well). \- The thing I wish & yearn to teach (show) my kid & several others who grow up with him is to put the interests of "whole" before "self". This I believe is something seriously lacking in our society and could hurt us badly.

The more I think of it the more I am convinced that every other societal
problem starts from the individual and the nation begets the leaders it
deserves (in a democracy!).

And at a macro level decision making there are few issues that will drive it.
\- Self-sufficiency in energy sector will be the key driver on which way these
nations go. In India there is HUGE dependency on energy outside India and yet
there is not much being done (compared to others there is not even much
awareness).

It is wishful thinking to believe the numbers alone could help the nations
move forward and as the OP summarized it is for these developing nations to
gain or lose the most while for US to protect and defend and (hopefully) not
at each other's expense.

In my opinion it will be measured by how much progress is there in standard of
living for each of these nations from the current standards.

------
hkarthik
I'm surprised at the fertility rate figures for the US, as I expected to see a
downward trend there.

Among lower middle class and immigrants (especially those that are Hispanic),
I expect fertility rates to remain higher. However, with the current anti-
immigration climate in Washington, I suspect a steep drop off as these groups
start to shrink with the decline in immigration to the US.

As you get into upper middle class and higher class families, fertility rates
appear low. Two kid families are the norm that I'm seeing in people in my age
group (30 years+) and I see a lot of one kid and no kid families too.

------
4clicknet
This article reminds us that you can't just look at historic growth rates and
extrapolate economic prospects. Environmental sustainability, the
effectiveness of political institutions, and demographics start to matter more
and more once you get to a certain level of prosperity.

Also interesting is the effect of demographics on technological development.
For example, one of the factors driving robotics technology in Japan is
probably the size of their aging population and the need to take care of them.
Another case of 'necessity is the mother of invention'?

~~~
forkandwait
Kingsley Davis spoke of a "multiphasic response" that each society does to
keep its population balanced (it doesn't always work, but it does happen).
Right now, Japan and Europe don't feel they are so close to crisis that they
are willing to really do what is necessary to increase fertility -- lots of
government support for mothers, lots of propaganda, negative sanctions against
those people who don't have families. "Traditional" (high mortality high
fertility -- "pre-transition" -- societies have always had these pushes in
place). Right now there is a little bit of govt support and a little bit of
propaganada. But they will when they feel like they are in a crisis (esp Japan
-- you watch...), and it may or may not be too late.

Low fertility is a dynamic that nobody has had widespread experience with, so
we don't really know what to expect. We also still have plenty of people on
the planet, so a population decrease of 50% might actually be a good thing at
the bigger scale.

I am surprised at Rand, if it is as simplistic a report as the comments say
(sorry, not reading -- I live and breathe this stuff). Demographers should
start doing scenario work, besides trend extrapolation, especially at a place
that is crawling with military types like Rand.

