jump to last post 1-4 of 4 discussions (21 posts)

Future World

  1. gmwilliams profile image85
    gmwilliamsposted 19 months ago

    http://usercontent1.hubimg.com/11888452.jpg
    Within the next 60 to 150 years, how will the family evolve and metamorph?  Will the family include less people who are blood-related and more people who are non-blood related?  Will the 1-child family become the norm in the future with the multichild family becoming extinct?  Will the further advancements and implementation of life extension and anti-aging technologies extend life and youthful looks to 200 years of age and beyond?  How will such longevity impact upon human populations? In relation to longer and longer lifespans, will there be more draconian laws implemented regarding severely limiting the human population?

    1. gmwilliams profile image85
      gmwilliamsposted 18 months ago in reply to this

      Within the next 60 to 150 years and beyond, the definition of what is family is going to drastically change.  There will be a marked increase in 1 child families.  There will be no need for siblings with the increased globalization and increase of social networks.  Children will find warm companionships with children outside the family circle.  Such companionships will evolve into lifetime friendships which will be analogous to family.  In fact, such companionships are more truer and less angst ridden than sibling relationships which are based upon gamesmanship, one upmanship, rivalry, and other forms of psychological manipulation which psychologically, even psychically impair people in such relationships.  Family will no longer be inclusive with blood members only, it will be more exclusive with members, blood or not, who truly love and respect each other.

      1. Quilligrapher profile image89
        Quilligrapherposted 18 months ago in reply to this

        Hello, Grace. It has been a long time since our last chat and I am so happy to see that you have not lost your passion for this topic.

        Unfortunately, the world you describe is far from ideal. In fact, such a society will self-destruct long before it sees any of the Utopian characteristics you envision.

        A marked increase in one-child families is a trend toward less than 2.1 live births per female. Upon reaching that point, the population begins to shrink and highly destructive social and economic realities begin to erode and destroy society:

        1. A sex preference for males in one-child families will upset the global population’s sex ratio which is currently at 107 males to every 100 females. Sex-selection practices against infant girls will spread with selective abortions, parental neglect, abandonment, and even infanticide becoming commonplace. {1}

        2. Shrinking global populations will reduce both the working-age labor force and the number of consumers within most of the world’s largest economies. The commercial instability that follows will lead to international unrest, social upheaval, widespread crime and, ultimately, the collapse of law and order. {2}

        3. Every adult male in your imaginary one-child-family-world will face extraordinary physical and mental stress and he will be forced to bear a huge economic burden trying to support his own aging parents in addition to the aging parents of his only child spouse. As an only child married to an only child, he will likely find himself financially responsible for up to seven people without access to financial help from siblings or any extended family. 

        4. With the growth of both the population and the labor force slowing down, societies will encounter a large increase in pension eligible populations, rising deficit pressures, and slower economic growth. Global aging is already recognized as a significant threat to global prosperity. {3}

        I can only hope for the sake of future world citizens that most of the assumptions and predictions in your post are never realized. While I agree that companionships and lifetime friendships developed outside a family circle can be analogous, I know from my own experience they will never achieve the depth and connection found between loving siblings. Furthermore, gamesmanship, one-upmanship, rivalry, and other forms of psychological manipulation are normally found in varying degrees in all relationships in life. Their presence does not necessarily result in psychological, or even psychiatric impairment.   

        Thank you, Grace, for launching this interesting thread.
        http://s2.hubimg.com/u/6919429.jpg
        {1} http://geography.about.com/od/chinamaps … -Facts.htm
        {2} http://csis.org/publication/meeting-cha … obal-aging
        {3} http://csis.org/publication/meeting-cha … obal-aging

        1. BuddiNsense profile image60
          BuddiNsenseposted 18 months ago in reply to this

          I can only hope for the sake of future world citizens that most of the assumptions and predictions in your post are never realized, unfortunately your predictions are happening right under our nose, the population growth is stalling. Our economy works on the principle of increased consumers and decreased employees, but the problem is decrease in employees lead to decrease in consumers (remember when Ford gave loan to its employees to buy its vehicle). As you rightly said the aging population is increasing world over, in Japan currently, I think there are two retirees for two employed, but in 10 or twenty years it becomes 4 to one, so all the taxes will be diverted for the care of aging population. It will be, as in a democracy the majority is what decides and the aged will be the majority. National debts will balloon and there will be none to buy the new bonds and debts as retirees outnumber employed and retirees will be withdrawing money and not depositing. The world economy will collapse (the day of reckoning of 'debt'), and the majority of the world will die of hunger and war, and we are the unfortunate generation that has to face the biggest population implosion that was ever witnessed, may be this is another bottle neck as happened a few thousand years ago or may be it is the end.

          1. gmwilliams profile image85
            gmwilliamsposted 18 months ago in reply to this

            Present humanity is thinking about population in terms of 20th century consciousness.  The future society will be an increasing computerized one with advanced global and social networks.  As such, there will be no need for siblings as everyone will reach out and care for one another.  Humankind will evolve and advance beyond tribalism at least in the postindustrialized, computerized society.  What siblings did in the past, there will be social and global networks and connections to do that.  Besides, the more children per family, the higher incidence of impoverishment and a lower standard of living.  Now I digress.  Also, with the increase of lifespan and the simultaneously delay of aging with older people retaining the physical and mental facilities of youth, there will be no need to incessantly reproduce as people will live beyond 150, even 200 years or more as vital and contributing members of society.  Siblings will be a remnant of a less advanced age where there were less social and global networks of support and communication.  In the 21st century and beyond, siblings and the concept of siblings will be totally unnecessary in an increasingly computerized society.

            1. BuddiNsense profile image60
              BuddiNsenseposted 18 months ago in reply to this

              Increasing computerization cause more loss of jobs. A recent news from Japan says that they made a robot that can sit in a hotel counter. Extinction by attrition (decreased fertility) or collapse is our choice.

              1. Live to Learn profile image81
                Live to Learnposted 18 months ago in reply to this

                We can choose to collapse, or adapt. I think, as a society, we will chose to adapt.

                1. gmwilliams profile image85
                  gmwilliamsposted 18 months ago in reply to this

                  There will be those who will choose to adapt and even be trendsetters in this future society.  The future society within 50 to 160 years will be built for very small families.  Everything will be globalized and there will be more social networks than ever before.  People will evolve outside tribal and insular familial consciousness.  Families will evolve to contain and include non-blood related people in our lives.  The concept that family is only blood related relatives will be hopefully outmoded by this time.  With this increasing networking, there will be no need to have more than 1 child as such will be unnecessary in future societies.

                  In fact, people who have 2 children or more will be at a distinct disadvantage as many if not most things will be computerized and such things will be costly.  Particularly, those with larger families of 5 or more children will be increasingly left behind in the postindustrialized, computerized 21st century because such things will be out of the socioeconomic reach of the average larger family.  Such children will fall behind in school and will be relegated to what few noncomputerized positions that are left thus falling into impoverishment or worse.  The future in its premise will belong to very small families.  In fact, the future will be tailored for them with the wider access to social networking which will be highly inclusive which means that there will be people to look out and take care of each other regardless of blood relations or not.  Better yet, there will be increasing quantitative and qualitative life extension which translates into people living to 200 years but retaining the looks and vigor of their youth.  Physical and mental aging will be delayed to a significant degree.  With the significant increase of life extension, there will be no need to incessantly reproduce children hence 1 child will be enough.  The future society will be a siblingless society-friends will take the place of siblings as humankind will evolve beyond familial tribalism and will see all people as brothers and sisters and act accordingly.

                  The concept of having siblings is really a holdover of a more agrarian, rural culture when life expectancy was low and there were less social and other networks to look after people.  Children were needed to work the land and farm.  There were few networks to look after people so parents had to produce many children.  Now in a modern or postmodern society and culture, having many children is totally unnecessary.  People have evolved beyond this notion due to modernization and increasing availability of contraception.  Larger families are becoming near extinct and many people are waking up to the fact that there is nothing wrong in the 1 child family which is highly advantageous to parents and children alike. Only children are not lonely and have social networks and companions through friends and members of their extended families.  In fact, friends are their extended family. Again, family does not necessarily mean blood relations.

                  1. gmwilliams profile image85
                    gmwilliamsposted 18 months ago in reply to this

                    We as humans have to evolve into the new paradigm of what defines family.  Family in future, postindustrial, computerized societies will not be exclusively blood families but will be families based upon friendship and a certain commonality which will not be related by blood.  Exclusive blood families as we know it presently will become extinct or will be seen as an atavistic holdover of a previous time.

                  2. Quilligrapher profile image89
                    Quilligrapherposted 18 months ago in reply to this

                    Grace, your post is out of touch with reality and, clearly, you have missed the most obvious flaw. Your imaginary future world without siblings is not only impractical but it is biologically impossible to achieve! If the birth rate falls below 2.1 live births for every female for a prolonged period of time, the species will literally cease to exist. Mankind becomes extinct. 
                    http://s2.hubimg.com/u/6919429.jpg

                  3. BuddiNsense profile image60
                    BuddiNsenseposted 18 months ago in reply to this

                    Disadvantage only to the family. Less than two children per family is a disadvantage to the society as we need children for future economic growth. We need tax payers. And as children decreases older people will increase and so does the economic cost of supporting older people and their health benefits. The society finally will cease to exist as there won't be any more new children.

                2. BuddiNsense profile image60
                  BuddiNsenseposted 18 months ago in reply to this

                  To adapt we need children. The TFR is currently falling world wide and is already below the replacement 2.1 in the developed world.and once it goes below 1.7 it can never come back. Look at the efforts of Germans and Singapore to increase the TFR. Even China which had a one child policy is seeing the flaw.

            2. Credence2 profile image84
              Credence2posted 18 months ago in reply to this

              I have to agree with Quill on this, the bonds of family are really hard to replace or imitate. You give humanity to much credit, iof the past is a guide, the future will not be pleasant.

              Because of automation, human labor will lose its value. Low skilled labor that remain will be only a notch or two above slavery or serfdom. With the aging workforce, younger people will provide much of the tax base and resentment will rise as to the people that in one era were well dead, now on cruises, playing shuffleboard, whatever.

              Taking current trends into this century, since the Fred Flinstone model can't work anymore, workers will be highly skilled or else there will be marginalized in the workforce. The skills will come from education and high end trade schools. This education will cost money and the controversy now is whether we make this education available at low cost so that there remains a middle class tax base to support all the old folks, or we can do what the Right advocates, let only the wealthy prosper and have opportunity, where they will consodate their wealth and position further consigning the rest of us to oblivion.

              As long as man's fundamental nature continues to be what it is, the increase in technology will be more of detriment to people than an advantage.

  2. 60
    Chloe Micaposted 18 months ago

    Considering the current social reality, I think the future world must be a technological world.

    1. gmwilliams profile image85
      gmwilliamsposted 18 months ago in reply to this

      The future world will be technological and beyond.  It is going to be computerized to the nth degree.

      1. janesix profile image59
        janesixposted 18 months ago in reply to this

        Only for as long as resources can support it. How long will that be?

  3. gmwilliams profile image85
    gmwilliamsposted 18 months ago

    People are beginning to progress beyond a tribal consciousness based upon fear.  People are coming to a realization that we all are one.  With the increase of consciousness, people will realize that family does not mean only blood relations but people who love, care for, and respect each other, blood or not.

    1. janesix profile image59
      janesixposted 18 months ago in reply to this

      I doubt it. People seem exactly like the humans they are. Just read the news for five minutes.

  4. gmwilliams profile image85
    gmwilliamsposted 18 months ago

    Not so, in future societies, with the advancement of medical technology, life spans will extended into the hundreds of years.  In addition to this, aging will be delayed significantly with older people having the physical and mental vigor of youth.  Aging in the future will not be as it is presently and in the past.  Aging people will still be active and contributors.  With the extension of life spans, there will be no need to incessantly reproduce.  The species will still exist but will have a higher quality of life unimagined in past eras. People had a lot of children because of low life expectancy.

    1. janesix profile image59
      janesixposted 18 months ago in reply to this

      Complete fantasy. Or maybe science fiction.

 
working