The 4th one people might argue... there's prima facie no reason to expect a worse outcome than Spanish Flu, but on a double take (secunda facie?), there's a risk present here that wasn't present in 1917-19: the sheer complexity of modern society
-
-
Show this thread
-
For eg. In 1920, the rural population of the US was about 49%, the first time it fell below 50%. Today it is 24% (which is an overestimate of those shielded from urbanism risks because most of those don't actually live on farms)
Show this thread -
One way to collapse level (which would take a shit ton of modeling) is to look at the highest tech sophistication level the core work behavior in the sector requires. Like pilots only have jobs if there are planes flying around. Collapse = lower GDP % at higher complexity levels
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I feel like 1+2 would be in tension with each other. Do you count de-urbanization as part of 3?
-
Yeah, 1+2 in tension, but could still work... globalization remains for lots of commodities, but recedes to nationalism for higher value-added goods... and high robotization will drive deglobalization Deurbanization could be part of either 3 or 4
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Any good ones?
-
Not for 10 years
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Honestly I see all of these happening in equal measure.
-
1, 2, and 3 can happen in combinations, but the more 4 progresses, the more 1-3 are moot
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
The thing is that complexity might not be quite the right term for it. It's the complicatedness of layer upon layer that obscures all understanding that's the killer for adaptiveness when the world changes. If you cut through the layers its harder but it's much simpler.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.