There are 4 scenarios with sufficient weight of likelihood to be worth planning for I think: 1. Hardened neoliberalism 2. Partial deglobalization 3. Permadistanced world 4. Collapse (defined as say 25-30% economic shrinkage and depopulation over the next 2 decades)
-
Show this thread
-
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
3 replies 2 retweets 33 likesShow 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)
1 reply 1 retweet 13 likesShow 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
1 reply 1 retweet 17 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @vgr
Did I tell you about my paper on the "Fragile World Hypothesis" that was just (re)submitted to Futures?pic.twitter.com/L5yCdl0PMO
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
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.