The world in 2057

Is it possible that USA is on a slowly descending course and will be replaced with EU as the next leading super power? I see three alarming tendencies:

1) Protectionism. Not only is it bad for the economy, it also breeds mental isolationanism.

2) Xenophobia. If you got rid of all illegal immigrants working in "the breadbasket" and enforced zero tolerance against anyone trying to enter the country illegally, even to make a honest living, then the food prices would skyrocket.

3) Theocracy. If you want to have a separation of state and church, then you must keep them separated.

If USA isn't breaking these tendecies like right now, then it's doomed. My guess is that in 2057 is EU a superpower far more powerful than anyone could've imagined. It rose to superpower status during the colonial wars in China on african soil. EU is allied with the African Union and are trying to contain the threat from the pan asian coalition headed by Russia and China.

2057 is too far away to say anything but lets look at the near future:
Europeans and Asians are liberalising economy while Americans vote for the Democrats.
Yep, you guys are fucked.

ITT, nobody understands how the world works in the present, hence much "brainpower" is lost applying 500 year old historical principles to try to extrapolate future predictions.

I actually got inspired by Ayn Rand when i wrote the OP. She said that cultural changes often goes so slowly it's hard to see it comming even during a lifetime.

Yes, USA is the most free country. But if people are smug about it and doesn't know why USA became free, even less defend it principally in a debate - then doom is inevitable.

>>2 P.S. Don't forget that the Republicans are good at protectionism as well.

>>2

I loled at Europeans liberalizing their economy.

>>6

They do it.
Yes, you'll never see them giving up the subsidies but that's just because they really hate Africa.

>>7
Wait and see. We will have an election for the European Parliament in 2009. With smarts, hard work and a bit of luck we voters have pushed the protectionists back a bit more. Mind you that here in Sweden we have a tradition of free trade thats unsurpassed by americans. Not even the former communist party in Sweden are a friend of customs.

>>8

I loled at "we voters," voting in a lot of European countries is compulsory. It should be that way in America though, that way more people are represented and more learn whatever they're capable of learning about the election.

How is free trade in Sweden unsurpassed by Americans? Do you allow child labor? What are the taxes on business like?

>>1

"3) Theocracy. If you want to have a separation of state and church, then you must keep them separated."

HAHAHA OH WOW

Why didn't you unveil this master plan sooner? No one has ever heard of something like that before. Next thing you'll be telling me that in order to be a democratic society we'll need democracy.

We will all be hooked up to the interbutts by 2057, so whatever

I'm sick of being s superduper power, we're like the worlds scapegoat.

>>9
Voting for the EP is not compulsory. It's compulsory in Belgium to vote in the Federal Parliament election. But Belgium is the most corrupt and politicized country west of the Iron Curtain. So you should avoid compulsory voting at any cost.

With free trade I'm only referring to the customs levels or the lack of them. The general consensus in Sweden is that customs are harmful and if it only was for Sweden, EU would abolish their customs over night. Not even the swedish trade unions or the farmers wants to have customs.

>>10
So you're comfortable with the Kansas School Board and cut funding to stem cell research, but only stem cell research and nothing else? Goody! Have it your way.

I'm sorry that I didn't elaborate on point #3. But you can't pretend that you have a separation of state and church when you national motto is "In God we trust". And morning prayers in tax funded schools. Either you shed all your pretentions of having a separation between state and church, or you enforce the separation.

>>12
I'm sick of defending a superpower. We're being persecuted, waaaaah!

>>1

1) Protectionism is good for the economy, especially is your major "trading" partner is merchantalist.

2) Xenophobia is darwianistic, take the Roman Empire for example -- at its peak it slaughtered any African or other inferiors by the thousands. Without illegal aliens, there will be an incentive for investment in agricultural technology, and thus make the whole nation productive as a whole.

3)Theocracy. A theocracy is fine, it would help save billions of dollars a year in taxes.

>>15
>Protectionism is good for the economy, especially is your major "trading" partner is merchantalist.

It's 2007. You're two centuries too late to advocate mercantlism.

Btw. it wasn't 'good' for the economy.
The people wanted autarky even though it was inefficient.
It was a question of politics.

The world economy will prevent nations from falling.

Not so good for the investors (read:  rest of world)

>>18
Maybe so. But if USA loses its relative position, then it wouldn't be a superpower any more. With a population of 494,900,000 compared to USAs 301,819,700 - EU has a great potential and lots of resources, it's only a bit disorganized.

>>19

How does the EU plain to curtail India and China? The EU is great and all and it certainly has the numbers if it works in state cohesion but they don't offer mass production that both India and China offer. If India's GDP continues to grow at the current rate (which I don't think it will) it will overtake the US by 2030.

These are powerhouses of production, they're the only states in the world that offer labor at a very cheap expense, so, wealth will ultimately flow there.

The EU together with the US is 60 % of the world economy in some aspects, and the US invested 4 times as much capital in Germany as in China the previous year.

Yet, Europe barely has the potential to take #1, and is definetely to weak on critical issues to take over, lest it does some serious catharsis or, preferably, bites the bullet and reforms NAO!

China... I'm not sure about China, economically or politically, but I am interested in India and Brasil. Russia can rot for all I care - the only productive citizens are muslims and everybody treats them like those from the Caucasus.

yeah, i doubt we, europeans, will manage to reform in the near future, at most we'll manage to make a semi-constitution which won't really be backed by the population anyway, and will only superficially tie the european countries together. We'll probably manage like we always have, but the next superpower? i don't think so, tim.

russia... well.. they got the gas, and that's about it. they have plenty of available workers etc. but their workforce is shoddy, no work morale, and people show up for work either drunk or hung over.
china is sort of weird, mainly because of the situation with their currency being undervalued and their funds not being allowed to invest out of china (recently it was changed so they were allowed to invest up to 25% in foreign assets, but china's economy is booming so they're reluctant to).
India and brazil are as >>21 said sorta interesting, brazil still has alot of problems with crime etc. but has the possiblity to evolve very well, same with the rest of southern america, unless the current "red" wave manages to fuck things up too much. India still has some unresolved foreign affairs with pakistan, but other than that i'd say it's a nice bet as one of the up-and-coming cool places. High focus on technology, a large part of the population speaks english, but still lacks development of infrastructure and education of large amounts of the countryside population.

1) Protectionism. If a country won't pay it's workers the same as ours is it moral to let them have that advantage over our workers? We tax them in proportion to their minimum wage and ours and the free market is preserved.

2) Xenophobia. Population must be controlled in order to preserve our standard of living. I don't care if the resources used to produce 1 burger can generate 10 loaves of bread, if the people who need that bread didn't exist I wouldn't have to be oppressed in order to feed them. If other countries won't control their population growth we shouldn't be forced at gunpoint to cater for their excess. I will not submit to tyranny.

3) Theocracy. Don't be a stupid fag.

I think China is the only real contender for the next superpower, I mean until the last 500 years they were arguably the most advanced country on the world. I think they have been held back by the government's consistent purges against intellectuals, and this will effect China's chance to grow now politically and economically.

India has too low an IQ to be a world superpower. The eastern asian countries are only growing fast economically because all the technology and knowledge is already in place for them to do so, at best they will catch up the west, but I doubt they have the innovation to take over from the usa or europe. The huge popultion of China however will give it more influence even if they dont achieve the standard of living in the west.

The downfall of the USA and europe will be immigration, and low white birth rate, but still I see them holding onto their position a superpowers for the next 20 years at least.

I think the next world war will be
US vs EU.
and the rest of the world will take side.
I am with EU

>>24

yeah, but with the living standards, or at least a sudden burst in living standards will lead to a sudden burst in living standards which will lead to the related problems. Life-style diseases and such.
With china we also have to think about this demographics. This may not keep them from becoming a super-power, but it will put a lid on their economy sooner or later. The one-child-policy was instituted in the early eighties, this means that in about 20-30 years, the generation shift will kick in, and millions of chinese people will be going on pension, with less and less people to support them, this is the problem we have in europe right now with the baby-boomers of the 40's and 50's.

It's also interesting to see if we can even talk of real super powers in 20 or 30 years, if the current trends of global companies and expanding international trade, more and more bi- and multilateral trade agreements, would anyone risk starting, say, another world war?

china and india will surpass the US and the EU as a superpower.  they have engineers willing to work more than 12 hours shifts and live at the offices.  and they have a fuckton of em.

neither the US nor the EU has the willpower, resources, or motivation to compete at the level india and china can and will.  instead, the US and the EU must take their places as the innovators of the world.

we basically have to retire and retire gracefully, so-to-speak.

>>1
My guess is that by 2142 the earth will have frozen and water will be in short supply. The war for control of the water will be fought between the EU and a coaliton of Asian countries called the PAC. The theater of operations, or "battlefield" if you will, is likely to be Europe and northern Africa.

>>28
tl;dr version: plot of tank girl - 50 degrees kelvin = earth 2142

>>24

Are you crazy? Indians have low IQs? I'm a white person who is doing Chemical Engineering in an American University and 60% of people within the major are all Indians coming over here for education. They're a very intelligent people.

India's IQ is 81 comparted to China's 100 (World average 90)

I have had Indian physics and economics professors -- no doubt some of them can be intelligent but the ones who come over to America to study is hardly a representation of the average Indian.

>>30

We've some Indians in the tech institute too and I fully agree with you.
They're hardcore and surpass any other foreigners and most of our students.
It's because they come from wealthy families and they're also extremely competitive.

>>30
Hey I'm majorring in chemical engineering also.

>>31
IQ-tests was used by americans who wanted to denigrate immigrants by asking them wholly irrelevant questions. If you take a IQ-test you've signed your own declaration of stupidity and dependence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mismeasure_of_Man

>>23
Have you ever heard of Frédéric Bastiat? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bastiat

>>25
Not if either USA or EU descends into dictatorship.

>>34
Yea go on thinking every race is of the same intelligence

Libertarian: While we're not equal in ability we should have equal rights.

Socialist: We're not equal in ability, so we should persecute people just for being part of a demographic that does better than another demographic. THAT WAY WE CAN PRESERVE OUR PURE black/aryan/muslim RACE SIEG HEIL SIEG HEIL SIEG HEIL

>>38

wrong thread?

>>34
I have some better books

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bell_Curve
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ_and_the_wealth_of_nations

Regardless of "what an IQ score means", there is a huge correlation between the score achieved in IQ tests and wealth, success and intellectual achievements.

I'm aware that some of the tests have some cultural bias that may account for a few points, but if you compare intellectual achievements of India's 1 billion people to say the 1 billion white people you would have to be extremely blind not to see the huge intelligence difference. The fact is the Jews, with an IQ of about 115, and a population of 15 million people have had countless times more great intellects than India's 1 billion people with an IQ of 81. I dont believe intelligence is a value that can ever be measured absolutely, but the IQ test scores are a damn good indicator at least of applied intelligence.

The book you linked to seems to be entirely theory and have very outdated concepts. It's now practically scientifically proven that intelligence is inherited  and genetic, but I guess people choose to believe what fits their world view.