One Hundred Years From Now

Lets go back a ways and try to relate....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0TkfYTXa6k

http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=jz2iBHYS_YY

Wanna be a member?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4fXllxQa1Y&feature=related

Loved that second film especially. Wish we still used them, or updated versions.

This video contains content from Sony Pictures, who has blocked it in your country on copyright grounds. Sorry about that.

You didn't miss much.

You didn't miss much.

Had an OT for a while, wonder what happened.

Here is what I think will be:

1. Politics, as we know it, will have as much relevance as the Queen of England has nowadays. A parade of impotent fossils. Sorry you guys back there

2. Religion will be treated as a hobby and will not take part in the overall important flow of information. A big flow of substance is needed, indeed.

3. The Eisenhower ^(?) supported doctrine of the industrial military complex will be vindicated. Swords to plow's it is. Nowadays it is more about hitting share holders.... , they'll survive.

4. CR4 will be more established than Face book and have a world wide instant influence on matters concerning anything one would prefer being concerned about.

5. Still not a perpetual motion in sight.

6. Drugs will have a remedial position and will be available from local, privileged in the science, Drug Dealers, not Pharmacist Reps. One needs not Columbia to .......

7. This is all financially supported by the funds the prior mentioned 'fossils' will not have and will support friends to have a more fruitful life. That's the whole lot of you. Well, some say it's the 99% but they forget the tax

8. Transcending to this state will not happen without pain. It seems to hurt when one loses weight but in the end it is all an illusion.

9. Roger Pink will have something in print and taught.

10. We shall over come.

Take it easy.

Ky.

PS: I like Your President!

I hope you're right about most things.

As to the chief executive, he was handed a mine field of problems, not the least of which were tax cuts that were supposed to stimulate jobs. Those cuts stimulated more hording of giant amounts of corporate and personal cash instead of helping the economy. People are still out of work.

I'm more middle of the road than lots of people, some of whom are regulars here.

Cheers.

"2. Religion will be treated as a hobby and will not take part in the overall important flow of information. A big flow of substance is needed, indeed."

Why would the idea of spirituality or religion go away? It has been around since the beginning of time. Why would the next 100 years be any different? Human nature, in which there is a God-consciousness, will still be the same , whether someone acknowledges God or not there is still a sense of a Being that is present and active in the world.

Since basic human nature doesn't change much there will still be a need for a strong judicial branch of government.

We are seeing more and more economic unrest in the world and there will be a push for a more centralized government. That is a huge mistake because people lose autonomy and sovereignty when they become part of something so large. The larger the organization, the more ineffective and inefficient it becomes, the more uncaring it becomes.

There will be an increasing pressure from Islam to dominate territory and countries through violent means.

There will be a continuing degradation of personal character and integrity which will be reflected in rising crime rates, the breakdown of the family unit, rampant problems with STD's because of illicit sexual activity. There will be a more stark contrast between people of character and those otherwise.

Formerly communist country China will have moved more towards a capitalist and free enterprise mindset and see booming growth in it's economy.

There will also be movements of people who will be willing to "put down their feet in the pool and seek to reverse the flow of the water and return it to the correct direction", where people are cognizant and educated about economics, personal responsibility, accountability, ethics, character and integrity.

You like out President. Please, come and get him before he turns this country into an unrecoverable mess. He is well on his way, and if they give him four more years we will become a clone of Greece.

________________________________________________

Satisfaction is the enemy of improvement.

Hopefully, we will not have the global wars of the first half of the last hundred years. From this difference alone I think we will have a better world overall. There still will be hardship and adversity to overcome. I think that the ease of global, personal communication will make politics different in ways we haven dreamed of yet.

I'll come back and let you know in a hundred years.

An interesting question and one that I often ponder. One thing for sure is that advances in technology are very unpredictable. Just looking at air travel alone: supersonic airliners have come and gone already, unducted turbofans were tried and were never pursued, variable incidence fan blades were tried and abandoned, carbon fiber fan blades failed, slew wing was tried and abandoned. I'm sure there were many more - can't think of anymore off-hand. All these "advancements" came to nothing, despite having much promise at the time. Airliners are no faster now than they were in the 1950's (that damned Mach 1 thing), and in my opinion less pleasant to travel in. More economical and quieter - yes, but not much to show for 50 years. By now we should have been travelling long distance by sub-orbital airliners according to the predictions of even 40 years ago.

Nuclear energy? Need I even ask? Renewable energy? Enormous promise, but seems to have stalled. Computers/communication and medicine seem to have taken top honors. Our future will depend completely on energy and its availability. If nuclear fusion becomes really practical, then everything changes.

But then there are the things that could derail everything (but which we could control): severe overpopulation, trashing the environment, a drug fueled population, virus pandemic, global warming. The first three are already on their way. The last still hotly debated. What we can't control: massive asteroid/comet collision.

I'd love to come back in 50, 100 and 500 years to take a look. Will it be better or worse. Absolutely no idea, but not looking too promising at the moment.

like fall out 3?

I am afraid there is an excellent chance of that. I own the game, but find reality more compelling. Our brains seem more developed than our souls. Our wisdom can't seem to keep up with our intelligence and technology.

Much cheaper holidays in Greece and Spain.

The point in trying to predict the future is to avoid the obvious mistakes that we are making over time. You are doing a fair job of it. No one knows if the world will be here tomorrow, for sure.

Humans will become Robotic... & Subjects to many different types of machernery...

O' no... We are almost there now!

50 years from now... We will all be Catholics or Dead!

Growing elaborate mustaches will have become the most popular pastime, and annual competitions are held for the world championship....it's the most watched event ever....

7 *billion I meant.

Capitalism may be the only thing that CAN save us.

Unless you can convince the world population to stop increasing, we had BETTER see continued economic growth. Otherwise, the amount of food we now feed to 7 billion people will soon have to feed 14 billion.

However, I guess that would be a self correcting problem, albeit a little harsh.

Continued economic growth means a continued rise in poulation....more houses, more development, more infrastucture, the need for more resources, which all means more jobs...more money.....all to fuel the capitalist ideals/goals of companies, corporations, and to a lesser extent, even the average man running a business etc. Thats the problem, is it not? Thefore I fail to see how 'Capitalism may be the only thing that CAN save us.' Sitting down, and accepting the fact the current model is not sustainable, and trying to come up with a new one, is the only thing that is going to save us. The biggest step in fixing a problem, is accepting that you actually have one in the first place. If it keeps going the way it is, eventually there wont be anything left to mine, there wont be any more room for houses, there wont be any clean water left to drink. The earth is only so big, so its pretty obvious that everything on it is finite. Finite meaning it has an end, an end we take another step toward everyday. We arnt going to do it because we are to stupid, ignorant and selfish a race, but ultimately we need what could only be a be described complete revolution in our thinking and our way of life to save ourselves. Capitalism will not save us....not in the end. It might serve as band-aid for a while, but even that is a generous statement. Therefore I respectfully but whole-heartedly disagree with your statement.

I concur. New technologies, and epic stories aside.....at our current trajectory, it aint gonna pretty in my opinion.

http://www.industrysearch.com.au/News/Western-consumerism-a-threat-to-species-scientists-60410

So get out of the way from those who want to rejoice. Tragedy an indifference has always existed.

"Continued economic growth means a continued rise in population"

OK, if economic growth comes to a halt (as it has for the last few years) then population growth will stall as well ??

Hopefully people who reason like that will not be in charge of our problems (or maybe they already are). It is a little depressing to me that you got a GA for that divination.

Look, economic growth is not the problem with the depletion of resources. Population rise is the problem.

Yes, we will eventually deplete resources (on this planet). No, economic growth (and capitalism) will not cause this; more people will cause this.

No, if population stalls and economic growth continues, you will not be able to drive two cars at once or eat twice as much and live in two houses at the same time (ie...the same number of people will not consume more).

A. Maybe we could pull in our lines, get rid of technology, and localize. I have no doubt this would work.

B. On the other hand, maybe we could ride this fast train and see where it takes us.

I'm in favor of B.

There there WJ, dont feel bad, there are far more depressing problems in the world than me getting a GA, not that I care for them anyway. All a GA means, in essence, is that someone agrees with you. Not really worth writing home about, plus, I am sure they can revoke them, so after you enlighten everybody, that may well occur.

I agree population rise is the single biggest problem, but poulation rise and ecomomic growth are proportional to a very great extent. Sure, if all economies stopped suddenly, people would still continue copulating, but it would definately slow them down, because they would be to busy just trying to survive themselves, plus the mortality rate would rise. But, if people stopped breeding, what the hell would everyone do? Business's keep getting bigger, and resources keep getting used up, because there is more demand for supply........because there are more people (that and our consumerist society corporations/brands/whatever have created).

I prefer option 1, thats why my goal in life is to be self sufficient (still working on that one), but that isnt really an easy option when everyone is already on the fast train heading for the abyss, is it?

'OK, if economic growth comes to a halt (as it has for the last few years) then population growth will stall as well ??'

Come to a halt? I dont see anything halting (ok, maybe Greece). It might have slowed down considerably in some parts of the world, but it definately hasn't halted yet. And what essentially is the reason it has slowed?....greed. Commonly Capitalism's 'right hand man'. There are that many people on the earth that I think it might be to late to halt poulation growth anyway...hence my exponential curve comment. If that is the 'fast train' you are talking about......it would seem that no one is getting off anyway, even if they wanted to, because its already going to 'fast'.

Lastly;

'A. Maybe we could pull in our lines, get rid of technology, and localize. I have no doubt this would work.'

You have 'no doubt' this would work, but you choose the fast train? If you had cancer, and a doctor said to you "You have 2 options...."

"1;You could go with this wonder drug, derived from a plant in South America. Tribesman there have been eating it for thousands of years. We have been testing it the last 15 years and have 'no doubt' about its effectiveness to completely cure you'

or

2; 'you could go with the standard operation, chemo and radiology treatments, which will make you extremely ill, your hair will most likely fall out, and it still may not save you'

Which one would you be more inclined to choose?"

You my friend, are living in the rabbit hole.

Population growth will not slow. Surely being in the rabbit hole, the rabbits have shown you this. Any overpopulation that cannot he handled by growth will perish.

You sound like a good candidate for option 1. Maybe you can even make it work.

I on the other hand, like option 2. Unlike you, however, I do not see the fast train going off a cliff (the abyss). I am a firm believer in the seemingly unlimited capacity of human beings to create and change.

Funny thing about "fast trains"; there are always people on them doing everything in their power to get to the brakes, when they could simply have gotten off at the last stop and exercised option 1.

In the rabbit hole I may be.....and yes it is cramped in here, just as it is everywhere else.

I am a firm believer in the seemingly unlimited capacity of human beings to destroy and procreate, even at their own detriment. Im certain infanticide is, or has been prevelant in some areas of the world, but as far as I am aware, China has been the only nation I am aware of that has actively put some kind of 'program' in place to attempt to slow the rate of population growth. Here in OZ, its the opposite, they pay people when they have a child. I can attest to there being a good number of single mothers out there with a whole bunch of kids, living quite comfortably from government child support payments.....at the detriment of their own children. If I was running the country, I would be paying people to NOT have children. Good thing I am not running the country then I guess?

I have been on the Shinkansen in Japan. I didnt see see anyone attempting to hit the skids, and I had no inclination to do so myself, but I knew the exact destination of the train.......thats the difference.

Im still trying to work out this comment; "Any overpopulation that cannot he handled by growth will perish." Do you infer that we will hit a plateau whereby poulation will reach a point where there simply is not enough sustenance to sustain it? If so, then I am guessing that that will be the exact moment the train derails/becomes airborne off the cliffs edge. That will also be the moment when all the passengers collectively thinkto themselves 'I wish I had of just got off at the last stop".

We're on the same page regarding those on the dole just pumping them out. You think OZ is bad ? Try the good ole USA.

Regarding my overpopulation statement, I will simplify.

1. When land that cannot adequately grow crops is populated with too many people, some of them might perish. If they do, the train does not derail or go over a cliff (although it may seem that way to them).

2. On the other hand, the UN might step in and send food to those people, that was grown using technology that allows for ever increasingly denser crop yield. Maybe the food was transported to those people using technology other than mules.

In the case of 1, overpopulation causes people to perish. In the case of 2, people that might have perished do not, due to the growth of technology.

Incidentally, if you know the exact destination of the train, please impart this to those of us who are more interested in progress for humanity, and less interested in getting off the train.

Ok, what you say makes sense, but, the earth being finite implies that one day, eventually, there will be people everywhere, and there will be no where to grow food etc, besides on the rooftops (or wherever new technologies enable this process). And what about all the other 'non-essential' flora and fauna? Where are they suppossed to live? My assumption is, they will be a distant memory, spoken of by 150 year old humans when describing their childhood to their grand kids. Or in zoos, for everyone to admire.

I would also say that someone 'perishing' and their train going over the proverbial cliff, are one and the same.

In my particular experience the trains destination was Hiroshima/Kyoto/Tokyo, all on different occasions. As for the destination of the train mankind is aboard, I posses not, a crystal ball, therefore I along with everyone else who commented on this thread, can only speculate. I admire your faith in our race and your humanity, and apologise for being so cynical, but I think collectively, as a race, we are all screwed.

'If your not part of the solution, you are part of the problem'. My effort in solving our woes, is working toward the goal of being self sufficient, and having as minor an impact on the planet as I am able ('if you cant change the world...change your world'). Yours is obviously, to assist everyone else in doing the same, albeit in a completely different fashion. I accept the fact, that for humanity's sake, your approach and belief is probably more productive.

If this isnt a good analogy, then I dont know what is?.......fire in the 'rabbit hole'...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9xoFCS33kg&feature=player_detailpage

No, this is not a good analogy. Exponential growth is just one phase of well known population growth curves. The proposed nutrient filled test tube with bacteria is not even close to life, or even human life on Earth. This proffered analogy is so significantly simplified that the goal I can think of to simplify things this much is only to mislead people.

The link relates to any species in any biosphere. By choosing the biosphere to the whole planet it does set the immigration and emigration values to zero but it does not invalidate the analysis. What the link briefly mentions that is very pertinent to what I think is your point is that at any given time in an ecosystem there is a maximum carrying capacity for a species. People have long speculated that we should be transitioning into the environmental resistance effects that converts the exponential growth curve into the sigmoidal growth curve. Two reasons explains why our growth continues to follow an exponential curve:

1. The maximum carrying capacity for us is so large that environmental resistance has yet to appear to effect our growth. I do not believe this to be true but to be thorough in this discussion this possibility should be mentioned.
2. The maximum carrying capacity for us has changed over time so that despite our continued exponential growth the maximum capacity has grown enough with us to keep us at the far left of the curve. I believe this is the reason we continue to grow exponentially.

We do this by actively changing our environments maximum carrying capacity for us. The first efforts in this process was our ancient shift from a hunter-gatherer society to an agrarian society. Choosing and fostering the plants that grew on an acre of land produced more food from that acre. The maximum carrying capacity increased with the invention of farming. We've since done so very many other things over many millennia to improve the maximum carrying capacity that it is difficult to say how many orders of magnitude of people exist above the original maximum carrying capacity we have.Now unlike most species, our species reacts faster than the slow process of natural selection of genetic mutations. We evolve by learning new techniques and passing this knowledge to other generations. Every new technique always has some drawbacks. Most drawbacks are not known until the technique is implemented for reasons that should be obvious.

This is why I still believe that 100 years from now things will be different in ways I cannot imagine, but people will still be here.

but population rise and economic growth are proportional

You're right:.. but.... it's an inverse relationship.

If there was a person refuting your stupid, that is Buckminster Fuller. He Instructed his architecture students to pack people in suburban comfort in an area and in a cube.

It turned out, that Texas could house all the inhabitants of this world.

It turned out, a cube mile can do the same.

Now, sonny, sharpen your pencil. Come back, when you know better, than moaning.

Would you like to live in cube mile, with 7 billion other people?

Its selfish notion I know, but what about quality of life!? I know of a place you speak of, it exists in my mind, and its called hell! I wouldnt be suprised if that happened ONE DAY.....but we will leave the conspiracy theories out of this discussion.

Fuller died in 1983, last time I checked it is 2012. I have not read any of Fuller's work's, so maybe you could tell me. Did Fuller make this proposition when he was practising as a professor, or on his death bed? Becuase the population in 1983 was 4.7 billion people, so I assume it was considerably less when he made that calculation.

Im running a pacer, therefore I dont need a sharpener.....thank you technology.

Due to technological development there will be lot of changes in health sector, communication, travel, manufacturing etc which will make word borderless. There will be a great socio cultural change. Many changes will take place in important social institutions. Quality of life of people will improve . There will be peace in the world as there will be no discrimination.

I feel only those things will change which have already not reached near perfection. Take for example ball bearings. Nothing has changed in last 50 years. Take pumps. the basics remain same. Archimidian screws are still used for pumping even after 2300 years. Reciprocating engines have not phased out despite many attempts at rotary engines and turbines. Therefore after 100 years lot of technology which exists today will still be there. Lot of new additions will be there in the fields where perfection has still not been achieved.

We cannot imagine what it will be like 100 years from now, just as people 100 years ago could not imagine how it is today. There are too many variables that could change outcomes. What if the discovery of manned flight had been delayed 20 years? What if nuclear energy were still undiscovered? How different things would be today.

The Microsoft operating system will become self-aware.

It will also be jealous of Linux!

It already is!

It will even be aware of itself freezing and crashing

The Microsoft operating system will become self-aware.
Will it produce Terminators?

It will then realise it's a bug riddled crock of $hite and self destruct.
The development of computing can then progress at a much faster rate.
Del

100 years huh? We will be fighting wars with sticks and stones and the more advanced will be using bows and arrows.

you want to invest in something what's the gig

I'm gonna go ahead and say that I hope that the world will be a better place. But the way it's looking in real eyes, I think it will either continue to get even messier if most countries keep having leaders who look out for themselves and their family, and who don't consider their country part of their family. I feel as though America, in which I do live, will be a sort of instigator for the issues of consumption and secrecy; the real bad guy. But it's anybody's guess in 100 years. I think design has to add an element in their concepts in which a lot of them consistently seek to forget. Which is to remember that people need to still need to do work.

I understand that design is supposed to make things easier right now. Rather than something working at the push of a button, or devices that work through voice- which is cool; we still need to have something that makes us work and keeps our bodies healthy. Farmers can't be the only ones getting a good workout. Does that make any sense? In 100 years if we can have a good handful of some honest and like-minded leaders and a wholesome population of some healthy people, the world could continue to make some progress. In talking about 100 years though, that's up to everybody to teach the youth about the meaning of progress.

LOL Bravo! Bravo!

Thanks!

The United States IRS as we know it will be dimantled on 1 April 2023. That entity, and all governmental revenue systems, will become completly pointless after the Paint-Can Lid Uprising in June of the previous year. The final collection by any revenue system in the world will be against somebody called KrisDel Corp. on 31 March 2023.

So, the pending court cases against LynDoor Industries will simply be dissolved. Whew, we will dodge a bullet there!

I'm glad you didn't mention that little dust up LynDoor™ had with the IRS.

Law Makers Will Add the New Laws: " You Can't Do That Any More"! & "Do or Die"!

Maybe my first answer to the question was wrong. Maybe it will just become the "Planet of the Apes"

____________________________________________________________________

Satisfaction is the enemy of improvement

Wow, we just went through a time warp.

Or, was it a miracle?

I'm not sure the intervention was divine in this case, more administrative, I think.

I had a great retort for the FM, too.

Did others witness this, this, this "time travel"?

Anybody seen kramarat?

Never mind. Wrong thread.

Oh ,wow! I am left with minor details. So be it.

All the world's dark matter and such are dissolved into the followup of the string theory; Loop-de-loop. Everything is becoming blindigly obvious, as long as you handle high math²

The nuclear particles gain mass by divine proclamation (not as you understand, but by: "a sufficiently advanced society is indistinguishable from magic". The CERN supercollider is and was superfluous.

We find, that tachyons are used by advanced members routinely, and as a measure for admissibility.

The mile² array is a venerated museum piece, the proof (if you are able to believe it) of the First Contact.

We are unwashed upstart second hand cousins in the great society's games.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Am I too fantastic? Compare it with the last 500 year's unexpectedness, and weep. I do not care, which "Great Society" you talk about. The greater the ego, the greater the fall.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Engineers, with their sense to proportionality, will survive. HAIL to the first engineer,

----------------------------------------------------------------

Other than that, I have no strong opinions.

best regards

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Am I partial? Yeah, for a - or many -damn good reasons!!!

Edicts from 2012: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-NckBvLrP6Gj6v6C6fcRToZGV3capzdnRPXPZEukQK4/edit

Unable to access a doc someone shared with you

If you're unable to access a doc that you were previously able to open, or if you can't access a doc or file that was shared with you, there are a couple of possibilities.

• The doc owner hasn't granted access to your account.
• You were removed from the list of people with access.
• The owner of the doc deleted it.

If you have the link to the doc or a sharing email, you can request access to the doc. Visit the doc URL, then click the request access link on the page that says you don't have access.

If you think that you're receiving this message in error, here are some things you can try:

• Make sure you are signed in to the correct Google Account - one of your accounts might have access, and another might not.
• Contact the person who invited you to confirm that you have access to the doc and that you're visiting the correct URL.
• If you're only able to view a document, spreadsheet or presentation, but not edit it, you can ask the doc owner if you've been added as a viewer or editor.

========================================

Was it any good Lyn?

Access granted.

you may very well be the most optimistic person i've ever met.

Virtually any work in manufacturing that can be done by robots will be done that way.
Thats my job!

It is always interesting to speculate about the future, but predictions so far ahead are little more than guessing. As it was said earlier, there are too many variables.

As some look ahead in their imagination, many tend only to think about the technological issues, but those, I believe, are trivial. Most all of our 'evolutions' are social, and those social changes are what drive all other issues.

Also, there is a tendency to think in terms of what we commonly refer to as our 'first-world' environments … those of us who are influenced by the technologies and marketing of same. We are not alone on this planet. There are many aboriginal cultures who still survive in ways not dissimilar to way they existed a hundred years ago, not because of oppression or famine or disaster, but by choice.

I am not a sociologist, however it seems to me that we in this 'first world' environment are the weakest of the lot, because we have become dependent upon our technologies (I speak of myself), and look always forward to the next time-saving, muscle-weakening, brain-numbing innovation. That is not to say we have not benefited from technical advancements, but we have indeed become dependent upon them.

My concern, without considering the natural disasters which may befall us, is our continuing fall as we choose to think 'less', allowing others to think 'on our behalf'. Regardless of our individual morals or philosophies, change happens, and it happens so slowly that we hardly notice. As we think about what the world may be like one-hundred years from now, I wonder to the contrary, what the man of one-hundred years ago might comment if we could suddenly uproot him from then, and plant him in our day and time? Initially, they would be amazed at the evident technologies we all take for granted, first in transportation and communications, then, delving further, in our knowledge of the medical sciences, and on into our knowledge of the physical sciences. Soon, however, I cannot help but think that same person might be disappointed in our social evolution and how attitudes and governments have changed. Moving so quickly from 'then' to 'now' might at last cause them to wonder if all our advancements were truly worth the cost.

Some have responded here regarding how the future will bring peace and love and harmony and long-life. Some have predicted the demise of us all, either naturally, or of our own stupidity. Actually, except for the coming of natural disasters, either is possible, but it is up to us, and that may be the most discouraging thing to contemplate. We haven't a very good track record of 'moving as one' toward any common goal. We haven't a very good track record of making collective decisions that have a lasting impact. Can we? Of course. Will we? Hmmm.

Kind regards …

If your world is ok to live in now?

With all the tec stuf ect. then I have something to look forward to

Here in Africa we are about a 100 years behind you guys,

So wow have we got something to look forward to

I have heard reports of Masai living traditionally, except that they have cell phones and internet centers that they use extensively. Is this accurate? How would you view that as a lifestyle? Maybe some combo of severe retro and tech is best.

I:m not sure of the masai but here in South Africa the Zulus in the rural areas live in mud huts but have cell phones and cable T V with a BMW car parked outside in the open.Maybe you guys should buy some land here for your Gran kids

Computers will still be too damned slow.

Computers will be implanted and allow you to perform complex math in the blink of an eye. Memory will be expandable, as you learn to manage it.

1 million tigibytes, won't be enough, to hold the SPAM; leters, when you want to go through your E-Mails in the morning

You dont sound very optimistic either. (those are my radiation sunnies)

I would like to be optimistic, but I think that pessimism is more realistic and helpful. My motto is: Pray for the best, but prepare for the worst.

Some studies have shown that pessimistic predictions tend to be more accurate than optimistic ones.

I always figure to spend twice as much on vacations, as I would like to budget.

Hope for the best...prepare for the worst.

Sounds good to me! (still got my radiation sunnies on haha)

Re: #66, #67

I prefer to continue there, as the running baseless negativism is simply depressing. AND BASELESS. Now, it may be a natural resting state of the human mind. But that is the best, it can be said for it. NOT as reality by any means.

I remain tightly coupled with Buckminster Fuller for a sound reason. He demonstrated year after year, that the human mind is fallible, more like warped to the negative. The human mind is quite ok estimating linear distances. Not good at all estimating areas. Engineers do halfway adequate, after a lifetime training. Absolutely abysmal at estimating a volume. The point? You cannot trust your intuition as an anchoring point. Get your facts right.

1,. You are all multimillonaires. Not knowing it does not change it. Not laying hand on it does not change it either. Now, What is the trick? Take out a 100meter cube under your foot, and take it apart atom for atom. Accounting for all in it, you are rich. Not right now, as you need energy, and knowledge. Er, let me translate: knowledge AND knowledge.

2,. You are multimillionaires. Not realizing it yet does not change it. Biotech hothouse technology is something yields 100x or better of the present system. For food. For pharmaceuticals much higher. How much higher? Your bet is as good as mine. Dream on.

These two points were made to counterpoint the habitual pessimists. Other than that, let them rant.

Multimillionaires?....by whos defination? I dont have the time to work out the approximate ammount of atoms in 100 cubic metres of dirt, and I feel rich just being able to experience life on this beautiful planet, but unless it was heavily laden with gold or some other precious metal, it would not have much monetary worth. You are on some 'next-level sh*t' (no pun intended), and I can appreciate that. Maybe one day all this will make sense to my feeble mind. (hopefully that is the thinking emoticon)

People will still make bows and arrows from wood using simple hand tools.
Other technologies may crash and burn, but the bow and arrow will still work.
Del
(It will pbobably be illegal and/or taxed of course!)

The Square Wheel, will be Perfected!

Everything went to hell when healthcare Providers Aurora Medical, Prevea and health insurance giant United Healthcare merged with McDonalds , where McDonalds brought back the promotion of 'Super Size Me' repackaged it as ' Super Duper Size Me'.

Economic World Power Haiti has imposed economic sanctions against the United States as well as China until they get their fiscal austerity policies in order dealing with it's own government benefit packages since the reinstatement of collective barginning, with the exception of food and medical assistance.

This was a swift annoucement from the last survey that found 12 out of every 10 people working are on the government payroll, since the liberal repeal of the law that lets illegal aliens the right for benefit programs.

^{I can't figure out the math either.......}

Everybody will have their own giant bird like creature to fly around on...