The World 2050

[12th Doctor]

I've been thinking about this, because I wanted to make some truly serious forcasts... breaking it down, first by the U.S. and then by regions of the world, and then some general global trends, note that this is not some idealistic prediction saying what I wish will happen, this is serious, good, bad and ugly:

United States of America

1)

There will be 52 states by the year 2050... Puerto Rico eventually decided to enter the Union, in union with the Virgin Islands in the 2030's.  The new states is known as "Antilles."  The measure was a long time in coming.  Serious overtures of statehood started in 2016, after Puerto Rican Governor Fortuño had a surprisingly strong showing in the Republican Presidential Primary, and was a strong contender for the VP slot.  This choice was blocked because of concerns about the status of the territory he governed, and growing anti-Hispanic sentiment, tied to immigration, which soured relations between Puerto Rico and the mainland United States through the 2010's and 2020's (though this was not consistent through the period).  At the same time, the U.S. Virgin Islands demonstrated a strong, growing sentiment toward statehood, but are blocked due to their small size.  After a strong, and growing independence movement from San Juan in the 2020's, Puerto Rico whiplashes back to pro-statehood, and the deal is struck.

There is much less drama surrounding D.C. statehood.  It simply becomes a reality in in the 2020's, as the Republicans, oddly enough, become the new champions of the cause, in an attempt to get black votes, under the auspicious of anti-Federal Government sentiment (opposing Federal control of the city).  Many in D.C. quickly wish they hadn't, as the reality of having to run their own budget, without Federal help, soon sinks in.  A deal is eventually struck, allowing the Federal Government to pay for certain projects connected to the "Federal District of Columbia" while the "State of Columbia" pays for the rest of the expanses.

2)

After a strong period of anti-immigration sentiment through the 2010's, the reality of declining birthrates and an aging population catch up with the United States.  Bringing in immigration soon becomes a matter of survival for all industrialized states, and the United States significantly relaxes its immigration policies by 2025.  The hard-line immigration policies of 2012-2025 appear to stall "white plurality" at the time, but by 2050 the new, relaxed view toward immigration means that those who self-identify as "white" comprise only 40 percent of the population... those who claim "no race" now comprise 20 percent of the population, as most Americans are either children of a "mixed-race" couple, or married to someone of a different "race".

The prevailing political attitude during the 2040's, with new states, and massive immigration influx is called "Neo-expansionism".

3) Fears that Spanish will become competitive with English in the United States are never realized.  Spanish is rarely spoken as a first or close second language, except near the border, and English is now as prevalent in the border territories of Mexico as Spanish is on the American side.  American English has borrowed a number of Spanish words, and the occasional odd bit of Spanish construction has snuck into American (which is becoming increasingly distinct from other English languages), but nothing else.

4) Nearly 70 percent of all Americans live in areas that have the character of truly urban areas.  The suburbs that once dominated the U.S. landscape are now largely populated by low income families, if at all, as many are falling into disrepair... by 2040, many of the cheaply constructed housing and shopping areas have already been almost completely reclaimed by natural surroundings, or have been cleared for farming.  The majority of the population of metro-regions now extends no farther than the inner-ring suburban zones.  

This is not to say that all Americans live in or around large cities.  Indeed, many parts of the United States have seen a "small town" revival, but most live in a classic town setting, and no along the outskirts.  The "rural revival" is helped along by the influence of technology, which allows smaller firms (or small branches of large firms) to establish themselves in smaller areas.  

Contrary to predictions, the majority of work is still done in office settings, and not by people "teleconferencing" at their homes without ever going to work.  People and corporations moved toward that level of total independence in the 2020's and 30's, but both eventually realized the real benefits of physical interaction in a real work place.

5) Suburban death was both an economic, environmental and social movement.  The new urban society and community movement that started in the 1990's only continued to pick up steam through the 2020's, when the total suburban collapse began.  The new generation of people who moved to urban areas in the 2000's and 2010's quickly realized the benefits of urban living, as the quality of living in the inner-city increased, and soon had children whose only impression of the suburbs were the unattractive surroundings they saw on the long drives to see grandma and grandpa.  Inevitable gas shortages, and rises in oil prices were partially held off by the proliferation of hybrid-technology, but as it became clear that society had passed peak oil production from the ground, even the mass production of synthetic petroleum couldn't stave off rising prices.  The cost of suburban living attracted more people back into cities, or near mass transit lines extending out through them.  The highways fell dead.

The 2020's saw one outer suburban municipality after another go bankrupt as they struggled to provide even the most basic services.  The collapse of the old system was amazing sudden, as suburbs around the country lost almost a third of their numerical population from the 2020-2030 Census, and half by 2040... I say numerical because of the number of original residents fell further, but some were replaced by low income residents.

Along with the new farmlands, urban gardening has become a major source of food.  Thanks to the relocation of food production back near centers of consumption, food in actually less expensive, as a percentage of the family budget, than it was in 2010, in spite of higher global and national populations.

Note:  While the average American still eats more meat than the average person around the globe, consumption of "fleshy" meat products has declined by half, being replaced partially by higher egg consumption.

6)  The number of Americans identifying as pure atheists has not changed, appreciably since 2010, just as it had not truly changed much throughout the 20th century.  However, fewer Americans claim a specific religious belief.  

Note: The percentage of self-identified atheists in the United States in 1944 was 4 percent.  The percentage of self-identified atheists in the United States in 2007... 4 percent.  It was lower during the years in between.  In 1910, it's estimated that the percentage of people in the United States who were atheist was 10 percent.  What was different?  Back then far left-wing economics and social views (communism and anarchism) and social Darwinism (Eugenics, and other forms) were both more prevalent political philosophies.  In Europe today, same deal.  It has nothing to do with scientific advancement in society.  It's cyclical and dependent on the individual society.

7) The Republicans and the Democrats are still the two major parties.  Minor parties play a larger role than in the 2010's, but still only comprise between 10-15 percent of the electorate combined.  Since 2016, all the minor parties combined have fielded a total of 36 U.S. Representatives, 3 Senators (as Senate races are the most high profile, and the major parties still dominate the national scene), and 12 governors... mostly from very small states (New Hampshire, Vermont, and Wyoming account for 9 of them), though Texas elected a Libertarian governor in the 2030's.

The United States House of Representatives was even run by a parliamentary style coalition of Republican and Libertarian Congressmen for one term in the 2030's.

8 ) Marriage was destroyed by the fags, obviously.

9) Seriously, though, in 2027 the Federal Civil Unions Amendment is passed, and becomes the 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution.  It removes the authority of the federal and state governments to recognize marriage, and instead allows only for civil unions, which are allowed for any two, consenting adults to engage in a civil union.  The proposal is advanced as a compromise by social conservatives, in an effort to "save" the "idea" of marriage as a religious institution in the face of eroding public opposition to gay marriage.

10) It's a good thing that food, housing, and transportation costs are lower of people in 2050, because medical costs now comprise 35 percent of the average person's budget.  Even though the sudden influx of immigrants saved many of the basic social programs, in some form, socialized medicine is near non-existent in the United States, and indeed all the industrialized world.  As a trade off, most people live to see their 90th birthday, and living to be 110 is not too uncommon.  Social Security is now distributed at the age of 80, and is partially privatized... the system barely stays ahead of needs, even then.  People now regularly have their first child in their late 40's.

[12th Doctor]

11)  Though life long education is not uncommon, a four year college degree is no longer as common as it once was.  The heavy emphasis placed on four year college, and then graduate school for the Millennial Generation proved to be an economic burden, as few of this generation ended up getting jobs in their fields, or that required such a high level of education.  The economic benefits simply did not pan out as promised.  As a result, higher education was not as heavily encouraged by this generation when they became parents, as a means of social advancement for their children.  A movement began to overhaul the United States public education system, as the increased pressure from parents to better prepare children with a higher quality high school education forced schools to have to try; teachers no longer could act under the assumption that "they'll learn it in college".  Colleges themselves adapted, offering more two-year degrees to learn specific skills for vocational areas, and retraining programs.  More people today have some college education, but areas such as social sciences, and upper level science, medicine and business programs have only a fraction of the students they once did.  This has, in turn, improved the quality of these programs.  People with four year and graduate degrees now truly standout, again, making such a degree more desirable, and ironically leading more people into those fields again.  So the process might reverse itself, slightly.

12) The rearrangement of education around vocational needs was assisted by the rebirth of American industry, which started in the 2020's.  The expansion of free trade around the turn of the century allowed companies to move over seas and have their production to be handled by people willing to work for far less.  Labor unions also kept the cost of manufacturing in the United States prohibitively high, and stymied employment of new technology and methods.  Free trade also brought a higher standard of living to regions like India and Coastal China, and the workers in those countries soon expected a standard of living comparable to those in Westernized countries.  At first they were denied, but the civil disordered that ensued brought a hefty rise in wages between 2018 and 2025.  It was still modest by Western standards, but it was enough to make the cost of manufacturing many items in the United States affordable again, and many new factories were built in the United States' old industrial cities, with their access to natural resources, and good, non-car dependent transit lines.  The power of the unions had declined to near non-existence by then.  While the workers are not paid a wage anything near comparable to those demanded by workers during the middle of the last century, and more of the work is done by automation, the average industrial worker makes between $65-$85/ hour today ($20-$35/ hour in 2010 money).

13)  The United States is still the lone true super power in social, cultural, and military prowess.  The United Kingdom, Poland-Ukraine, Turkey, the Federal Republic of Iran, the United States of South Africa, Brazil and Japan are all very important regional powers, but none of them has a true global reach.  India has tremendous cultural influence around the world.

14) Fossil Fuels still represent a plurality of power generation in the United States, slightly over 35 percent, as power needs only continued to grow through the decades, without regard to smart grids, or energy saving electronics, but other methods of electrical generation have proven fruitful.  Despite the most ambitious pipe dreams, wind and earthbound solar, in mass concentrations, never broke more than 10 percent of total energy supply.  5th Generation Nuclear Reactors now generate 35 percent of our total power need, producing almost no waste in the process and using very little uranium.  10 percent of our current power needs are now provided by satellites that send down solar energy in the form of microwaves to collectors on Earth.  This technology is only about 20 years old, and fears over the possibility of a severe solar storm damaging the satellites has prevented us from becoming very dependent on it, but there are hopes for expansion in the future.

15) NASA just started a new PR campaign... "Mars or Bust by 2060."  Most of the public is as skeptical about this one as all their previous attempts to start a project to land a maned mission on Mars.

16) The first openly gay President was elected in 2044, he is the current incumbent.

17) The first female President was elected in 2024, we have had one more since then.  Congress is now 40 percent female.  The same percentage of CEO's are now women.

18) While abortion remained a contentious issue through the 2020's, the number of abortions has dropped off drastically with the emergence of "100%" birth control methods, and expansion of access to such treatments.  Abortion is almost non-existent today.

However, almost 40 percent of all children grow up in single parent households (biological parents never married or lived together).  Part of this is due to far more children being the product of artificial insemination from "choice" donors, to professional women who are established.  This does not imply total removal of the biological father in all cases, though, as many people simply choose to have a child with a trusted friend who with whom they have no intention of pursuing a romantic interest, and pursuit more casual relationships with others.

Simply put, the ideas of love, sex, commitment, marriage, and children are not as intimately linked as they once were.

Full polyamory is not uncommon.

Sex has become fully demystified in the American culture.  This is helped out by medical advances that have made all STD's, including HIV/AIDS either preventable, or curable... in fact, most of the diseases that once plagued humanity are curable because...

19) The "Cure for Everything" was genetic sciences greatest gift to the world.  By the 2030's, medical science had developed a way to (relatively) inexpensively clone and mass produce an individuals white blood cells.  With these, a doctor can simply inject a patient with nature's own disease fighting agents.  After years of finding chemical treatments for almost all ailments, this treatment was able to fight viruses, germs, and even cancers.  While a long list of maladies still can't be treated with simply white blood cells, many of the most wide spread, and dangerous ones can be.

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

I'm not exactly sure why I switched into a "looking back" point of view starting with #2, but I liked it.

Never had a plan as to where I was going, just what I thought of sitting here.  I'll talk about my other predictions later.

[12th Doctor]

Oh, wow... I forgot a big one....

By 2030, the states that had grown so rapidly through the 1980's, 1990's and 00's experienced a significant reversal in their fortunes.  This owned to two main issues.  The first was the afor mentioned urban rebirth.  Cities in the Southwest and Southeast were poorly organized to deal with the change in demographic patterns, as almost all their cities were built like suburbs, too spread out to have real urban cores.  Second, problems caused by a lack of freshwater were never solved.  The boom had occurred during decades when rainfall was relatively high in those areas, and the already scare water supply was stretched even thinner through the 2010's.  Fires, droughts, more fires, more droughts combined with the expense of large scale desalinization technology, and cost of transporting that much water over any kind of distance made population growth in these regions utterly impractical, and the current population unsustainable.  People who lived through droughts that often lasted months on end learned to appreciate having something so basic as water. 

The entire population base of the United States shifted northward again.  States around the Great Lakes received significant population bumps, and the Pacific Northwest added to its own growth, substantially.  Between 2010-2030, California lost 15 of its Congressional Districts (hurt further by a relatively minor earthquake that inflicted serious damage on the California Aqueduct and Reservoir  System, a disaster that caused 10x the number of deaths through panic and simple thirst than Hurricane Katrina), Florida lost 5, Arizona 3, Georgia and Nevada each lost 1.  While real losses stopped after that for these regions, they continued to lose congressional seats through the 2040 census.

[12th Doctor]

2)

After a strong period of anti-immigration sentiment through the 2010's, the reality of declining birthrates and an aging population catch up with the United States.  Bringing in immigration soon becomes a matter of survival for all industrialized states, and the United States significantly relaxes its immigration policies by 2025.  The hard-line immigration policies of 2012-2025 appear to stall "white plurality" at the time, but by 2050 the new, relaxed view toward immigration means that those who self-identify as "white" comprise only 40 percent of the population... those who claim "no race" now comprise 20 percent of the population, as most Americans are either children of a "mixed-race" couple, or married to someone of a different "race".

The prevailing political attitude during the 2040's, with new states, and massive immigration influx is called "Neo-expansionism".

Do you have any idea what part of the world the bulk of these immigrants will be emigrating from?  I have my own ideas, of course (as you have seen), but what are your thoughts?

Other than Latin America, India will be a major source.  By 2050, I think that 5 percent (currently less than 1 percent) of the population of the United States will have some Hindi background, perhaps more.  In Great Britain, it will be 10 percent (about 3 percent now).

While I don't think India will become a major superpower, for a variety of reasons, the Hindi culture will have a major impact on the United States, Canada, Australia, and Great Britain, as well as the cultural output of the home country itself, which will grant it a large amount of influence, but again, mostly cultural.

I think we will also see significant Arab migration, as well.  The best the Middle East can hope for at the current time is a "kinda sh**tty" status quo, where peace comes to the region simply because all the warring parties have worn themselves out.  Once the "massive threat" of Islamic terrorism is no longer relevant (happening sometime in this decade) the West will lose interest in the region, which will cause it to return to the not-too-hot-not-too-cold style stagnation that seems to be the destiny of the region for the near future.  So, people who want opportunity and can leave will leave.  Also, the general climate warming trend that will characterize the next few decades is going to give more incentive for people to leave.

No major power will emerge out of the current states that are set up, and there won't be enough happening for people living there to feel compelled to change that.  Turkey is a country that has alot of promise in the future, as is Iran (once they go democratic, which probably isn't too far off).  As the two strongest countries in the region, and the only two non-Arab states (besides Israel, of course), I expect them to take the role of traffic cop over the region, turning it into their sphere of influence.  This is helped along by the fact that they have no conflicting strategic interests, what-so-ever.

[12th Doctor]

The Turkey/Iran arrangement will also ultimately be good for Israel, since it will keep the Arab world in check.  Realistically, neither of those two countries has any long term strategic interest in seeing Israel destroyed... in Iran's case, it's purely out of "religious conviction" and showmanship.

[12th Doctor]

SuperSoulty, do you ever think the U.S. will experience large scale immigration from Sub-Saharan Africa?

Eh... maybe at some period in the more distant future... past my projected lifetime (I'm supposed to die in 2057, according to insurance company estimate software, but I figure with new medical technologies, I might have until the 2070's).  There are a few reasons I don't see this happening. 

The first is because I expect South Africa to emerge as a serious anchor for the region in the next couple decades, and the eventual formation of an "African Union" of some sort, perhaps even one with real sovereignty (hence my comment about the "United States of South Africa).  This African Union will have a much longer life span then the European Union, as the countries involved will have true common goals and shared strategic interest (which Europe as a whole does not have, by a long shot), and will be able to contrast their order to the on-going chaos of Central Africa (including the sub-Saharan Regions). 

I don't expect the areas that make up the band running through the central part of the continent to improve anytime soon.  They are simply too backwards, too remote (being cut off from important centers of trade, communication, etc), too poor, and too pron to infighting.  Like I said, I expect AIDS to be curable by 2030's, but in the meantime, the poverty heaped on the disease will mean that more industrialized countries won't have any interest in taking in people from that region, even with the more liberal immigration policies I expect to take root.

[12th Doctor]

Hindi culture

I might be nit-picking, but what is this? Most Indians I know speak no Hindi.

A Turco-Persian tacit agreement to divide up Arabia would be terrible. Turkey and Persia have imperialized enough. I don't trust either nation.

"Hindi" is a perfectly acceptable, and in fact, more cultured way of saying "Indian"... it is where the word "(H)Indian" comes from, after all.

I'm not saying there is anything inherent about being Arab (ie racial) that causes problems for the people that region, but it seems clear that the Arabs are unable to responsibly rule themselves, in anyway, shape or form.  Since they are unable to do this, and have been unable to do so on a historical basis, there is little doubt in my mind that the more powerful nations will do it for them.  There is a reason the Turks (Byzantines) and Persians have traditionally ruled over the region, and had little cause to fight... its because everyone else has done nothing but fight one another, and then followed these periods with long bouts of stagnation.

[12th Doctor]

If there is a "cure for everything", then presumably medical costs would decrease due to early prevention and quick healing.

No, because the "cure for everything" in good against viruses, cancers, germs, etc... but not against the natural problems associated with aging, which will have more effective, but more costly treatments by the time frame we are discussing.  The ability to mass clone white blood cells, also (for instance) will not prevent you from having heart problems, or from needing a knew Kidney.  We will have the ability to treat these problems more effectively, but more expensively as well.

I also imagine, BTW, that there will be a movement of people who will seek a life rejecting all these more extreme, unnatural life expanding measures.  They'll make up a decent sized subset of the population... 20 percent, perhaps.  One might suppose that this group would be made up of an "alliance" of naturalists and religious types, but I suspect that they will be one in the same at this point, as conservative religious types will slowly turn more towards naturalistic views of the Earth, in contrast to the increasingly fast pace of technological advancement.

[12th Doctor]

If there is a "cure for everything", then presumably medical costs would decrease due to early prevention and quick healing.

No, because the "cure for everything" in good against viruses, cancers, germs, etc... but not against the natural problems associated with aging, which will have more effective, but more costly treatments by the time frame we are discussing.  The ability to mass clone white blood cells, also (for instance) will not prevent you from having heart problems, or from needing a knew Kidney.  We will have the ability to treat these problems more effectively, but more expensively as well.

I also imagine, BTW, that there will be a movement of people who will seek a life rejecting all these more extreme, unnatural life expanding measures.  They'll make up a decent sized subset of the population... 20 percent, perhaps.  One might suppose that this group would be made up of an "alliance" of naturalists and religious types, but I suspect that they will be one in the same at this point, as conservative religious types will slowly turn more towards naturalistic views of the Earth, in contrast to the increasingly fast pace of technological advancement.

I doubt cancer could ever be cured, I hope I'm wrong but I think it's something nature intended to exist to control our populations.

Everyone has cancer.  Cancerous cells exist in every human being.  When a person is said to "have cancer" that only means that the cancerous cells are reproducing faster than a person's white blood cells can destroy them.  You fix that problem, and you solve cancer.

[12th Doctor]

Hindi culture

I might be nit-picking, but what is this? Most Indians I know speak no Hindi.

"Hindi" is a perfectly acceptable, and in fact, more cultured way of saying "Indian"... it is where the word "(H)Indian" comes from, after all.

I know that they're cognate, but they aren't synonymous. Hindi culture would seem to me to mean the culture of the upper and middle Gangetic Plain.