8 ms·

What Will the World Be Like After Coronavirus? Four Possible Futures

66 points by freediver 7y ago

dang 7y ago
Url changed from https://singularityhub.com/2020/04/03/what-will-the-world-be-like-after-coronavirus-four-possible-futures/ https://singularityhub.com/2020/04/03/what-will-the-world-be..., which points to this.
eezurr 7y ago
This is a lot to take in, especially not coming from any related discipline background. Since I dont have the prerequisite background, I can only ask questions. I also believe that there are not right answers. Every decision benefits someone at the expense of someone else. 1. This article does not cover the positive sides of an "exchange value" economy. Isn't this type of economy responsible for bringing once 3rd world countries out of poverty? 2. Side note: I think the choice being made here is environment vs present suffering. For every person in a 3rd country on its way to 1st world, they need a fridge, fresh water, oven, more space (thus transportation beyond walking/biking), safety codes (more materials), etc. The environmental impact on providing these modern facilities must be huge, no? 3. If a national-level economy values "exchanging value", wouldn't that culture prioritize making their lives better? Better is subjective, and alludes to the rat race, but at least in the USA, if you're okay not living in the coastal areas, you can live very comfortably for cheap. 4. The international balance of power. If one country focuses on "exchanging value" thus enriching themselves, wouldn't that give that country a lot of international leverage? I personally believe we've had (generally) global peace for so long because there's been only one super power in the world for that time period (the USA). If we shrunk our economy (based on your 4 possible options), how would that impact the military budget? I personally think if there are multiple competing super powers, then war is more likely to happen
- lonelappde 7y ago
  Is China not a super power? Europe?
  - dntbnmpls 7y ago
    > Is China not a super power? No. They are a regional power at best. > Europe? Given the number of US bases in Europe, I'd says no. A superpower by definition wouldn't need other countries defending it.
    - lm28469 7y ago
      If China isn't a superpower I don't know who is. Either 2nd or 3rd by gdp [0], literally building the vast majority of the world tech, leading in renewable energy [1], largest army in the world, in the top 3 of military strength ranking [2]. Economically invading Europe [3]. Playing the smart game in Africa [4], and the list goes on and on. If anything the US is on the way down while china is on their way up, seeing it from the outside it looks like the US is slowly rotting away and getting soft while china is aggressively expanding and starting to set their own conditions. The thing is that China hasn't peaked yet while the US arguably peaked in the 90s. Don't get me wrong, China is very far from being a nice place, but they know what they're doing. > Given the number of US bases in Europe, I'd says no. A superpower by definition wouldn't need other countries defending it. It's more like the US are happy to have a presence in Europe than the other way around. These are leftovers of ww2 and aren't for defense anymore, as it turns out it's very convenient to have presence in europe when you want to go lose a war or two in the middle east. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nomi... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_China [2] https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing.asp https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing.asp [3] https://www.npr.org/2018/10/09/642587456/chinese-firms-now-hold-stakes-in-over-a-dozen-european-ports https://www.npr.org/2018/10/09/642587456/chinese-firms-now-h... [4] https://qz.com/1550626/chinas-investment-will-allow-africa-to-lead-the-22nd-century/ https://qz.com/1550626/chinas-investment-will-allow-africa-t...
      - chiph 7y ago
        China is almost a superpower. They have the beginnings of a blue-water navy, which a primary requirement for projecting force beyond your borders. So far as economics, they are indeed very powerful because they became the low-cost manufacturing center of the world. As seen in the past, those jobs can easily leave a nation for another country/region when it becomes cheaper. As their standard of living increases, this is more and more likely to happen. > These are leftovers of ww2 and aren't for defense anymore Ask the residents of Estonia (a NATO member) if they'd like to return to living under the Soviets.
tomatotomato37 7y ago
All these people predicting cataclysmic change because of the Coronavirus are missing the fact that this all happened multiple times already, including barely a century before. The Spanish Flu went and wiped ~4% of the world population, including the young, right after civilization spent the last 4 years shooting at each other in trenches. The result of all this? America and Europe experienced an age of economic prosperity known as the Roaring Twenties, with any radical government changes attributed to war debt over anything the flu did
- teambayleaf 7y ago
  Also 1968 Flu pandemic killed 1 million people. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hong_Kong_flu https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hong_Kong_flu Different perspective. AIDS was (and still is) definitely much much scarier infection than COVID-19, but yet it did not fundamentally change how our society operates.
  - kelchm 7y ago
    You’re right — it’s also worth reflecting on the fact that tuberculosis killed 1.5 million people in 2018 [1]. [1]: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/tuberculosis https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/tuberculosi...
  - toasterlovin 7y ago
    It was easy to avoid AIDS (unless you needed a blood transfusion) and, as a result, not many people in the west ever got AIDS as a result. AIDS is nothing like this pandemic, in other words.
- lowdose 7y ago
  That was probably because it freed up a lot of capital of old people. The people inheriting money would spend it and hence a natural cause for an economic boom. The Spanish flu would have taken both Donald Trump and Joe Bidden.
  - NotSammyHagar 7y ago
dchyrdvh 7y ago
First we pretend to care about global warming and make bold promises about how in some distant future we'll cut emissions to a more reasonable level. Everybody understands that the emissions come from the growing economy and that the only real solution is to slow down the economy. So the virus slows down the economy for us. Exactly what we wanted, right? Emissions are down, folks in India can even see Himalayan mountains. Everybody should celebrate this, but no, our only concern is how to restart the economy and get to the new heights of pollution asap.
- satyrnein 7y ago
  We're supposed to be celebrating a global pandemic, because (if we weren't forced to shelter in place) we might see the mountains? Hardly. Hopefully, technology will offer other options to decrease emissions than simply slowing economic growth, because that has real human costs.
  - dchyrdvh 7y ago
    I think you illustrate my point well: people are bought into the climate change talk, but when it comes to actions, they do what they really believe in.
    - cthalupa 7y ago
      Many of us are bought in to actions that don’t include the death of millions of people.
      - dchyrdvh 7y ago
        Actions like switching to paper straws?
        yetihehe 7y ago
        Yeah, people don't want to be inconvenienced. "Yeah, I've driven several miles today with my gas gurgling vehicle to see some nice view and destress a little, I would do it in electric car, but it's too expensive to buy, I'd rather do some small damage to environment". Avoiding small inconceniences multiplied by millions of people is what gives us the situation we have now. People want change but don't want to change. I see I am part of this problem too, but the big problem is that I'm only a very small part of a problem. If only I change, I make my life worse for negligible benefit of others. How to change this? I still have no idea, but I believe this is THE source of our problems with environment. Every other problem loops back to tragedy of commons.
rayhendricks 7y ago
I’ll be happy if we get Medicare for all out of this. Insurance companies are not going to get people who have been laid off for 6mo to pay their crazy bills for Covid treatment.

66 points by freediver 7y ago

dang 7y ago

Url changed from https://singularityhub.com/2020/04/03/what-will-the-world-be-like-after-coronavirus-four-possible-futures/ https://singularityhub.com/2020/04/03/what-will-the-world-be..., which points to this.

eezurr 7y ago

This is a lot to take in, especially not coming from any related discipline background. Since I dont have the prerequisite background, I can only ask questions. I also believe that there are not right answers. Every decision benefits someone at the expense of someone else. 1. This article does not cover the positive sides of an "exchange value" economy. Isn't this type of economy responsible for bringing once 3rd world countries out of poverty? 2. Side note: I think the choice being made here is environment vs present suffering. For every person in a 3rd country on its way to 1st world, they need a fridge, fresh water, oven, more space (thus transportation beyond walking/biking), safety codes (more materials), etc. The environmental impact on providing these modern facilities must be huge, no? 3. If a national-level economy values "exchanging value", wouldn't that culture prioritize making their lives better? Better is subjective, and alludes to the rat race, but at least in the USA, if you're okay not living in the coastal areas, you can live very comfortably for cheap. 4. The international balance of power. If one country focuses on "exchanging value" thus enriching themselves, wouldn't that give that country a lot of international leverage? I personally believe we've had (generally) global peace for so long because there's been only one super power in the world for that time period (the USA). If we shrunk our economy (based on your 4 possible options), how would that impact the military budget? I personally think if there are multiple competing super powers, then war is more likely to happen

lonelappde 7y ago
Is China not a super power? Europe?
- dntbnmpls 7y ago
  > Is China not a super power? No. They are a regional power at best. > Europe? Given the number of US bases in Europe, I'd says no. A superpower by definition wouldn't need other countries defending it.
  - lm28469 7y ago
    If China isn't a superpower I don't know who is. Either 2nd or 3rd by gdp [0], literally building the vast majority of the world tech, leading in renewable energy [1], largest army in the world, in the top 3 of military strength ranking [2]. Economically invading Europe [3]. Playing the smart game in Africa [4], and the list goes on and on. If anything the US is on the way down while china is on their way up, seeing it from the outside it looks like the US is slowly rotting away and getting soft while china is aggressively expanding and starting to set their own conditions. The thing is that China hasn't peaked yet while the US arguably peaked in the 90s. Don't get me wrong, China is very far from being a nice place, but they know what they're doing. > Given the number of US bases in Europe, I'd says no. A superpower by definition wouldn't need other countries defending it. It's more like the US are happy to have a presence in Europe than the other way around. These are leftovers of ww2 and aren't for defense anymore, as it turns out it's very convenient to have presence in europe when you want to go lose a war or two in the middle east. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nomi... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_China [2] https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing.asp https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing.asp [3] https://www.npr.org/2018/10/09/642587456/chinese-firms-now-hold-stakes-in-over-a-dozen-european-ports https://www.npr.org/2018/10/09/642587456/chinese-firms-now-h... [4] https://qz.com/1550626/chinas-investment-will-allow-africa-to-lead-the-22nd-century/ https://qz.com/1550626/chinas-investment-will-allow-africa-t...
    - chiph 7y ago
      China is almost a superpower. They have the beginnings of a blue-water navy, which a primary requirement for projecting force beyond your borders. So far as economics, they are indeed very powerful because they became the low-cost manufacturing center of the world. As seen in the past, those jobs can easily leave a nation for another country/region when it becomes cheaper. As their standard of living increases, this is more and more likely to happen. > These are leftovers of ww2 and aren't for defense anymore Ask the residents of Estonia (a NATO member) if they'd like to return to living under the Soviets.

tomatotomato37 7y ago

All these people predicting cataclysmic change because of the Coronavirus are missing the fact that this all happened multiple times already, including barely a century before. The Spanish Flu went and wiped ~4% of the world population, including the young, right after civilization spent the last 4 years shooting at each other in trenches. The result of all this? America and Europe experienced an age of economic prosperity known as the Roaring Twenties, with any radical government changes attributed to war debt over anything the flu did

teambayleaf 7y ago
Also 1968 Flu pandemic killed 1 million people. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hong_Kong_flu https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hong_Kong_flu Different perspective. AIDS was (and still is) definitely much much scarier infection than COVID-19, but yet it did not fundamentally change how our society operates.
- kelchm 7y ago
  You’re right — it’s also worth reflecting on the fact that tuberculosis killed 1.5 million people in 2018 [1]. [1]: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/tuberculosis https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/tuberculosi...
- toasterlovin 7y ago
  It was easy to avoid AIDS (unless you needed a blood transfusion) and, as a result, not many people in the west ever got AIDS as a result. AIDS is nothing like this pandemic, in other words.
lowdose 7y ago
That was probably because it freed up a lot of capital of old people. The people inheriting money would spend it and hence a natural cause for an economic boom. The Spanish flu would have taken both Donald Trump and Joe Bidden.
- NotSammyHagar 7y ago

dchyrdvh 7y ago

First we pretend to care about global warming and make bold promises about how in some distant future we'll cut emissions to a more reasonable level. Everybody understands that the emissions come from the growing economy and that the only real solution is to slow down the economy. So the virus slows down the economy for us. Exactly what we wanted, right? Emissions are down, folks in India can even see Himalayan mountains. Everybody should celebrate this, but no, our only concern is how to restart the economy and get to the new heights of pollution asap.

satyrnein 7y ago
We're supposed to be celebrating a global pandemic, because (if we weren't forced to shelter in place) we might see the mountains? Hardly. Hopefully, technology will offer other options to decrease emissions than simply slowing economic growth, because that has real human costs.
- dchyrdvh 7y ago
  I think you illustrate my point well: people are bought into the climate change talk, but when it comes to actions, they do what they really believe in.
  - cthalupa 7y ago
    Many of us are bought in to actions that don’t include the death of millions of people.
    - dchyrdvh 7y ago
      Actions like switching to paper straws?
      - yetihehe 7y ago
        Yeah, people don't want to be inconvenienced. "Yeah, I've driven several miles today with my gas gurgling vehicle to see some nice view and destress a little, I would do it in electric car, but it's too expensive to buy, I'd rather do some small damage to environment". Avoiding small inconceniences multiplied by millions of people is what gives us the situation we have now. People want change but don't want to change. I see I am part of this problem too, but the big problem is that I'm only a very small part of a problem. If only I change, I make my life worse for negligible benefit of others. How to change this? I still have no idea, but I believe this is THE source of our problems with environment. Every other problem loops back to tragedy of commons.

rayhendricks 7y ago

I’ll be happy if we get Medicare for all out of this. Insurance companies are not going to get people who have been laid off for 6mo to pay their crazy bills for Covid treatment.