10 ms·

America will collapse by 2025 (2010)

• Terr_ 2y ago
  > Oil Shock: Scenario 2025 [...] At this point, the U.S. can still cover only an insignificant 12 percent of its energy needs from its nascent alternative energy industry Actual values now are ~21%.
• jmclnx 2y ago
  Well the current US Admin seems to be doing its best to hasten this. Already our allies view the US with suspicion.
  • fastball 2y ago
    [flagged]
    • esseph 2y ago
      War escalation being reversed? Sounds like we're on track to trade Ukraine for an Israeli-fronted attack on Iran.
      • fastball 2y ago
        Where have you heard the Trump admin wants Israel to attack Iran? I haven't seen that news. And yes, ending the Russian-Ukrainian war is in fact de-escalation, even if giving Russia what they want is the outcome.
        • Loggias 2y ago
          [dead]
        • esseph 2y ago
          https://www.livemint.com/news/israeli-prime-minister-benjamin-netanyahu-says-israel-will-finish-the-job-against-iran-with-us-support-11739721145984.html https://www.livemint.com/news/israeli-prime-minister-benjami... https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/netanyahu-says-israel-working-full-coordination-with-trump-gaza-2025-02-16/ https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/netanyahu-says-isr... https://archive.ph/M2mhi https://archive.ph/M2mhi Adding more context: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/02/national-security-presidential-memorandum-nspm-2/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/02/nati...
          • fastball 2y ago
            Not letting Iran get nukes sounds like a great way to avoid further escalation in the region.
            • esseph 2y ago
              I love it when people justify escalation for the purposes of deescalation. I spent too much time in sandy areas with a rifle.
              • fastball 2y ago
                None of what I read sounded like escalation. The US' stance has long been that they don't want Iran to have access to nukes.
                • esseph 2y ago
                  Ok!
        • mcphage 2y ago
          > And yes, ending the Russian-Ukrainian war is in fact de-escalation, even if giving Russia what they want is the outcome. That’s what they said about the Sudentenland, too.
          • fastball 2y ago
            Indeed, sometimes de-escalation is followed by further escalation. By your implied metric, every ceasefire that wasn't permanent was a failure. Sudentenland is the exception that makes the rule. Throughout history, most peace agreements have not been immediately violated by the "winning" side.
            • mcphage 2y ago
              > most peace agreements have not been immediately violated by the "winning" side. Most peace agreements are signed when the war is over and one side has given up. Most peace agreements aren’t attempts at appeasement.
              • fastball 2y ago
                And this war won't end either, if neither side gives in.
                • mcphage 2y ago
                  That’s the thing about war—if it goes on long enough, it eventually ends, because one side is unable to continue it. And if it’s the aggressor, then that stops them from continuing their aggression.
        • computerthings 2y ago
          > And yes, ending the Russian-Ukrainian war is in fact de-escalation, even if giving Russia what they want is the outcome. It's siding with the aggressor, and makes the soil more fertile for more such aggression. So if I try to steal your baby, and you catch me and we fight, and it gets really loud and people are inconvenienced and all that, so someone steps in and says "stop fighting, both go on your way", and I leave with your baby, that's de-escalation? Not even in your dreams. You can only stoop to this from the ivory tower of not being affected either way, or thinking you won't be. You can only call this de-escalation when you are not the victim. You wouldn't do it otherwise, ever.
    • jjk166 2y ago
      Pissing off allies was part of the first failure mode: "Riding a political tide of disillusionment and despair, a far-right patriot captures the presidency with thundering rhetoric, demanding respect for American authority and threatening military retaliation or economic reprisal."
      • fastball 2y ago
        That isn't the failure mode at all, that was given as the result of the failure (once it was already too late to reverse course). The next line which you forgot to quote was: "The world pays next to no attention as the American Century ends in silence." Which is definitely not how the world is currently treating Trump. Do you not think swelling deficits and an inability to pay the bills (the things actual spelled out as causes in that section of the article) are not something Trump is (ostensibly) trying to reverse more than any other president in recent memory?
        • jjk166 2y ago
          No, it was part of the failure mode. The next line you quoted is the result. > Which is definitely not how the world is currently treating Trump. I don't know what world you're referring to, but the one I'm living on has a bunch of countries disregarding what the US president says and making plans that don't involve America. > Do you not think swelling deficits and an inability to pay the bills (the things actual spelled out as causes in that section of the article) are not something Trump is (ostensibly) trying to reverse more than any other president in recent memory? No, I do not believe Trump is trying to reverse the swelling deficits more than any other president in recent memory. In fact I believe he is doing quite the opposite, just as during his previous term when he swelled the deficit more than any other president in recent memory. Setting up a fake government agency with a joke name then claiming your actions are in the name of deficit reduction when they are obviously not, all the while torpedoing the economy and planning massive tax cuts to boost the deficit is not what I consider "trying to reverse the deficit". Previous presidents, who were actually serious about improving government efficiency, used the real government agency that already exists to do exactly that: the office of management and budget.
  • roenxi 2y ago
    I want to stress this is a bipartisan position in the US - there seems to be consensus that the overall system is in a state of crisis. And from a financial perspective they can't afford the Not-An-Empire spread through Europe and Asia. It is interesting to take a step back and ask how it can end without a USSR style dissolution. If the left wing are genuine in their meme that the right wing supports the 2nd coming of Hitler it is hard to see how the country will hold together. Some sort of painful schism seems likely. Someone is going to have to admit to being wrong, and there isn't a clear path to that. Although democracies do have a tendency to be much more socially robust than they have any right to be; even when the situation comes to literal blows.
    • JasserInicide 2y ago
      I don't see any kind of schism/balkanization in our future. The federal government has its tentacles in all states and the states in turn rely heavily on it for big parts of their budgets. Any one that gets to the point of secession (highly unlikely), the federal government will just invade it on grounds of securing their many assets in the state and then proceed to depose of the seditious element.
    • motorest 2y ago
      > If the left wing are genuine in their meme that the right wing supports the 2nd coming of Hitler it is hard to see how the country will hold together. It's not "the left wing" making that claim, but the whole world. You have the current Trump administration repeatedly threatening to invade and annex multiple neighboring countries. There is no way around it.
      • roenxi 2y ago
        > You have the current Trump administration repeatedly threatening to invade and annex multiple neighboring countries What a shocking departure from the US's normal mode of operation. Are they finally going after Brazil? https://vividmaps.com/countries-attacked-by-the-us/ https://vividmaps.com/countries-attacked-by-the-us/
        • 2y ago
• openrisk 2y ago
  Collapse or no collapse I just hope that somebody sets up a HN equivalent in Europe. Discussing technology in a meaningful and fun way becomes impossible when moral values diverge beyond recognition and this is now becoming our reality.
  • fastball 2y ago
    You don't think European moral values are wildly divergent? Also Europe isn't exactly known for its technological innovation in [current year], so not sure what technology you'd be talking about anyway. If you want moral alignment and technological innovation, it seems better to setup your new HN in China.
    • motorest 2y ago
      > You don't think European moral values are wildly divergent? Which moral values might that be? > Also Europe isn't exactly known for its technological innovation in [current year], so not sure what technology you'd be talking about anyway. I'd love to hear what you consider technology innovation.
      • fastball 2y ago
        > Which moral values might that be? Exactly my point. > Technology Relative number of technology unicorns headquartered in Europe would be a good start. Or number of bleeding edge tech industries you'd say "Europe" is leading (e.g. space, military, nuclear, AI, etc)
        • motorest 2y ago
          > Exactly my point. You made no point at all. > Relative number of technology unicorns headquartered in Europe would be a good start. You seem a bit confused. "Unicorns" are characterized not by technology but by coming up with novel business plans that can disrupt incumbents. The likes of Google and Apple are tech companies, but Uber, NetFlix, AirBnB, etc have tech as a secondary support role to what actually drives the unicorn status. More nuanced, what characterizes a unicorn isn't even a successful business plan. Being able to fool a fat wallets investor to dump cash on your idea is the key aspect that makes and breaks a unicorn, and tech is an afterthought. > Or number of bleeding edge tech industries you'd say "Europe" is leading (e.g. space, military, nuclear, AI, etc) France is the world's second largest arms exporter in the world, ahead of Russia. In the top 10 list of world's arms exporters, 5 countries are EU members. Not bad, for a region that has offloaded it's arms industry to the US. Also, does the US have anything that comes close to ASML? Perhaps a TikTok clone or an app to rent apartments counts more as tech than it, perhaps?
• crazygringo 2y ago
  Not really sure why this is posted. Maybe you think America is collapsing politically, but the four specific scenarios described here (economic decline, oil shock, military misadventure, world war III) are not even remotely applicable today in February 2025. If Slate was trying to predict the future, they failed miserably.
  • bloaf 2y ago
    It is not at all obvious to me that those scenarios are irrelevant today. * The US is poised to strongly take Israel's side in a conflict with Iran, which could easily evolve into either a misadventure, oil shock, or WW3 * The US is poised to withdraw from NATO, ceding a significant amount of geopolitical clout to Russia in particular. This would undermine a bunch of our military efforts abroad, relegating them to the bin of "misadventure." To say nothing of the proposed acquisition of Greenland.
    • crazygringo 2y ago
      But none of the things have happened yet, nor are there any signs they're immediately about to. They might happen any year. And fortunately, Iran isn't doing anything belligerent at the moment -- they got their butts kicked last year and are missing a lot of their previous protection. And no, the US isn't "poised to withdraw from NATO". Nobody's even talking about that. I mean, a lot of bad stuff is going on, but withdrawal from NATO has not been in any news cycles.
      • bloaf 2y ago
        > And no, the US isn't "poised to withdraw from NATO". Nobody's even talking about that. Trump, the current president of the US, is. https://www.businessinsider.com/what-would-happen-us-leaves-nato-trump-2025-1?op=1 https://www.businessinsider.com/what-would-happen-us-leaves-... Congress found the scenario credible enough to pass a law specifically making it more difficult for him to do unilaterally. > But none of the things have happened yet, nor are there any signs they're immediately about to. Proving the nonexistence of signs is not a position I would be willing to take as it is far too philosophically difficult to defend. The reality is that both the Ukrainian and Iranian situations are far from an equilibrium; there don't need to be signs to know that dramatic changes are coming, we just can't tell what those changes will actually look like.
• tnt128 2y ago
  We spent so much time worrying about foreign adversaries. But if a collapse were to come, it won’t be because we are invaded by a foreign power, it would be because half of the people can’t stand the other half.
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  • AnimalMuppet 2y ago
    I think foreign information operations had a fair amount to do with why half the people can't stand the other half. I mean, the schisms were there. But Russia (and others, but primarily Russia) amplified the divide, a lot.
  • motorest 2y ago
    > We spent so much time worrying about foreign adversaries. The US government has a report on how the current US government was put in power by a foreign adversary, who is also heavily invested in polarizing US society as part of their strategy.
  • thefz 2y ago
    > We spent so much time worrying about foreign adversaries You can't ignore the decade long psyop by Russia to destabilize democracies in the West, which the result is exactly that you can't stand each other anymore.
  • red-iron-pine 2y ago
    Not even half. Only about 1/3 of eligible voters voted for Trump. And many of them are feeling a little dismayed or betrayed at current behaviors (presumably because they are rubes and got scammed). A little over 1/3 didn't vote at all. A motived pushed back from virtually any part of the electorate -- they have the 2nd Amendment for a reason guys -- or a small push from established military officers could easily topple Trump. Arguably the real risk is social media, since they're all in bed together now, and have a stated aim of owning the system. If you're gonna topple trump, you'd better have a go at the zuck, theil, and larry ellison, etc
• reissbaker 2y ago
  Well, I guess this goes to show that people have been predicting the imminent collapse of America long before the current admin, at least.
• mizzao 2y ago
  As quoted from the article: "Riding a political tide of disillusionment and despair, a far-right patriot captures the presidency with thundering rhetoric, demanding respect for American authority and threatening military retaliation or economic reprisal."
  • nunez 2y ago
    This feels like a prediction that's been made many times before.
• tomohelix 2y ago
  This is interesting with some quite prescient predictions especially on the date they could happen. But it is also wrong on some call outs. Still, it is sobering to see how there had been signs all along. When giants like the US are falling, often there will be signs. These initial signs are never taken seriously and by the time the issue become obvious, the momentum has already built up. At this scale, once events are set to motion, no single entity can change its course. The time and specifics may differ slightly, but the outcome is, imo, inevitable. People will struggle and attempt drastic measures. Yet I doubt it will help. If anything, the combination of pride and desperation is more likely to hasten a violent end.
  • jltsiren 2y ago
    The other side is that an empire can remain irrational longer than you can remain alive. There can be clear signs of impending collapse, but the actual collapse can be a year or a century away.
    • tomohelix 2y ago
      I would argue that is the optimistic scenario, where there are effective efforts or attempts to mitigate the problems. I do not see such effective efforts in the US.
• 1vuio0pswjnm7 2y ago
  "... while Canberra, pressured by the Chinese, informs Washington that the Seventh Fleet is no longer welcome to use Fremantle as a homeport, effectively evicting the U.S. Navy from the Indian Ocean." Australians caving in to Chinese pressure. Yeah, right.