[tcoppi]

Demographic shifts like this and the ensuing competition for limited resources are the kind of things that fuel major wars. It may be the transition that is needed long-term, but we should be very mindful of the way it is actually achieved.

[ekianjo]

> Demographic shifts like this and the ensuing competition for limited resources

Less resources are needed if you have less people. Ultimately everyone will benefit from it.

[tcoppi]

The thing is we don't have less people right now. The population is still growing rapidly, just getting older overall. That is going to lead to a massive grab for limited resources(not just physical like food and basic goods, but time for caretakers, medical services, etc.) that could be massively destabilizing. We've already seen rising food prices recently lead to unrest in poorer regions of the world, that could be only the beginning.

[ekianjo]

I'd just like to remind people that at the beginning of the 20th century many were predicting the doom of Mankind once we would reach one billion folks. Needless to say it did not happen and we went much further than one billion and took care of starvation along the way. Of course there are many reasons for this, but let's not underestimate the resources of mankind to solve its problems.

[tcoppi]

I completely agree, I don't think it will end up being a massive disaster in the long-run, precisely because people will be thinking about how to solve them. Quick dismissal of the potential problems that could result does not help us solve them.

[collyw]

Sounds like what many politicians have been saying about global warming for 20 years or so. The scientists will figure something out. We haven't figured out much so far (yet we have worked out how to extract more fossil fuels via fracking).

[Joof]

So far society seems to deal with long-term (multi a generational) problems poorly. This is fine up until it starts to cause significant damage and can't be reversed in a short timespan. Global warming may be this problem.

Elon Musk may be having success changing those huge incentives, but relying on revolutionaries like that isn't ideal and might not work.

[googletazer]

Not at the point where you have one worker for two retirees. "Ultimately" you're talking about might never be reached as every government in the world scrambles to cover its own ass by any means necessary.

[eli_gottlieb]

More resources split among fewer people only really works well if your economy is capital-bound in almost all lines of work. If there was anything where you really needed labor, you're fucked.

[hx87]

Every year labor is becoming less and less necessary for economic production and capital is becoming a better and better substitute for labor, so our economies /are/ capital-bound.

[eli_gottlieb]

Judging by prices, we have gluts of both labor and capital, a systemic shortage of aggregate private and public demand, and yet consistently increasing employment and rock-bottom productivity growth. To me it seems like cheap labor is being used to substitute for capital.

[hx87]

Wouldn't the /lack/ of a demographic shift fuel major wars? After all, it's a lot easier and more likely to have a war with populations full of young people than one full of old people. Besides, unlike oil or water, healthcare and services isn't something you can just steal.