My mom was born in late 1930s Germany. She remembers being bombed out of her appartment. She came to US and is not happy with the way things are going here.
The USA is currently experiencing an autocoup prosecuted by an unholy alliance of tech industry elites and dominionist christian white supremacists. Its president, who presided over an attempted violent coup in 2021, has called for the annexation of Canada and Greenland, ethnically cleansing Palestine and acquiring it as US territory, military incursions into Mexico, seizing Panama, and suggested the annexation of the United Kingdom.
He is openly aligned with radical white supremacist militias that are entwined with our sheriffs, police, and military. He's installed a white supremacist as Secretary of Defense with the support of congress and numerous others in powerful positions throughout the remnants of the US government.
No, I hear what you are saying. Nevertheless — I don’t think my hypotheticals are unreasonable. All these people want money. And there is so much more money to be made not going to war.
Because they have zero connection to reality? Can I have a pony in this hypothetical too? How do we get to any of them while having to climb over the additional hurdle of a far right anti-science government?
> The USA will likely address climate change directly through technology (geoengineering) vs rapid degrowth (the only two plausible means of stabilizing the climate)
How is "rapid degrowth" a solution to climate change? we have "degrowth" in population in basically every industrialized country already anyway, but more extreme rates like South Korea are already destabilizingly low, and still not even close to enough for keeping CO2 emissions in check: That would probably require us to slash population by at least 60% (and quickly, even if we kept enacting CO2 reducing measures).
There is already a "solution" for climate change on the table-- electrify everything, de-carbonize electricity generation and help roll out this change globally, but all the major players are dragging their feet because this is obviously not free...
>The American scientific establishment and education system are likely to be transformed to create massive jumps in productivity (in the age of AI)
And this presidency will ensure that this jump in productivity only benefits the wealthy. Proposed tax cuts by Trump would make middle class people pay more and wealthy people pay less
>There are very few ways to compete with China without very strong leadership — and now, it seems, we have that chance.
Oh yes, the guy that wanted to have a say in what the fed does. The guy who proposed and eventually rolled back tariffs on its neighboring countries, sending a lot of companies (both in usa, Canada, and Mexico) in panic. I could go on for hours
> 1. The USA will likely address climate change directly through technology (geoengineering) vs rapid degrowth (the only two plausible means of stabilizing the climate)
That climate change can be addressed through technology is of course true, but equating that with geoengineering is pure insanity. Also, there's _nothing_ that indicates that the US will address this area at all, especially not now, with an administration that doesn't even believe that there's anything to address!
> 2. The USA will likely avoid war.
I do not understand how you can draw that conclusion after seeing the new president threaten even _allies_ with war in just a few weeks in office.
> 3. The USA will likely experience large-scale economic growth due to regulatory change, efficient government services, compounding industrial ecosystems and robotics
Which efficient government services are you talking about? The ones provided by skilled bureaucrats being replaced due to lacking "loyalty"?
> 4. The American scientific establishment and education system are likely to be transformed to create massive jumps in productivity (in the age of AI)
Transformed by having their funding slashed?
> We already have smarter AI than 99% of humans
You seem to be sampling a very strange subset of humans.
> There is little doubt that this will be applied across society at an unbelievable scale and speed.
There's, in fact, lots of doubt.
> In short, China’s economic model (low-corruption communistic capitalism) is working way better than liberal democratic models.
For certain things, sure. For other things (like freedom of speech, personal liberties): very much not.
> There are very few ways to compete with China without very strong leadership — and now, it seems, we have that chance.
So, you want a "strong leader". How does that go down in history again? Anyway – do you think that in addition to being "strong" there are other aspects of a leader that you might want to have in addition? Like, I don't know, intelligence and compassion? Or are you just going for strength to smack everyone over the head?
> And, with the global distribution of high-intelligence AI, there is plenty of room for distributed, decentralized local growth that can enable all people around the world to participate in economic development and super-abundant resources.
Absolute meaningless dribble. It just needs a sprinkle of blockchain or something.
> Things will continue to accelerate. And the biggest wellbeing challenges will come from overabundance of resources rather than their scarcity.
So when can people suffering under these authoritarian strongmen expect this abundance? How much suffering will they have to take before utopia hits? Or, alternatively, before we can laugh you lot off for a few generations again.
