Trump tries to sell a state to Russia.
World War 3.
But it won’t be a nuclear war that ends the world. (un?)fortunately. – Nuclear war doesn’t benefit the elites – Instead it will be a jillion proxy skirmishes all over the developing world, as countries get puppeteered by Russia/China/USA into fighting their battles, and said countries get ‘support’ in the form of weapons and training that will breed a whole new generation of extremist regimes and terrorists.
In the end, we’ll be back to the same ol’ same ol’ – Life gets shittier for everyone in a gradual, painful, tedious way.
1984 with just a hint of Wall-E.
- dollar devalues by 90% compared to present value
- wages so low / cost of living so high that people can’t pay for bread with their wages, making subsidies / universal basic income a necessity.
- US goes on the brink of a civil war before the rich agree to pay for said subsidies, probably some people die because of it.
- US slides into a mixture of tech-authoritarianism/fascism
- martian settlement/research makes surprisingly fast progress, with wide bi-partisan support because people realize it’s actually a good idea for everyone, creating demand for human labor and driving up the wages.
lol at that last one
A Tsunami of unprecedented size will completely destroy a coastal metropolis.
A heat wave in the middle east will leave hundreds dead in the first recorded wet bulb event.
In September 2035, the Arctic will be completely ice-free for the very first time, 15 years ahead of predictions.
Around that time, the first commercial shipping route along the north-western passage will open.
One of the first container ships will run onto a naval mine and sink, killing all hands. Russia will deny any involvement.we follow the trajectory of Nazi Germany
only THIS time, America will NOT be sweeping in to save the day. there IS no one to save the day this time.
so imprisonment and death for millions…and a world war. if we are very lucky , there might be an after…but then again…maybe not.
There will most certainly be an after. Unfortunately, very likely not for a lot of us.
USA brain drain. Seriously, most of my friends in academia are trying to GTFO because they know they’re lucky to have the credentials and money to do it.
2008 was known for the Great Bush recession.
2025 will be known for the Great MuskRat Depression that Trumped all other depressions.
This time though the U.S. will feel the brunt
Great Bush recession
I’ve literally never heard it called that, is this a non-US term? I’ve heard “great financial crisis”, “great recession”, or “housing crash” before.
I just call it what it is. All those you say are attributed to the president’s policies.
So maybe I’m also calling that too.
I’ve heard the Bush recession a few. I’ve also heard it called the Obama recession from some obvious bootlickers trying to rewrite history but that don’t make sense since Obama administration reversed it.
Global Bird Flu Pandemic. Our Population will be cut straight in half.
Perfectly balanced…
Donald Trump will either still be President, or be dead.
Or both!
Nuclear war
Ayyye same, do you think it’ll start with Israel and Iran too?
Israel, Iran, Pakistan, the USA, there’s many ways this could go
Conservatives who are getting their face eaten will not learn a single thing from anything
Woah, look at Nostradamus over here
-The internet will become something only old people use and will fill up with old people like radio and TV before it. Something new will be the hip new thing that kids use/consume, though it technically could be considered the internet
-Coal power plants will be phased out entirely in U.S.A. with some taking credit and others morning the loss of a purely economic conversion over to natural gas power. It will look like it is solar’s time to shine, but a “new” way of generating power which is cheaper and slightly cleaner will take over and slowly convert natural gas plants to whatever it is.
-There will be a detracted argument over whether or not what comes after current gen-AI is considered sapient and worthy of rights. While the debate will be straightforward in a vacuum, other semi-related topics will mix in including: the rich wanting their AI doppelgangers to keep control of the money/power they earned during life; something to do with sex and/or relationships because of course there will be; religious opposition until the poll numbers swap, then there will be some regions that view AI rights a helping the disadvantaged
-A young politician from the democrats will get elected on the back of anti-Trump hate. They will have in their first two years theoretically enough support to pass substantial legislation, but will be stopped by a small number of conservative democrats from doing anything substantial save for maybe one big accomplishment. They will loose the 2030 midterms to a bunch of republicans and a “grass-roots” organization that is paid for by rich business owners, but will come back to win the 2032 election against a rich republican from New England. However, they won’t have control over the congress and by 2035 will be a lame duck.
-Someone will scrap NASA’s current human space flight plans to promote their own plan, which in itself will be scrapped when a new administration comes in. By 2035, articles will be printing “it is a shame that no real current alive human has stepped foot on the moon”, taking a subtle dig at China’s AI-human that is currently building structures on the moon.
someone will scrap NASAs current human space flight plans to promote their own plan, which in itself will be scrapped when a new administration comes in
Kinda like how each administration switches if we are going to Mars or the Moon next based purely on what the previous guy said haha
There will be a detracted argument
Probably meant protracted
The first two feel like they’re missing details. What are you considering the real internet? Do you mean nuclear power will take over?
Famine will enter the American lexicon again.
Trump will die and a new religious movement declaring him to be divine will gain a significant foothold among people who call themselves Christians in the US.
Evangelicals will decide that, despite being nominally Protestant, they’re suddenly OK with sainthood again.
Okay, I could see this one happening.
There is already a religious following in his noxious wake. They literally think he’s heaven sent.
I think Trump’s loyalists are more after what he pretends to offer. As one uncle said, “He made me rich!” If you take away the potential earnings, there’s not much to the guy but bullshit. Like, he’s not even good looking enough to hang his portrait on a wall without getting tired of his face.
Peak human population will occur within the next ten years. Previously this was driven by falling birth rates. Now it will be driven by rapidly rising death rates. Within the next ten years, I think 300 million - 1 billion dead from starvation due to bread basket collapse is a conservative estimate.
Could have just said the knicks will win the world series and left it at that, jesus
Look, I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but don’t kill the messenger. The media does a piss-poor job of really nailing home to people the short and medium term impacts of climate change.
Did you know that in the last 15 years, global farm yields per acre have been flat? This is despite miraculous improvements in farming technology. Genetic engineering, farm automation, finance markets extending industrial agriculture to underdeveloped countries, satellite planning, innumerable tools and techniques.
Our global average farm yield per hectare should be soaring. Instead, it’s been flat. We’re swimming against the current, above a giant waterfall. All our advancements in farming technology are going into keeping us one step ahead of mass famine.
It’s been projected by insurance industry studies that if we hit +3C above preindustrial levels, that would correspond to a halving of the global human population. And with how fast climate change is accelerating beyond our previous overly conservative models, that could easily happen by 2050.
Again, the media has done an absolute shit job of explaining the perils of climate change to people. You think grocery prices are bad now? You haven’t seen ANYTHING. This is NOTHING compared to what is coming. The real danger of climate change isn’t slow sea rise or even wildfires. The real danger is the fact that at any given time, the planet only has a few weeks of food reserves stored up. We need to continuously make enough food to feed 8 billion humans. And if climate change causes multiple simultaneous bread basket failures? If we don’t make enough food for 8 billion humans? Well, quite quickly we will not have 8 billion humans anymore.
If you really want to understand the magnitude of the climate catastrophe, I suggest conceptualizing it in terms of wars. All of the fervent efforts in government and the private sector are trying to address climate change? All of them are trying to constrain the casaulties over the next few decades, to merely WW2-level casualties. We’re already going to face that; that’s already locked in. We’ve already guaranteed a loss of life on the scale of the Second World War. We’re trying to keep the casualties from spiraling up to “global thermonuclear war” levels of destruction.
Because the climate is becoming hotter, wetter, and highly unpredictable.
And we grow our food outside.
I think you might be missing something. If food yields were soaring that would decrease the market value of food. The current agriculture system is designed with profit as the goal and feeding people as a secondary result.
Is a supply chain inefficient? In the current system that’s alright, it lets a company charge more to make up for losses and gives them something tangible to justify price hikes.
There’s also massive surplus waste and other problems that are prevalent in the current system. Growing to feed local populations rather than growing for export would drastically shift the situation alone and is currently entirely possible, but not nearly as profitable.
Can we get enough food for everyone? Yes. Can we do it while maintaining record high margins? Probably not
There isn’t some vast array of technologies that exists but that we’re holding back from employing. We’re employing everything. Are there inefficiencies and manipulations from a capitalist system? Yes. But that has been the case for generations. Food yields per acre were increasing quite regularly for decades prior to 15 years ago or so. This is a relatively new phenomenon. And even in the greediest of corporate systems there’s pressure to develop as efficient a supply chain as possible, and to make use of available land as profitably as possible. Ruthless profit seeking could decrease the total number of acres under production, but it shouldn’t restrain the productivity per acre. Land doesn’t come cheap.
