PDA

View Full Version : The Future Isn’t What It Used To Be


David Blanchard
8/14/2007, 04:27 PM
Every once in a great while, somebody will write a book that as soon as you pick it up, you find it nearly impossible to put it down. That happened earlier with this book (http://www.amazon.com/Supply-Chain-Management-Best-Practices/dp/047178141X/ref=pd_bbs_3/103-9090458-4371054?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1186864406&sr=8-3), and it’s happened again with The Extreme Future (http://www.amazon.com/Extreme-Future-Trends-Reshape-World/dp/0452288665/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/103-9090458-4371054?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1187122924&sr=1-1) by James Canton. Somehow I missed this book when it came out in hardback a year ago, but a fresh new paperback edition is now available and if you have any interest at all forecasts, predictions, prognostications and the occasional blind guess, this book ought to satisfy you.

James Canton is a futurist, which means he gets paid to think about stuff that hasn’t happened yet, based on his analysis of what has happened and what is currently happening. Don’t get hung up on the word “futurist,” because it’s got nothing to do with horoscopes or guys like the Amazing Kreskin; futurists don’t just “make stuff up” – they apply exhaustive analytical studies to vast databases of historical information to arrive at their conclusions. True, sometimes (a lot of the time?) they get things outrageously wrong, but more often than not futurists are looking at trend lines as opposed to identifying exactly when something might happen. So to use a trivial example, a futurist wouldn’t be able to predict exactly when the Chicago Cubs will next win a World Series, but they’d be able to tell you that if the Red Sox and the White Sox could win in consecutive years, then the likelihood that another historically underachieving team could also win seems to be at least statistically possible.

Now, I’m no futurist myself but I was once invited to speak to a group of people who were all clients of a futurist. I had contributed a few items to this futurist’s newsletter on the topic of business applications of various advanced computing technologies (virtual reality, neural networks, that kind of stuff), and within about 15 minutes, I shut off the overhead projector (this was back before the days of PowerPoint presentations) and ended up moderating a very high-spirited discussion amongst the group, some of whom were convinced that virtual reality was a complete joke while others already had success stories they could share. It became a day-long Q&A session, one of the most fascinating exchanges of opinions I’d ever participated in.

James Canton talks about virtual reality in his book, as well as other “weird science” (his term) technology trends like nanotechnology, robotics, artificial life, teleportation, even a self-aware Internet. But what the book really does is serve as a wake-up call to people who want to believe it could still take decades for sweeping changes to occur. The book is kind of an antidote to Thomas Friedman’s largely optimistic The World Is Flat (http://www.amazon.com/World-Flat-History-Twenty-first-Century/dp/0312425074/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2/103-9090458-4371054?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1187122988&sr=1-2), as Canton’s tone is much more alarmist.

The book's subtitle is "The Top Trends That Will Resharpe The World In The Next 20 Years," and to that end almost every page includes a list of some sort, whether it be the somewhat whimsical (the Top Jobs in the year 2030 include “climate-change forecasters” and “poets”) or the startlingly powerful (an American earns in an hour what the average Chinese citizen earns in a year). A lot of the book is laced with Canton’s own political musings, which occasionally cross the line into outright fear-mongering (“democracy is at risk,” he says, because “we are running out of energy”). Even so, whether you agree with his predictions or not, they’re fascinating to read and if nothing else, they get you to thinking.

According to Canton, these are the Top Ten Threats That Could Kill America’s Future:

1. Religious fundamentalism
2. Damaged environment
3. Limited immigration flow
4. War and rampant terrorism
5. Poor education system
6. Lack of high-tech skills in the workforce
7. Reduced funding for R&D
8. Dysfunctional health care system
9. Weak defense and security infrastructure
10. Attacks on privacy and individual freedoms

Abogle
8/15/2007, 07:51 PM
1. Religious fundamentalism
2. Damaged environment
3. Limited immigration flow
4. War and rampant terrorism
5. Poor education system
6. Lack of high-tech skills in the workforce
7. Reduced funding for R&D
8. Dysfunctional health care system
9. Weak defense and security infrastructure
10. Attacks on privacy and individual freedoms


Sounds like a good read David.

I am in agreement with most of the list but must take issue with number 3 and number 6.

I would like to know what the author uses to support these positions? is it true statistical data or just more open border talking points with no real substantiation?

Clearly illegal immigration would be a negative rather than a positive as it burdens taxpayers with additional need for law enforcement, medical care, education and other social services, as well as burdening of charitable organizations. Legal immigration on the other hand may be a plus, provided we get smarter about who we let in and what skills and education are they bringing to the table rather than simply importing a new underclass to compete with minorities and teens for the existing entry level service jobs, and depress middle class wages.

And of course this so called skills gap which is completely false- as the data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Census Bureau show proves, not to mention the common sense that there already aren't enough jobs for existing tech and science graduates from US colleges that are the best in the world. I have yet to see a clarification of what these skills are that we are supposedly lacking that can't be filled by college graduates or the plenty of un and under employed former manufacturing workers of all skill levels.

I am totally in agreement of a lack of funding for R&D - all the capital for this appears to be flowing out of the country to china and india, not much really going on domestically - the term "yankee inginuity" just no longer seems to mean anything - there is no new "next big things" on the horizon at least as US technology and manufacturing seem to be concerned.

Dysfunctional health system is also one I am in agreement with. we have the most expensive system in the world yet 2/5ths of our population is either un or under-insured and therfore go without adequate health care. Not only is this a burden on small business and US based manufacturers but it also puts us on an unlevel playing field with nearly every other country that has some form of universal health care.

Nine is definitely a concern as we continue to dismantle our industrial base and give it freely to countries such as china that are clearly not our friends and a very real threat to our economic and national security. we can no longer be the arsenal of democracy if we lack the capacity to produce that arsenal.

David Blanchard
8/16/2007, 02:25 PM
I am in agreement with most of the list but must take issue with number 3 and number 6.

I would like to know what the author uses to support these positions? is it true statistical data or just more open border talking points with no real substantiation?

I abbreviated the list somewhat; the full description for point # 3 is:

"Limited immigration flow unable to offset declining fertility rates, leading to a reduced workforce and a depressed economy."

I'm not sure I agree with that point, either (in fact, there are a lot of things in this book that I would question, but that's part of what makes this book so fascinating). In his latest "The Competitive Edge" column, Tom Duesterberg neatly lays out exactly which countries will be most affected by declining fertility rates. You can read the whole article here (http://www.industryweek.com/ReadArticle.aspx?ArticleID=14767), but let me excerpt one of his points here:

"The U.S. population, due to a higher fertility rate than other advanced economies and much higher rates of immigration, will continue to grow at a rate only slightly lower than the world average between now and 2030."

In other words, the United States is in a far better position than most other industrialized countries, or even emerging Third World countries, in terms of population and productivity. So this "limited immigration flow" sounds more like political commentary than future-trending, but if you can get past that kind of stuff popping up every so often, the book is definitely a conversation-starter.

rbrooku
8/16/2007, 02:26 PM
The real threat is not "national". It is "global", and thinking only in terms of nations is part of the process of that threat. Canton's points are valid, but the summation as implying the "threat" is merely "national" is a grave mistake.

Jon Burger
8/16/2007, 03:40 PM
I know I'm not supposed to scoff at the title "futurist", but #4 (War and rampant terrorism) makes it tough. No way, really?!? I was thinking the opposite!

Craig
8/17/2007, 10:16 AM
The prediction about immigration is probably based on problems currently faced in Europe. For one reason or another, families aren't as common as they once were there. The low end jobs are getting harder to fill, so immigrants from Turkey and other less developed countries are filling in. I think the big difference between Europe and the US is that the immigrants are filling jobs in response to a clear need there, where as the need here is somewhat in question while there are still unemployed citizens.

David Blanchard
8/22/2007, 09:07 AM
The real threat is not "national". It is "global", and thinking only in terms of nations is part of the process of that threat. Canton's points are valid, but the summation as implying the "threat" is merely "national" is a grave mistake.

In fairness to James Canton, the list I excerpted came from a chapter titled, "The Future of America and Democracy." He does indeed devote another entire chapter to global trends and threats. Here are what Canton sees are the top barriers to globalization's future:

* High unemployment
* Global terrorism
* Trade barriers
* Depressed local economies
* Threats to energy and climate
* Tyranny
* No rule of law
* A controlled press
* War
* Poor education and health care
* Anticonsumerism