Thread: Global trends and the decline of the U.S. and Europe

Firstly, I maintain and insist that I am actually a happy contented person with a generally positive outlook. I also love the U.S., a country I was born in and have lived my life in. I will say that to me, however, there is a PROFOUND distinction between my country and the government. I love my country.

Thanks to the suggestion of a friend, I got a subscription to Foreign Affairs magazine, the magazine put out by the Council on Foreign Relations. I'm fascinated by this magazine since the CFR's agenda is publicly stated as being an organization created to promote and work to bring global governance to fruition.

An essay in the current issue by Jack A. Goldstone titled "The New Population Bomb" cites some alarming (or not) statistics regarding projected shifts not only in population concentrations by 2050 but also in the projected economic changes that are argued to imminently affect the U.S., Canada, Europe by 2050.

NAFTA and any other change in U.S. production and trade that have decimated our country's real production of goods aside, the essay posits that not only will the U.S. and Europe NOT recover economically, the U.S. and Europe WILL slip to the status of a "developing nation" economically. And, conversely, the "global middle class" will grow to be found in what is now considered the "developing world". Countries cited as surpassing the U.S. and Europe in economic status (economic status enjoyed by individuals rather than simply revenue generated at the national level and kept at the government level) are Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Mexico and Turkey.

A main and undeniable reason for this imminent change relates to the age of populations. Apparently 9 out of 10 children on the planet under the age of 15 live in developing countries. By 2050, 30% of Americans, Canadians, Chinese and Europeans will be over age 60 (40% over age 60 in Japan and South Korea).

There's much more to the essay, but overall it brought a sobering and definite clarity to me. Someone my age (40) would have to have been in a sensory deprivation chamber for the past twenty years or have been lobotomized to not have noticed DRAMATIC, negative and damaging changes to our nation's ability to maintain a healthy GDP and equally healthy exports.

The clarity for me comes much like it does for those who say they "knew" something was wrong within themselves when they at some point find out they have cancer. I've read that often people hearing such news about themselves in some way feel a sense of peace or relief. They don't have to expend any additional energy wondering IF or WHAT may be wrong.

Now the blunt part here and the reason for the disclaimer at the beginning of this post:

I don't believe the U.S. will "recover" economically. I don't believe the U.S. will return to the economic health that it had during the first half of my lifetime. How could it? It can't compete with countries that manufacture products where people are eagerly paid a fraction of U.S. wages. It can't compete when the youth is dwarfed in relation to the aging population. We're cooked. And, apparently, those shaping global trend believe Europe is as well and for the same reasons. I can say with conviction that I would be thrilled if I was proven wrong in my belief. Ross Perot was right about the sucking sound. I believe it would be delusional for me to think that U.S. won't continue to slide to a state that I would have even considered unimaginable twenty years ago. If the U.S. does fall toward the bottom of the pile, and if it were still a sovereign nation centuries from now, I really think it would take that long, hundreds and hundreds of years before it would rise again in any significant way economically. Why so long? It would have to wait until the generations of the middle class of the now developing nations refused to work for a pittance and instead embraced pleasure and leisure allowing the then U.S. to work for a pittance and work its way up the ladder again.

How could this be reversed? I'm sure it would take many efforts on many fronts and only in a unified manner. Although it would be less likely than me running an ultra-marathon tomorrow, inhabitants of the U.S. abruptly and on a profound level boycotting cheaply made foreign products or largely doing without such products if they couldn't be purchased here in the short term may shake things up. The same in regard to Europe.

I'd love to hear others thoughts on this subject and any solutions to this problem.

Chris L