Three Trends for the Next 50 Years
James Altucher
79336

I still think corporatism is a natural consequence of living in a Capitalist society. See Erich Fromm’s marketing and exploitative orientations. People with the resources can freelance if they like. They have to, since everyone is chasing the same money. Capitalism requires everyone to work in a masochistic system for imaginary money, rather than become self-sufficient or do work which is actually productive and beneficial to the community. Hierarchies are necessary to drive into those working within the system who gets more and who gets less, aka class division. You said past trends from a hundred years ago may become popular again. Almost a hundred years ago today Russia was about to overthrow their feudal overlords, the Tsars. Perhaps feudalism will become popular again. Some say we are already living a neo-feudal existence. Maybe it’s revolution which will become popular again. Something I seriously doubt the First World is capable of but not the Third World, where all the stuff is made. Also, the honeymoon with companies like Uber is over: http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/34453025/whats-the-problem-with-uber. New ideas and thoughts are great for the mind and society, but I would question the ones which do not challenge but instead embrace the insanity which is greater ambition and wealth at the expense of all else.

In response to whether there will be any new ideas which “change everything,” I agree with your stance of not being a big believer in the future but not for the reason you may be thinking. The fact is nobody important is interested in ideas which change the status quo. Change is bad for business, especially the kind of change which requires us to do away with the current economic model. Right now, neo-liberal economics has fueled a toxic growth cycle which has been dubbed by some as “cancer.” It is literally as anti-economic as you can get. Yet scientists are literally censoring their work out of abject fear for challenging long held socio-economic beliefs.

One of them said, “What we are afraid of doing is putting forward analysis that questions the paradigm, the economic way that we run society today… We fine-tune our analysis so that it fits into the economic reality of our society, the current economic framing. Actually our science now asks fundamental questions about this idea of economic growth in the short term, but we’re very reluctant to say that. In fact, the funding bodies are reluctant to fund research that raises those questions.”1 — http://dissidentvoice.org/2016/03/does-methane-threaten-life/

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.