US birth rates hit 1.6/woman

[EatenByLimestone]

If the developed and developing countries have lower populations, less energy will be used. As the largest worldwide generation, the boomers, ages, I expect the earth’s population to fall quickly. Note that this phenomenon is skewed toward the countries that use the most energy in the first place.

 

[woodgeek]

Hmmm. Zeihan likes to play it a little fast and loose with the details, but is entertaining in a doomey kind of way.

On a US basis the Millennials are bigger than the Boomers. And are already powering the US economy at this point. The 'lull' between the two (my small generation, 'X') came in the 2000-2015 doldrums, where the US turned to 'financialization' to maintain some semblance of economic growth. That didn't really work out too well.

Population is still growing semi-rapidly in Latin America, and rather rapidly in Africa, although current UN peak population projections are are much lower than they were 10 years ago. Progress!

On a global basis, those two regions are still driving global population higher rapidly, probably until well after 2050.

Given that decarbonization really needs to be well underway by 2050, the slow future decline in global population will come too late to have a significant impact.

More importantly, global populations will get richer and demand more energy services, leading to growth of end-user energy (not primary inputs) by 2-3X current global levels.

The critical issue is if that growth will come from low carbon and sustainable sources, which will make it manageable for the climate, or if they will come from fossils, which would lead to climate breaking emissions (like 2-3X current in a few decades).

So, decarbonization is actually a global fairness issue. There are enough fossils in the ground for the (current) global poor to have a middle class lifestyle (including, um, meat and dairy consumption), but not enough atmosphere to stash all the emissions. So if we want a middle-class world with a livable climate, renewables are the Way.

 

[EbS-P]

Just look to Japan as to how birth rate affects economy. Immigration needs to be part of economic policy. As does child tax credits, and public education costs.

 

[EatenByLimestone]

I think Zaihan gets a lot of things wrong, but I think he has the population thing down. Seems to be on the alarmist side, but without young people, lots of things have to change.

The millennials are here. It’s the ones being born now that are the issue.

Heck, I’m at the end of Gen X and am already looking at retirement in the future. I bet the older millennials are too. I suspect the last decade of work will go pretty fast, lol. I plan to get out or at least really cut back in 7.

 

[EbS-P]

I think Zaihan gets a lot of things wrong, but I think he has the population thing down. Seems to be on the alarmist side, but without young people, lots of things have to change.

The millennials are here. It’s the ones being born now that are the issue.

Heck, I’m at the end of Gen X and am already looking at retirement in the future. I bet the older millennials are too. I suspect the last decade of work will go pretty fast, lol. I plan to get out or at least really cut back in 7.

Are we ready to tackle Social Security restructuring yet. Butter get a move on. Sure would be nice to get some of that money I’ve paid in back. I’m not counting on it.

 

[woodgeek]

I think Zaihan gets a lot of things wrong, but I think he has the population thing down. Seems to be on the alarmist side, but without young people, lots of things have to change.

The millennials are here. It’s the ones being born now that are the issue.

Heck, I’m at the end of Gen X and am already looking at retirement in the future. I bet the older millennials are too. I suspect the last decade of work will go pretty fast, lol. I plan to get out or at least really cut back in 7.

Millennials retiring? Huh? I'm born in '68, so I am nearly the oldest Gen X (born in '65), and I'm only starting to think about slowing down at 56 yo. My target retirement age is 67-70, so 2035-2038.

The oldest Millennial is only 43, and I doubt they are thinking a lot about retirement. The youngest Millennial is 28.

 

[woodgeek]

So Peter says that immigration can't fill the demographic hole in the US, out of hand, but that is not clear at all. It has been filling that hole for many years already.

I guess I agree that demographics look like it could be a problem in the US, but in practice it seems a long way out to me.

The social security 'bankruptcy date' is also misleading. When the trust fund is exhausted (if allowed to happen) benefits would be cut by something like 13% in a 'cash flow' system, with a slow decay after that. But I think a lot of people assume that the bankruptcy date mean no more payments after that at all... the whole system goes poof! Hardly.

That said, it would be good to rejigger the system slightly sooner rather than later to push the date a bit further into the future. AS has been done several times before. My guess is the next time the Dems control both chambers and the Prez, it will be on the list. Easy.

 

[EbS-P]

So Peter says that immigration can't fill the demographic hole in the US, out of hand, but that is not clear at all. It has been filling that hole for many years already.

I guess I agree that demographics look like it could be a problem in the US, but in practice it seems a long way out to me.

The social security 'bankruptcy date' is also misleading. When the trust fund is exhausted (if allowed to happen) benefits would be cut by something like 13% in a 'cash flow' system, with a slow decay after that. But I think a lot of people assume that the bankruptcy date mean no more payments after that at all... the whole system goes poof! Hardly.

That said, it would be good to rejigger the system slightly sooner rather than later to push the date a bit further into the future. AS has been done several times before. My guess is the next time the Dems control both chambers and the Prez, it will be on the list. Easy.

How about we tax all one’s earnings not just the first $168k?

 

[woodgeek]

Nowadays... I'm thinking about the singularity and humanoid robots.

The 'math' of the singularity is that economic growth over centuries of time (excluding the last few 'slow' decades) looks hyperbolic, and goes to infinity at a point in the mid 21st century. This diverging figure is economic output per capita in constant dollars.

We can look at that and say 'how can economic output per human go to infinity?' The increase is bc of productivity due to better tools for humans to be productive with. Many thinkers (including our old friend Tony Seba) now think that automation generally, and perhaps fueled by AI and humanoid robots, will allow economic output to rise well above current levels.

After all, the problem with demographics (in this thread) is the threat to economic productivity through a shortage of labor. Of all kinds: manual, intellectual, creative.

Current humanoid robots are estimated to cost $200k and have a service life of 20k hours. Or $10/hr. So any labor task that can be done by such a robot currently has a cost ceiling of $10/hr, that like other tech learning curves is only going to fall through the floor. And of course one of those labor tasks can be building more humanoid robots!

Why humanoids? Well, the built environment is scaled to the human form, and it is filled with tools that are sized to human proportions.

If this all sounds like science fiction, ask yourself why Nvidia stocks are going to the moon, and why Elon is saying that Tesla is not going to be a car company soon. If you stil think its not going to happen in 2025, ok. But will it happen by 2030? By 2035?

What about countries like Japan and Korea or future China struggling with labor shortages... will they take the lead in humanoids? Will there be a humanoid gap? Will the next Biden admin order a crash govt program to build a humanoid army?

Maybe economic growth decoupling from human population means that economic output per human CAN go to infinity. All we need to do is then take the human population to zero.

I'm going to go take a nap.

 

[stoveliker]

I am not convinced by the humanoid part. We use many robots in manufacturing. None are humanoid. Why? Cost per hour of lifetime is lower. Why? More dexterity if one can design the body for the job.

Example: We used to weld cars together. Robots do that now.

 

[woodgeek]

I am not convinced by the humanoid part. We use many robots in manufacturing. None are humanoid. Why? Cost per hour of lifetime is lower. Why? More dexterity if one can design the body for the job.

Example: We used to weld cars together. Robots do that now.

OK... we have had industrial robots for a long time, that do a singular repetitive task like welding. I think a lot of those robots were programmed with conventional approaches, servo loops, control algorithms, line by line. As a result, the setup cost per task performed is large.

Nowadays robots are controlled by AI routines that learn by doing... there is no line by line program to execute, or servo control per se. And when one robot is trained in a task, its ability can be simply replicated into the others.

So post-AI robots are a different beast from industrial robots in the same way Google is different from a dictionary. One is much more powerful and versatile.

 

[stoveliker]

I agree. But even then a "butler" robot is much better on wheels than being humanoid (in shape). But maybe you were thinking humanoid in mode of interaction - for which AI is indeed indispensable.

My point being that even for human tasks in a human evironment, there are better shapes and dexterity forms than the human body.

 

[EbS-P]

I don’t see labor shortages as the critical point constricting economic growth. I see the flat lining of domestic consumption as the limiting factor. population growth equals economic growth while standard of living growth remains as it has in the past. As the cost of robots is reduced and reliance increases does that lead to substantial reduction in the cost of living? How does one make a living if robots do a lot of jobs. Will food and housing be free? How will one accumulate wealth?

Final note parenting 5 kids is exhausting and just in a the last 8 years has become way more demanding. Yes 8 years ago kids had iPads at school. Now all homework is assigned digitally. It now takes twice as long to complete similar assignments. 8 years ago—-“ do you have a pencil”. Today “where is your iPad? Is it charged? Where is your charger? That’s not your homework. Get off that game. No you can’t be on YouTube. ……. How about an AI parenting bot that the the kids will listen too how far off is that??

 

[EatenByLimestone]

Our shape is a compromise, but one shaped by generations of evolution selecting for positive traits. If anything was a really horrible design, it probably would have disappeared. I think it’d be nice to have another hand sometimes though. Maybe one attached to a tail.

 

[EatenByLimestone]

I don’t see labor shortages as the critical point constricting economic growth. I see the flat lining of domestic consumption as the limiting factor. population growth equals economic growth while standard of living growth remains as it has in the past. As the cost of robots is reduced and reliance increases does that lead to substantial reduction in the cost of living? How does one make a living if robots do a lot of jobs. Will food and housing be free? How will one accumulate wealth?

Final note parenting 5 kids is exhausting and just in a the last 8 years has become way more demanding. Yes 8 years ago kids had iPads at school. Now all homework is assigned digitally. It now takes twice as long to complete similar assignments. 8 years ago—-“ do you have a pencil”. Today “where is your iPad? Is it charged? Where is your charger? That’s not your homework. Get off that game. No you can’t be on YouTube. ……. How about an AI parenting bot that the the kids will listen too how far off is that??

I think labor shortage will be a bottleneck until technology figures out a way around it. So far, we seem to only be limited by our imagination and current technology. Give us time, we’ll think our way out of all of our most pressing issues.

 

[stoveliker]

Final note parenting 5 kids is exhausting and just in a the last 8 years has become way more demanding. Yes 8 years ago kids had iPads at school. Now all homework is assigned digitally. It now takes twice as long to complete similar assignments. 8 years ago—-“ do you have a pencil”. Today “where is your iPad? Is it charged? Where is your charger? That’s not your homework. Get off that game. No you can’t be on YouTube. ……. How about an AI parenting bot that the the kids will listen too how far off is that??

I quite disagree. Not with the exhausting - it indeed is.

But about the digital homework.

Never searched for homework papers that your kids lost?
That laptop they have from school is all they need. They look up their homework, and do it. No hassle with the dogs eating homework...

And I let them deal with their own f* ups. If their laptop is not charged when they go to school, they have to sit on their self-inflicted blisters (maybe that's a Dutch saying...). They have to take responsibility for their (in-)actions. It's not rocket science that the laptop has to be charged to use it. They very d*mn well know to do so with their phones... You forget something to school? Your problem. You didn't forget your pants either so you can do it.

Games or YT are simply a no-go until homework is done. And if they get caught, their electronics (or whatever else they value) is out of the picture for some time. They have learned mightily fast that it's not worth watching YouTube when it's homework time.

Tough love maybe, but it's working.
My daughter is #1 or #2 in her class. Getting all 100s on her 9th grade math and science (she's in 8th grade). Similar for my 6th grade son. They have learned real quick that explaining to a teacher why something is awry is not fun.

 

[stoveliker]

Our shape is a compromise, but one shaped by generations of evolution selecting for positive traits. If anything was a really horrible design, it probably would have disappeared. I think it’d be nice to have another hand sometimes though. Maybe one attached to a tail.

Yet there are quite a few days I wish to have wheels, three legs, a head that can swivel 360 degrees (kids...), 2 extra sets of arms and hands - on the back side.

 

[woodgeek]

Well. We had this bout of inflation the last few years that made folks really upset. What was that about? Was it microchips in vaccines and George Soros? Nope. It was driven by profiteering by many companies during the pandemic AND many folks demanding or expecting a higher wage.

IOW, inflation was largely caused by an acute labor shortage during the pandemic, which permanently raised salaries, esp among those on the bottom of the income scale, whose wages had been (IMO) suppressed for the last couple decades.

I am pro union in principle, but skeptical in practice. But I think a major reason why legacy companies are struggling to build EVs is the high cost of labor, and perhaps a slower innovation cycle at those companies do to issues around recruiting and retaining labor. Relative to China manufacturing, our higher cost are partly that, and our long (internal, domestic) supply chains and regulations (many of which are around worker safety).

So labor remains a huge part of the cost of finished goods, and is putting a price floor under all these amazing new technologies that Seba tells us will become so cheap in the future.

The missing piece is the supply and price of labor. So that techno-optimist future utopia hinges upon this thread's population issue... will there be enough workers to mine all the minerals and make all this stuff? Enter the humanoids!

 

[woodgeek]

I agree. But even then a "butler" robot is much better on wheels than being humanoid (in shape). But maybe you were thinking humanoid in mode of interaction - for which AI is indeed indispensable.

My point being that even for human tasks in a human evironment, there are better shapes and dexterity forms than the human body.

Not sure I agree on a wheeled butler... I live in a split-level house on three levels, and can't be bothered to get a Roomba.

I went to a technical presentation once that sought to answer what was the ultimate mobility method (wheels, legs, or both) for difficult terrain like sand-dunes on Mars.

The answer was articulated walking legs (6 was a little better than 4) like a spider, with wheels on the ends of all legs. On flat terrain, the bot would crouch with its legs together, the wheels would align, and it could roll efficiently at high speed. When it hit a steep sand dune, it could lock the wheels into 'paws', unfold its legs and clamber up the unstable face of the dune on 'all sixes'. The guy had some very cool videos of this.

So, wheels or legs? Both!

I am sure than humanoids will have human like hands, to manipulate tools and parts and tech the way humans do. But they will probably be 'double jointed' or more.

And maybe they will have 'wheelies' built into their feet (like those annoying kids in the mall) for when they need to go long distances.

 

[stoveliker]

If 6 legs plus wheels, double jointed arms,, and a 360 deg vision is humanoid in your book, I'm curious as to your gene profile 🤣

 

[EbS-P]

I have been thinking about labor markets in 20-25 years when kids born today will enter the job market. Tesla has a humanoid robot sorting batteries today. In 20 years AI will replace most all the repetitive task human jobs. Boomers will no longer be a driving economic force.

Today we are still in the “how can we automate” the shift is coming soon to how can AI do it best.