USA without planet Earth

[Heraclitus]

Originally posted by Vesayen


Agreed.

I would forsee an era of unparalleled technological advancment, prosperity and peace as suddenly the world has far, far, far more natural rescources then our society can use up in short order and no real competition for them.

There are no external threats and the U.S. is a coherant enough political entity that even under such bizzare circumstances the country would not splinter, our national identity is too strong. Give the U.S. all the rescources it could want, no external competition for rescources and no external threats?

Utopia, or close enough.

If I were you I would rethink my position. Especially the idea that technological progress would accelerate, if anything it would stop for some time, since the market would have no need for it (well this would not be true of entertainment technology), if not for any of the other reasons, then precisely because of the abundance of natural resources. And while national unity might hold on for some time, in the long term this second Earth would develop into a normal world with its own problems, far from anything you could call a utopia. And the law and order tendency if coupled with a global government might infact produce an dystopian state.

[Heraclitus]

Originally posted by Vesayen


The majority of Americans are still the same "law and order" sort who voted for Nixon 30 years ago, albeit a tad more socially liberal today and less politically active. Most people just want the trains to run on time and their bellies full. Fundamentalists don't stand a chance, our armed forces are loyal to the goverment and to the populace, who the hell is going to put up a fight, a handful of people in the bible belt with small arms?

You are grossly overestimating the number of religious fundamentalists in the United States.

Even most of the Christian fundamentalists are pro democracy and pro secular goverment. Only a very small fraction are a real "problem" and they are statistically insiginificant. No matter how much I try to convince foreigners of this, they never seem to believe me.

I think there would be a rally around the flag effect from this bizzare transportation and very few people who want to "leave" American society. I would think most groups that left the territorial U.S. would still want to be part of it politically. The U.S. now has all the rescources it could ever want, a pristine planet and no threats-why would you want to leave what is soon going to be a utopia, to go scratch out a living in the wilderness?

"Radical" sepratists groups don't have the neccesary rescources or organization to split off on their own. For example as cited above, how would the black or white fundamentalists leave the body of the state? The best they could do is eke out a substance farming living.

Oh, we also need to dismantle most of our nuclear stockpile and destroy our biological and chemical war programs, what the hell would we need them for anymore?

If you truly think that the only reason why people fight wars and have problems in society are cultural differences and resource shortage, then I have so much to say, that I don’t know where to start.

I’ll just say that the utopian argument is very, very weak. Social injustice would still remain; scarcity of resources would continue unless the US abandoned the capitalist system, population growth would eventually produce an overpopulated world. Space exploration would stop, perhaps for centuries since there would be no need for it. Fossil fuels might be in use for far longer; who knows they might be around long enough to start global warming just like here on Earth. Technological advancement comes in adverse circumstances; it comes when the society has a need for the advancement. Tell me if there is no need for military research, and civilian research is not as profitable as just looting the abundant resources, who outside underfunded academia will bother with it?

[Heraclitus]

Originally posted by Vesayen

Oh, we also need to dismantle most of our nuclear stockpile and destroy our biological and chemical war programs, what the hell would we need them for anymore?

I have an idea, why don't all countries just do that now?

A global government would still have use for weapons, believe me. Any national cohesion, would disappear with no external groups. It would either splinter into new smaller national entities, or would be replaced with a humanistic "all humanity is one" outlook.

BTW Would you support a global government in our world? I would, but I would know with certainty, that despite the funds it would save, it would not produce a utopia.




And another minor point: The rest of the world has disappeared.

Will the average moderately religious American who doesn’t believe in evolution believe a rational scientific explanation for the said event or will he see it as divine intervention?

[Whoha]

Originally posted by Heraclitus



If I were you I would rethink my position. Especially the idea that technological progress would accelerate, if anything it would stop for some time, since the market would have no need for it (well this would not be true of entertainment technology), if not for any of the other reasons, then precisely because of the abundance of natural resources. And while national unity might hold on for some time, in the long term this second Earth would develop into a normal world with its own problems, far from anything you could call a utopia. And the law and order tendency if coupled with a global government might infact produce an dystopian state.

The cost of labor is what drives businesses to invest in capital/innovation/etc. And in this scenario the cost of labor(relative to what it is now) shoots through the roof.

[Vesayen]

Originally posted by Heraclitus
If I were you I would rethink my position. Especially the idea that technological progress would accelerate, if anything it would stop for some time, since the market would have no need for it (well this would not be true of entertainment technology), if not for any of the other reasons, then precisely because of the abundance of natural resources. And while national unity might hold on for some time, in the long term this second Earth would develop into a normal world with its own problems, far from anything you could call a utopia. And the law and order tendency if coupled with a global government might infact produce an dystopian state.

Dividends of peace. While much technological advancment is spurred on by internal and external competition for rescources, we have never had a modern society with NO external competition for rescources. We can't say if that maxim will hold true or not.

If you truly think that the only reason why people fight wars and have problems in society are cultural differences and resource shortage, then I have so much to say, that I don’t know where to start.

Almost all wars in the last 200 years are economic in nature, even the ones which dont appear to be at first hand. The germans started WW2 in response to an economic recession. The Korean war and the war in Vietnam were part of a global struggle over economic systems. All the U.S. interventionalism in south america was to protect U.S. economic interests. Even the fighting in places like Kosovo or Uganada are economic in nature, while racism was a huge element, the hatred was generated by one group because another group, was wealthier(and ALSO of a different religion, race etc, which made it easier to justify in their minds). Oppresion of whites in Zimbabwe? Again, economic.

Society and cultural differences alone are almost never enough to start a war and never in a large, well organized country.

This would make a good thread topic actually, new thread?

I’ll just say that the utopian argument is very, very weak. Social injustice would still remain;

The social injustice in the U.S. is not so great that any big groups would want to leave, only small groups without the rescources to set up a modern society would do so. You can't hike off into remote wilderness, spurn the only existing modern society and have things like modern medicine.

scarcity of resources would continue unless the US abandoned the capitalist system,

Labor shortages are actually good for the poor, it usually raises wages. Employment in the U.S. would not dissapear as a certain % of people do not want a job or are unable to work, but everyone who would want a job, would be able to find a good paying job. This would be great for the wage slaves.

population growth would eventually produce an overpopulated world.

Not for centuries.

Space exploration would stop, perhaps for centuries since there would be no need for it.

Too many private individuals and corporations are heavily invested in it now. We would also lose our satelite system in this scenario and we would want it back, I think within a decade or so of this strange event, we would have GPS and communication satelites back in orbit. Space exploration gets one ENORMOUS boon in this scenario. We can use nuclear spacecraft. We can't now because there is public fear of launching such a vessel inside U.S. borders and international law forbis it. With both of those issues now gone, we can launch space ships with nuclear engines.

Fossil fuels might be in use for far longer; who knows they might be around long enough to start global warming just like here on Earth.

All the dead algae and reefs are now back, as well as a ton of trees. The immediate loss in refining and importing of oil would neccesarily result in an immediate emphasis on public transportation to ration what we have in reserve. After we have these systems in place, they would proboably stay in place, this does not mean there would not be a back slide after fuel becomes cheap again but it will help.

We are also forgetting one thing. The U.S. is now the worlds sole economic entity. There is no outside economic competition. If we have the national will to, after the crisis is over, we could legislate high requirments on fuel uses and enviromental laws. The public is on the whole, very pro enviroment even if they won't do things in their personal lives to back up those views. The auto industry would simply, die in this scenario, there would be no demand for new cars for a number of years due to loss of rescources, it might even be nationalized and the industrial machinary retooled for other things. The oil industry would also get a pretty big shake up. The are the only reason we don't have more efficient engines now and they may become non issues.

Tell me if there is no need for military research, and civilian research is not as profitable as just looting the abundant resources, who outside underfunded academia will bother with it?

The will to do military research can be offset by the fact we would shrink the size of our military. I don't think it would dissapear but it would be reduced in size. Civilian research would get a boon from the huge influx of natural rescources. After the black plague, there was political and philosophical progress as well as technological progress. Why? There was suddenly a demand for labor but in short order, more rescources to go around, which spurred progress.

Times of prosperity and abundant rescources are so rare that we have very few examples of them, most examples we have of technological progress are in response to scarcity, but that does not mean in times of enormous abundance, there cannot also be progress, or even accelerated progress. Labor shortages also spur on technological progress, as shown in the wake of the black death in Europe and suddenly we would have a big labor shortage.

I have an idea, why don't all countries just do that now?(Dismantle nukes)

I said we should, not that we would. I don't think we would.

Any national cohesion, would disappear with no external groups. It would either splinter into new smaller national entities, or would be replaced with a humanistic "all humanity is one" outlook.

Americans are far more patriotic and cohesive as a political entity(even if they don't agree all, or any of the time) then you give them credit for.

BTW Would you support a global government in our world? I would, but I would know with certainty, that despite the funds it would save, it would not produce a utopia

No way in hell. The purpose of a goverment is to protect my rights and my life from being arbitrarily intruded upon by another. Most of the world(who are not despots) believe the purpose of goverment is to ensure prosperity. I don't want the prosperity crowd saying how things happen in my country. There is not enough political cohesion between different countries for it to work anyway.

And another minor point: The rest of the world has disappeared.

Will the average moderately religious American who doesn’t believe in evolution believe a rational scientific explanation for the said event or will he see it as divine intervention

With all the scifi movies we see? Can't say. There would not be any religious wars in the U.S. over this.

[Heraclitus]

Originally posted by Vesayen

Americans are far more patriotic and cohesive as a political entity(even if they don't agree all, or any of the time) then you give them credit for.

No, you missed my point, what I meant is that any nation in the world would go through this process. In the long term either local identifiers appear, or all the Americans start thinking of themselves as human, since the terms become interchangeable.

[Heraclitus]

Many of the changes you are citing seem, unusual considering the current US socio-political environment.

[Vesayen]

Originally posted by Heraclitus



No, you missed my point, what I meant is that any nation in the world would go through this process. In the long term either local identifiers appear, or all the Americans start thinking of themselves as human, since the terms become interchangeable.

Over decades and centuries? Of course. Immediatly upon this bizzare transition? No.

What was implied in what you said was that there would be immediate cracks in national unity, not that it happens over many many years.

[Heraclitus]

Originally posted by Vesayen


Over decades and centuries? Of course. Immediatly upon this bizzare transition? No.

What was implied in what you said was that there would be immediate cracks in national unity, not that it happens over many many years.

That’s the root of our misunderstanding, I was talking about many decades perhaps a century or two, this point is unrelated to the comments I made about the transitional instability.

[Blake]

I wonder how long overpopulation would take...


If you make some assumptions... like, 1/2 the population is female, and 1/3rd is able/prepared to breed, and each female produces a child each year, then you could get up to about 15% population growth per year. If we then cut that to 10%, just for fun, then it would still only take 30 years for the population to reach 5 billion.

Even with only 5% growth, you're only talking 60 years.

Never underestimate the ability for populations to grow explosively, if they get it into their head that they should produce lots of children.

Lets try another analysis and look only at generations, not per-year growth rate.

Lets make it simple, and say that each breeding female, produces 2 new breeding female (ie they have like 5 kids, 2 are breeding females, 2 are males, and 1 gives his/her life to God)

Lets assume that in the USA (population 300 million), there are 75 million breeding females.

Generation / millions of people.

G1: 75 breeding females produce 375 offspring.
G2: 150 breeding females produce 750 offspring.
G3: 300 breeding females produce 1500 offspring.
G4: 600 breeding females produce 3000 offspring.

As you can see, by generation 4, there are 3 billion children ALONE, added to all the old people.

If a generation is 25 years, then that's 100 years.

It's quite possible for families to be larger than 5 kids. I mean women are fertile for about 20-30 years, and can easily pop out a kid every other year, so families of 10 children, even 15, are not improbable.


In the modern world, what gets in the way of huge families? Mostly, it's finances and careers.

In the new world, land is practically free and building materials are very cheap. That means, no huge mortgages, greatly relieving the financial burden on families. With easier finances, partly from the fact that people can just go live as pioneers if they wish (ie found their own villages, built from their own labor, and not be slaves to the capitalistic banking system) the huge families become affordable.

It's difficult to say how exactly the demographics will unfold, but it is more than likely, that there will be breed like rabbit types colonizing the rest of the world. The question of growth speed is really what initial %age of the population decides to breed like rabbits, because you can bet, that the children of those rabbits, will continue to breed like rabbits.

This could easily lead to a massive population of those religious types who ashun contraception, they could quickly dwarf the population of slow-breeders.

The result could easily be either dictatorship (to prevent religious control of power), or a theocratic democracy (where religious parties are always voted in).

[LzPrst]

Originally posted by Riesstiu IV
Many places of our current earth have become a stinking, overcrowded crapholes.

Like the americas?