When I was in school we had the occasional class discussion in history or social studies about the role of the frontier in U.S. economic development. Back then (this was the 1960s) if the teacher was sharp this would sometimes segue into a discussion about the implications for America of being without an obvious frontier — a condition that was widely known even then. Those conversations have stilled for some reason with the rise of what seems to me to be societal stupidity, but it is my growing sense that this is at the heart of our current economic malaise. We need a new frontier.
America has had several important frontiers in its 235 years. First there was the wilderness, then industrialization, then consumerization. These are my classifications and you may well disagree, especially with the last one, but I’m painting here in broad strokes. The wilderness frontier was conquered through the simple act of occupation — growing a population to fill the space. Industrialization turned that occupied land to fruitful endeavor, giving us jobs and industries and leveraging the value of that space we had occupied with such great effort. And consumerization (again this might be controversial) took that economic value and spread it to where there weren’t mines or factories or wheat fields by bringing the goods to us in our towns and cities whether it was Post cereals, Ivory soap, Howdy Doodie, or McDonalds.
Each frontier was conquered at great expense but little cost. The cost of taming the wilderness was free land with the expense being racial intolerance (my grandmother was a Cherokee — don’t get me started on this). The cost of industrialization was more free land (railway rights-of-way) with the expense being pollution and eventual urban blight. The cost of consumerization has been separating us from our traditional means of production, that is the previous industrial phase. Add to this an aging population and inefficient government dominated by the very folks who used to run for student council and you have where we are today — drifting.
Looking more closely at this latter phase, In the 1980’s and 1990’s we wiped out R&D in companies and that led to the loss of tens of thousands of engineering jobs, but this went often unnoticed because it took a decade or more to be strongly felt.
In the 1990’s we started shipping manufacturing jobs and equipment offshore. One statistic tells it all — the United Auto Workers’ membership is down by 500,000 in the last 15 years. There are a lot of fervent opinions thrown out about whether unions are good or bad (to be fair, I like unions — my father ran one) but we’d be hard put to argue that the existence of the UAW hurt Detroit in most of the 20th century. Our manufacturing job losses have to be in the millions. In the last decade we started shipping IT jobs offshore, too. Those numbers probably match the auto workers.
Economies embody an evolutionary process. As old businesses and industries phase out, others emerge. One of the big problems today is we have no real emerging industries, certainly nothing that can employ millions. Jobs are being lost and nothing is there to replace them. Government can’t fund enough jobs to cover this magnitude of loss. Here’s where we make a mistake by spending too much time these days talking about how we can best get back to where we used to be, but that isn’t going to happen. You can’t go home again.
We need a new frontier to get us truly back to work. But what’s that going to be? As much as I love the picture with this column the next frontier is unlikely to be space flight. Fun as it is that’s a rich man’s lark and will remain so for decades to come until teenagers start building space hotrods.
Alternative energy offers some possibilities but it is too fraught with conflicting interest groups to get enough traction. Remember new frontiers beget new fortunes and in energy the old fortunes aren’t yet ready to let go. Energy independence would be wonderful but I don’t think it will be allowed to happen unless it is a side effect of some even greater economic force.
So what should be our next frontier and what makes your idea better than another? I have my own thoughts, but I’d like to hear yours first.
I think one simple method to help with unemployment would be to adjust the “work week” from 40 hours to 32 hours.
That comes with its own unique problems. Do you also raise the minimum wage to nine bucks so that minimum wage earners make about the same amount of money?
Did you notice how well that worked for France? Why not just mandate that employers have to employ twice as many people and pay them twice as much?
Obviously that isn’t a solution — but by the same token this general assumption that things are bad in France is way off the mark. The French have better health care, higher life expectancy, more job security and a way better safety net should they lose a job, more leisure/vacation tim — better overall quality of life.
Not to belabor the obvious, but their food tastes better. Their wireless networks are infinitely better than ours — in coverage, bandwidth, call quality/reliability and price! Their wired broadband, ditto.
It is probably harder to start/run a tech startup in France than the US — that’s the main downside. If you are poor, young and don’t have a college degree, life there sucks — but newsflash, it sucks here just as much. There at least when you graduate you won’t be digging your way from under a mountain of student loans.
In France they use Nuclear power. (As long as we are postulating the source of the better quality of life.)
The US has peaked, high unemployment and low growth are the new norms. The gini curve will remain step and the middle class will shrink even further. The batton was passed from the UK to the US in the 1940s the US is now passing the batton eastwards.
Free Education (as in beer)…
Free education: and which of the newly emerging industries awaiting fresh young minds will this benefit?
some, people without (free as in beer) education, would never think off…
I think he means we can employee millions more as college teachers.
That’s funny, I think it’s almost impossible to say – but that is a positive value where we are now. Education is, you must understand, like R&D into people’s minds. It’s almost impossible to leave the current educational blight as it is: people from the new generations will simply demand to know more than most of us ever thought necessary or realistic – and old plans won’t work. Generations probably balance each other out. The more time people take to explore, the more they will find. Something like what reading used to do. This, and the implied slow-down of life, fosters discussion abilities. And of course political sensibilities. The ‘freshly emerging industries’ don’t already exist outside of this change/crisis – they’ll surge from right within it.
I think the current problems will provide a setting for settling for less stuff and doing more important things in life. It wouldn’t surprise me if Holger hit the nail on the head – a youth uncorrupted from the old ways (uncorrupted in a positive sense) may well be it.
Real education is good. But as it is, even when expensive, too many people go without a purpose, trying to “get a degree” without learning anything of value. Free higher ed may turn out to be free diploma mills since all tax payers will say “I paid my taxes so my kids are ENTITLED that degree.”
Bah. I’m an inexperienced young’n, but I think we are finally getting to the point where the Internet will be the next frontier. Bandwidth is high enough now that most of what we imagine the Internet being useful for is actually possible (netflix, itunes, online backup), but also the emerging mobile frontier is around the bend. When people have a computer on them at all times, ridiculous things start to be possible.
I also have great hope for the home maker industry. 3d printing and home cnc/laser mills are getting more and more possible. What would happen if anyone could manufacture most of the stuff they can imagine right in their home? Sounds like MY kind of future, but don’t know if the general populace will give a rat’s…
Don’t really know, though. Never really taken part in a frontier effort before.
that frontier’s already hog-tied and at the butcher’s. The Connected Internet has morphed into Da ISH, and those who are not online are the new poor with no hope, inability to get education, and bereft of many shopping opportunities.
with all the snarly-faced folks lined up for some sort of race over the soul of the country… corporations or individuals?… safety nets or bootstraps?… is taking care of your folks worth our time when they age out, since there will be so many of them?… we have a border to cross before we get to the next frontier. the border is… can Americans afford to give a rat’s patoot any more about anything/anybody except ourself?
most of the country is going to be past retirement age in a few short years, and the free ride of almost everybody producing and reaping the benefits is done. for all the whining and moaning over politics, that fact is massively ignored, the 500-pound gorilla in the room.
that’s got to be resolved first, or you can’t deal with anything else. “grow our way out” is a cop-out, it’s like saying ‘bullet 1… bullet 2… bullet 3… a miracle happens here… voila, profit!”
That’s sounding great! Yup, one of the main problems is always fighting the last war over and over again – investing in the strategies of old generals, so to speak. I also think that the ideas will come from people in new situations, and with new technology, very unexpected things will take shape.
I say automation. Right now, robotics is the only way we can eventually level the labor cost playing field with China, and it’s a great way to keep our so-called knowledge economy viable. But automation doesn’t just mean robots. As businesses have grown smart about workflows, the potential for automation is seeping into desk jobs as well. Up front, automation costs jobs. But it costs the kinds of jobs that Americans with $120,000 college educations can’t afford to have. And the flip side is, automation lowers the bar for entrepreneurs.
I have to agree that automation seems to be the next frontier. Considering that we are on the cusp with driverless transport and robotic manufacturing, it is possible for entire vertical markets to have zero labor costs. By labor cost, I mean paying laborers. There will still be a markup that goes to pay the office staff at corporate HQ. But then office staff is being increasingly automated as well…
I’m not sure what the end impact will be on a macro scale though, since it means less work – not more. Perhaps it will drive the cost of living low enough where a person doesn’t need to have much work to get by. Even so, there will be a lot of trouble ahead unless there’s *some* work for workers who aren’t skilled in automation.
I see this as well, and I suspect that the end result will be a much higher ratio of entrepreneurs to “laborers”.
A return to cottage economy and the reduction in importance of giant megamanufacturerers.
Maybe the eventual downfall of giant distributors like walmart and newegg.
Then it won’t be “get a job, ya bum” it will be (as it should have been all along), “Go create a job, ya bum!”
I know, crazy.
Won’t automation just decrease the number of workers needed? Or am I missing something?
How about the US reduces the minimum wage. Above, someone suggested increasing it. Make it less, much less.
There is no on ramp for jobs anymore. People need a B.S. to get a do nothing fast food manager job. That just sucks.
If we want to bring back manufacturing and not have everything go to robots, it has to be actually economically worthwhile to manufacture in the USofA.
I also agree that the next frontier is automation. We are already seeing it in manufacturing. In order for businesses in developed countries to compete, they must be able to automate the output achieved by 25 to 50 people from a developing country with a lower wage scale. It’s the Industrial Revolution on steroids with the potential of even greater disruption to the social fabric. There will be a limited number of individuals with the skills to run complex technology (the rich) and everyone else (the poor). Consider what would happen when McDonalds finally figures out how to run a restaurant with only one person.
This is a jumble, so I apologize, but everything I can think of is pretty much locked down by patents, monied interests and/or politics. The web is now competing with apps, so that frontier is becoming obviated by the three forces above. It seems to me that we have reached a point in human history that our creations, such as governments and corporations have reached a sufficient level of complexity and size that they no longer endowed with the capability of human judgment, human concerns and human limitations. It may be that the new frontier is in fact ‘the Plutonomy’, but that is a wild guess.
I do see the possibility of a shift in dynamics with events like the Arab Spring, the Jasmine Revolution, Anonymous, the Wisconsin rallies, Wikileaks, #OccupyWallStreet and other such things. However, I do not see the uptake in growth being fast enough to counter current pressures.
Again, sorry for the jumble, love your column.
Best,
-xn
One last thing, we need programmers, tons and tons of programmers. Coding is simply thinking, productivity and discipline. It is also magic in that we can create something form nothing. Maybe the development of our minds is the in fact our next, best frontier.
-xn
uh, problem. nobody hires entry-level, that’s outsourced, so “programmers” are about as well-employed in their field as “16-th century experimental-media art historian.”
curiously, more and more CIOs in top-500 lists in the trade rags have India-continent names.
if you don’t have 5 years of skills in packages that went on the market 3 months ago, you’re not getting hired thanks to robot HR.
CompSci is not the ticket that MIS is.
swschrad, I’m in my own ‘Ruby’ bubble where there’s an insane grab for dev’s. L.A., SF and NY companies will hire 10 coders on the spot even at entry level. There were ~220k new programming jobs in the US in the month of May alone(via wantedanalytics.com). Sure, many will be sourced from abroad, but many will be sourced locally. Furthermore, the 2011 BDO Technology Outlook Survey says that outsourcing has dropped by ~45 in tech fields. So, I am not buying it. I’d update your sources, things change quickly.
best,
-xn
I think those 220k “new” jobs are really about a dozen with 219k headhunters all looking to fill those 12 jobs.
Man, you didn’t serve up an easy one, did you? Once you eliminated space flight and green energy, you shrank the board considerably.
I used to think that waste reclamation would be the next big industry in the U.S. It had the potential to produce SOME jobs and advancements in technology implied viable business models. But the Chinese took the lead in that as well so now I’m not sure of an answer.
There are certainly issues than can likely be profitably addressed, such as urban sprawl. I remember when the fan-wing aircraft was invented, thinking that air taxis might finally become viable to reduce traffic and revitalize some depressed urban centers. Using airships and dirigibles to ship products to eliminate long haul trucking has possibilities but then you kill more jobs.
I don’t think any of that qualifies as a “frontier” though. I left out the virtual world because I don’t want to live in an actual world where everyone is a software engineer. I still think Roddenberry had it right… the future is up. I just don’t know if our imaginations are up to the challenge.
While “space is our final frontier” our oceans are another frontier that we have done little with in terms of “deep” exploration and exploitation. (SeaQuest DSV anyone?)
America has thrived on our industriousness and/or creativity. We have a solid record of invention so in what areas can we continue our zeal for invention? Nanotech? Computing? Mass customization/personalization of goods and services?
Maybe the socialization craze has more legs to it… how can we connect the world (other than with a Coke?)
Thanks for making me think of the ocean in this context. Yup, considering how it’s been a waste dump for so long, it is probably about time the tide turned. And problems coming from that neglect can provide us with the kind of concrete challenge needed to do big things.
I’m going to be the pessimist and declare we are at the beginning of our decline. We can be hopeful optimists like Scot Adams, but I don’t see anything that has that potential to produce a a rainfall of wealth, prosperity and growth for this country because certain forces, political and economic are too lunkheaed, greedy and shortsighted to allow it to happen. My guess is that the rich taking shorts on America’s collapse and will reap their gains at the expense of the so-called 99% or rest of us. If I get the resources and chance I’m relocating to a Pacific Rim nation like New Zealand or Australia, or found an American “colony” of expats in Brazil.
Perhaps at this moment there is no new frontier. Sure, in retrospect the new frontiers seem to have emerged at the close of the one before them or perhaps they overlapped but at some point, you will be between frontiers right?
We live in a closed system (the Earth) and therefore are limited by its resources. I put it to you that what is needed is a reduction in the population that puts the human population in balance with the Earth’s resources.
The next frontier will be here at some point but in the meantime, we need to to find that balance before the Earth balances it for us.
America really screwed the pooch. So many jobs outsourced to Bangalore/Chennai/India and China. Train your replacement. Big-time technology transfer.
I’ve seen so many of my extremely-qualified friends & colleagues get replaced by low-cost 25 year old know-nothings overseas. Quality fades over time, but the immediate impact – lower costs, better profits, soaring stock prices – is enough to cash out & get a big bonus.
I’m all for competition, but how can an American with 2x with skills of Prakesh or Wang compete when their cost of living is 10x lower?
we’ve eaten our seed corn, I agree.
I’d argue that entrepreneurism represents a wide open frontier. In my life I’ve already started three businesses no matter how modest they may have been. My Dad would have never been able to do the same because the tools weren’t in place yet. Teenagers today can make as much as people at the peak of their careers with a little bit of ingenuity. In order to expand this frontier we need less rules being set by established businesses (nearly every law passed today benefits 2 or 3 big companies to the exclusion of everybody else) and more economic assistance for small businesses. It’s nice that we have all these rules to protect labor, but one or two person startups are different then larger businesses. The rules for fundraising, taxation and legal issues all need to be made easier until they can create growth. By being more friendly to the masses than to the special interest, the US can tip the scales back to where they can generate growth.
I think it’s important to note that while yes, manufacturing jobs are notably down in the US, manufacturing output is not doing anywhere near as bad. Productivity in the US has rocketed up so far, in large part thanks to automation, that the average US worker produces so much more than we did in the past, the many fewer workers are required. Just look up “US manufacturing output” and you’ll get many similar graphs made from many sources.
Also consider how cheap Chinese producing has been, and how much that has taken off, and it’s no surprise manufacturing isn’t providing jobs. The thing is, it’s only a matter of time until productivity/automation in other nations rises as well, and they’re hit with the same problems. Again, some jobs will be sent out of their nations, but mostly, the jobs will just disappear, just as farming jobs have since “the number of people one farmer can support” has increased over history.
Bob’s right, we need a NEW frontier. Or a new social contract so that we all understand “hard work pays off” isn’t how things work. It’s kind of difficult to work hard when you don’t have a job. I think the effort for a new social contract is what we’re looking at in the Tea Party and The Occupation.
As for new frontiers… I don’t see bandwidth as providing many “new” jobs. Maybe a few hundred new businesses, most less than a thousand workers, in the long haul. Conversely, space settlements could also be a new frontier, but like Bob, I don’t see it working (though, due to political will. I think attempts to terraform a planet could do wonders long term. But I’m a dreamer.)
So, maybe genetics? Custom life forms? You’ve all heard about the attempts to reverse a chicken’s evolution to make it more dinosaur-like, right? Imagine that being affordable, and people dabbling in trying to create new animals.
A new form of democratic government. When I hear someone say, ‘let’s get government working again’, what I hear is, ‘government is failing.’ Technology can enable self representation in ways my elected (?) representative cannot. Why do I need someone to vote for me, why can’t I do that. Who would the lobbyist lobby if there wasn’t a House or Senate? I guess they’d have to take all of us out to dinner.
hey, it’s the best government that money can buy! what’s wrong with you?
oh, still looking for the first billion? so am I.
so we’re out of the loop.
perhaps that’s the basis of all the nasty backbiting.
A fundamental social restructuring seems more likely than finding a new frontier. Most of the comments identify important factors that will reduce, rather than increase, employment – automation, artificial intelligence, higher productivity, increased bandwidth, etc. Ward Kaatz suggests a reduced work week, which is consistent with the need for less employment. But what to do with those extra 8 or 16 hours? A renewal of the arts and philosophy (i.e., sophisticated punditry)? Whatever new structure we are evolving to is likely to be a much more profound change than the prior shifts (wilderness, industrialization, consumerization) you suggest Bob.
What saved us in the 1990’s was the technology revolution and all the investing that happened as a result. Why are we in a recession now? Because there is 9 Billion dollars sitting on the sidelines because everyone is looking for another “sure thing” like ‘Pets.com’ and ‘Pop.com’.
Everybody was So Sure there were going to make millions on this thing called the internet that they invested like CRAZY and the economy and jobs BOOMED.
September 9/11 and the internet crash was the rude awakening and now everyone is sitting on their cash, too afraid to put it in play. Until that changes we will stay in this recession/depression
What “saved” us in the ’90s was rampant debt-fueled spending. Life is good when a nation collectively spends 6% more than it produces for an extended period of time. We hit the wall in 2008, and our good Uncle Sammy stepped in to keep the party going. Bailouts for the insolvent big boyz and 10% deficit spending are the only things standing between our latest economic fiction/delusion and systemic collapse.
What’s the next frontier? How about a society based on the use and growth of absolute government power? In 1949 a fellow named Orwell wrote a novel describing such a society. It requires sophisticated surveillance technologies, perpetual wars, a compliant news media, and people inositions of power willing to engage in doublethink as needed. From the looks of things we are 90% there, comrades.
How about space, really with alternative energy?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXRJA7BZmP0
I say urban agriculture. Advances in hydroponics and water management are allowing all sorts of neat things. But specifically, the possibility of 1 agriculteur to produce enough to feed 30 consumers. Extrapolated to urban centers, that means a lot of people at work doing a job that is going to be difficult to off-shore, once the full costs of GMOs and pesticides and shipping ate factored in.
Bob, you forgot one frontier: war. US economy has prospered during WW2, engineering & building war machines. With WW2 over, new wars were joined or “invented” – Korea, Panama, Bay of Pigs, Vietnam, Iraq-Iran (Iraq side), Afghanistan (against commies, on you know who’s side), Gulf war (now against Iraq), Iraq, Afghanistan (now against those supported in first war). During cold war, the “enemy” was communists, after Iron Curtain fell new enemies emerged. All recent wars involving US (except Balkans) have something in common: oil. There are wars going on in oil-less Africa for decades without US (or UN) intervention. And the irony is most oil in US is consumed (by airplanes) for war effort…
Regardless of what you said, new frontier is green: remove power from oil, petrochemical & pharmaceutical industries. Despite of what they would like us to think, they are the greatest inhibitors of progress in the world – check out why NiMH batteries with >1kWh are not used in EVs (patent holder = big oil does not allow this), why a small Slovenian company had to invent a 400 MPG per passenger airplane (Pipistrel just won the NASA Cafe Green Flight Challenge today) or why you can’t buy an ultrasonic washing machine (coz you’d not need to buy tons of washing powder), etc. Not to mention financial speculators. But things will change – the authorities reaction to Wall st. protests shows somebody is very afraid…
The way forward is removing the inhibitors, removing power from old industries and let progress run it’s way. Else China will be the first to do this. They are taking big steps towards the future and already own >25% of US federal debt. The alternative: think what happened to all great empires over the last few thousand years…
After consumerization, maybe personal development slash education. I mean, who doesn’t want to learn a few things, for example: pick up another language, play an instrument, (be able to) do major home renovation, be coached at tennis, the list is endless. With people living longer–staying active longer–there will be more demand for this type of thing, and with other jobs automated or off-shored, more supply. Peer-to-peer teaching could do this more cost effectively than educational institutions.
What happens when we get to the point where there aren’t enough jobs to go around? When 1 person (along with his computers and robots) can produce enough ‘stuff’ to satisfy the all desires of 10 others? Are jobs going to become obsolete and then how is ‘wealth’ going to be distributed amongst the masses?
War- that is a good one.
I’d suggest that the need for a new frontier mis-states our problem. Sure, it would be nice to have one, but what if we don’t? How do we run our society so that it serves everyone and doesn’t fall into the sclerosis of entrenched interests and plutocracy?
I think the answer is a new deal- addressing the real problem of our time, which is the mal-distribution of money from the have-nots to the haves. Through the last decade or so, we were running on the fumes of consumer debt ( link ) which allowed consumption to continue without visible means of support, ie income. Now that party is over, and Keynes is back with a vengeance. Aggregate demand is down, and will continue to be down until some mechanism is devised to right the ship of income distribution on a permanent basis.
I would vote for straightforward taxation- taking a 50% cut from the upper brackets, and a 100% inheritance tax, and using that to create the public goods that equalize opportunity and promote high living standards- free education, high-quality infrastructure, universal health care. That would give everyone the kind of starting basis from which to live a productive and engaged life.
IOW – war
Your solution is so novel, let’s just put all the money in a big pile and hand it out in equal shares to all good boys and girls. Hmm, I think you’re on to something. In fact a similar idea was tried in Cambodia by a guy named Pol Pot. He envisioned an agricultural Utopia where Man’s purpose and genius could finally be realized. To get there his fellow planners had to rearrange the deck of cards a bit, and they had to deal with folks who didn’t quite fit into the master plan. Their motto for the logic of this Utopian revolution was “To keep you is no benefit, to destroy you is no loss”. It made the job of killing millions of surplus souls so much easier.
Bob,
The next frontier can be the human potential movement. I don’t mean just some feel good or metaphysical concepts. I mean concepts based on reality. Concepts that can empower people and let them exploit their natural talents.
.For example, concepts like those I explain in my new ebook linked above.
I’ve been expecting personal robotics to be the ‘next big thing’. I’ve been expecting this, however, for over twenty years now. There are several engineering challenges that still have to be so solved.
When consumer robots are practical, they are likely to be as disruptive to society as the automobile. Expect a lot of jobs to be created … and lost.
“We need a new frontier to get us truly back to work.” Therein may lie a fallacy of the next frontier – that it requires most of us to get back to work. There may not be any new great frontiers, just continued tweaking of the old ones by those who are capable with a percentage of the gains supporting those who are not capable. And I wouldn’t be so quick to write off alternative energy and space as events may force a change, overriding what the old guard wants and/or what the cost may be.
Everyone plays second life?
Old frontier: quantum physics. New frontier: hydrinos. The work done by BlackLightPower.com has been replicated in experiments performed at Harvard, showing that hydrinos are real and quantum physics is wrong. The implications? Cheap, limitless energy from squeezing hydrogen atoms into hydrinos.
Simple pessimistic answer, the next frontier is REVOLUTION. Until you get concrete political change you’ll have very little economic change. Intrenched interests don’t give up power meekly and will keep it until they’re lined up against the wall. So if you want a short term frontier to invest in then stockpile what you’ll need to survive the coming revolution or prosper with it. Long term, read up on your unconventional warfare literature learn how to politically benefit from the political chaos after the revolution.
I started this post as a kind of joke, but now that I think of it I come the opinion it might be a real possibility. Probably the cynic in me but you never know…
After WWII America had the advantages of a free market system without a government to weigh down economic growth. As a nation, our standard of living increased to levels never seen before in history – and so did our cost of living. With only 5 percent of the world population, we consumed 25% of the world’s resources.
During the same period, governmental policies of nations such as China and India retarded economic development and forced its citizenry to toil in poverty. In the 70’s an average Chinese earned only one fortieth of what an American earned. – Yet its people were able to survive by being efficient and compete. They have a lot of experience competing. Economic hardship has forced people in these countries to compete for over 4000 years!
China and India government finally opened up their economic policies in the early 80s and globalization ensued. Rich, lazy, inefficient Americans were no match!. Chinese and Indians were more efficient and can survive on less wage. Did I mention they had thousands of years of practice competing? Their workers had less overhead. What does health insurance cost each American each year ($3000/yr) ? What does having an average of 2 automobiles cost each household per year ($8000)? The average Asian incur $400 by riding a moped .. and it gets him from point A to point B. That big “sucking sound” that Ross Perot described during his run for presidency regarding job losses soon followed.
Today, with a salary ratio of 5 to 1, American workers still earn too much compared to their Asian counterparts. Companies that have a choice will not hire in America when they can hire in Asia for less. What can an American worker do that Asians can’t do – for less? – Our next frontier will be to become more efficient in terms of wages and standards of living. This comes in the loss of jobs, the loss of tax base, shrinkage in government, lowering of standard of living, shrinkage of salary. Jobs will not move back to America until salary ratios achieve more parity. By then, the 5% of the world population will consume a more realistic 5% of the world’s resources … and hopefully compete!
Your are not the only person who read Bob’s column and said the USA is behind China.
I am still waiting for the other shoe to fall on China. They are using their people and the environment to put toys on the Walmart shelf. Their economy is no more stable than ours.
I think the next frontier is scaling down our expectations. Burn less fuel, eat less food, live on less money, have fewer children, invade fewer countries, live in smaller houses.
It’s not glamorous, but it is an economic and engineering challenge, exactly the kind of thing America is good at striving for and achieving.
Genetics. The engineering of our own evolution. The practical, ethical, and religious implications will dwarf our previous transitions.
The problem with modern economy is that it is striving to be too efficient – what we should be aiming for is inefficiency!
For example, in the early part of the 20th Century the USA had around 2000 car (automobile) companies, all trying to do the same thing, duplicating the same factories, design staff, etc. Amazingly inefficient, as a system, but generated huge wealth. By contrast the Soviet Union only ever had 13 brands of car manufacture, and pretty much everyone remained poor.
The point being that it is the glorious INEFFICIENCY of Capitalism as a system – the massive DUPLICATION of effort – that makes it so effective: that creates so many jobs and pays so many wages, when only a few are actually needed.
Is it a coincidence that, now that all the US Auto manufacturers have merged in the name of ‘efficiency’, there are many fewer jobs and everybody seems to be poorer?
Nowadays, whenever a company talks about streamlining to improve efficiency, or two companies merge in order to reduce their cost base, I think: Communists!
Sorry if this has already been suggested, but not one final frontier, several.
Biotech/cure for cancer; switchover to a fully hydrogen based energy system; exploration of deep seafloor, followed by exploitation; and, yes, the final frontier – space.
Maybe also switch your military over from being imperial over to a pool of dedicated, brave, workers, who are willing to take physical risks on the more dangerous frontiers.
No single frontier will be sufficient. We need multiple.
The key is to get as many people as possible inspired and self-motivated. This will initially require some level of government support, bu that should be as brief as possible.
I do not think we can employ enough people in the country to remake our energy and industrial infrastructures quickly enough to get through the coming shortages in raw materials.
Efficiency in all our built things will be the revolution. It could be a beautiful thing when we are all aware, by necessity, to not waste an erg. Our creative powers could be unleashed in a way that was never possible before we were so interconnected and it would be applied for the obvious need of survival. We are naturally made to fight for our lives and I think, in a few decades, this current slow, suicidal slide of the cliff will be obvious to all.
Those with a vested interest in the suicide slide have to be got past, but that is politics.
My gut says we have a 30% chance to make this happen. Then the whole Universe is open to us.
Two things: a huge spike in oil prices making it uneconomical to ship dirt to Asia to ship cheap stuff back. Or, an aggressive tariff protected, buy local program. The latter didn’t work too well in the 30’s, but I see little alternative if we want to keep the largest portion of the existing population employed. One needs a tax base to pay for what people want from the Government.
Short to mid term genetics
Mid to long term understanding of quantum mechanics. I feel that these will have an affect that is an order of magnitude greater than solid state electronics and computers
Rnewable energy does have massive forces ranged against it, yes, but it has the potential for huge profits as well as the excellent side-effect of keeping the biosphere habitable. Once you can print cheap solar panels, everything changes.
Programming. And don’t take it from me.
Read Alan Kay:
http://archive.cra.org/Activities/grand.challenges/kay.pdf
I vote for artificial intelligence. In 30 years we’ve gone from George Morrow’s Keyed Up 8080 at 1 MHz and 4 KB of memory to smart phones with dual processors at 1 GHz and 4 GB. So the hardware base is rapidly and continuously improving. AI will take awhile longer and there will be fits and starts but the results eventually will be mind-boggling. Fairly soon AI will start bootstrapping itself, accelerating the process. And it will affect all of the other nominees for the new frontier(s).
The problem with AI is that nobody really has a reasonable definition of Intelligence. We’re all using the classic definition for obscenity to define it. we may know the destination “when we see it”, but it’s hard to steer the course for it in the interim.
I’m surprised nobody has said Health Care yet. We can’t easily outsource it yet, because for all of the telepresence out there it’s still a hands on business. The need for people to be employed would explain the rocketing and uncontrolled healthcare costs that everybody is complaining about. If we were to leverage this system into something we could export, say tapping into the Health Care tourism industry, we could potentially make a killing (pun not intended).
IMO patent reform or much shorter patent protection parameters would do much to expand the frontiers in tech and biotech. As has been mentioned previously exploiting the ocean for than net fishing has huge potential in wave generated power production, desalinization/purification/transmission of clean water, aqua farming and mining. Within the borders of the U.S reconstruction of infrastructure could be construed as an exploitable frontier, roads, bridges, rail, mass transit, airport (both rebuild and new), 1gbs Internet to each home, upgrading schools, removing abandoned buildings, and cleaning up what corporations have polluted. All would create jobs but then corporate America would scream bloody murder and payoff the required number of politicians to halt any such endeavor.
I think manufacturing will be the new frontier.
With more and more types of 3-D printers coming online, no longer will you need to order things and have them delivered to your home. You will simply buy the raw materials and then print them.
I agree. 3D printing is in it’s home brew garage phase and will grow exponentially into the next big thing. There will be no advantage to having your stuff made in China. American entrepreneurs will latch on to additive manufacturing and all sorts of new businesses will start up as all our stuff is made locally. I’ve recently noticed that people are working on printing automobiles and Bob recently suggested that it will be a key technology in getting the flying car (another next big thing) off the ground.
Hi Bob,
I didn’t see where you actually said Space and Alternative energies were off the table so I am going to mix a few suggestions here into the next great frontier.
The difference from past frontiers and where we are today is all in personal liberty. We had the right to fail and fail spectacularly. We did this with taming the west, transportation with the railroads and eventually air travel. Space is next.
The problem is that this frontier has so many restrictions, that people are not allowed to fail. As a recovering rocket scientist, I have been in the trenches bending metal to make rockets fly. That is the easy part. Dealing with the three letter sisters (FAA,EPA, FBI, CIA, NSA, NRO, ATF, etc) makes ones head spin. The cost of all these regulations is just weighing the process down. We need to lift it.
We need real competition for space. Not just for the current crop of builders (XCOR, SpaceX, Armadillo, Blue Origin, JPAreospace, Masten, etc) but the guys quietly working in the garage too. Here is where the government can help. Get NASA and the Congress to stop doing things the old way and have them just pony up real prizes for big problems solved. Give contract to anyone who can make things happen. Airmail contracts kick started the airplane industry (along with a war).
Kick start space…then get out of the way.
I think it is central to first realize where the US still HAS wondrous success world-wide and an uncomparable position.
All the protests going on at the moment hinge on people’s disappointments with how the current regime is helping them realize meaningful goals. It’s sort of time for a cultural revolution in order to regain creativity. In spite of the grave disillusion of Americans, people world-wide still very much look to the US for the next step – and having gone further than any country on earth in over-consumption, the USA will soon somehow likely be culturally very well-equipped to scale back, eventually, and to do it with a great deal of authority – given how central the US has been in exporting the old consumerist version of the Dream. (It’s like a game of Chicken that’s gone on way too long – when the US stops the madness, most will simply be happy if they’re still alive.) What the game will look like after that is sort of difficult to see =) but I like the idea (Holger, above) of investing into education for everybody.
The Final Frontier – if there is one – is therefore “a meaningful life”, daring to do it in a new and more open-ended way, as a society.
The one thing we have exported to the rest of the world for the past 100 or so years is our invention, our cleverness, new ideas. The United States is unique in its ability to invent. Other countries may have lots of patents, particularly China (it’s big population gives it an advantage in having lots of technical people). Other countries have developed plenty of fundamental scientific discoveries. But it is the United States that has best created new things.
Capitalizing on these ideas is not easy. We make a bunch on the first roll-out, but cannot continue to profit – manufacturing and incremental development moves off-shore.
So what can we do to continue to create, or better to increase our creativity? We need more good engineers and scientists. To get these we need more of the best of our students wanting to become these.
Healthcare and the medical revolution is the next frontier. Every year I’ve watched more and more breakthroughs in this area. We’ll conquer all of the major diseases while hopefully avoiding Hollywood-esque Resident Evil plagues. Your picture of Spock, while a spacey lark for rich folk, also denotes a fictional time in Earth’s history of peace and a healthy long life. That is unless you’re exploring some crazy hostile alien infested quadrant of space. Automatic doors, flip cell phones and iPads all came from Star Trek, why not scifi healthcare gadgets?
Eschew all the prior comments.
Robert X. is on the right track when he mentions teenagers make space hot rods.
We need something of that caliber, something that is ultimately democratic because its possibilities can be dispersed widely. Something that cannot be commoditized by centralized concentration and planning, then outsourced to the lowest bidder.
What this comes down to is psychic power, the ultimate power of every individual expressed in some local home-mind-grown fashion.
So far, paranormal has been the province of fools, yet there are tarot readers everywhere. Psychic pretenders are everywhere.
If there is ANYTHING to the paranormal, perhaps some kind of human evolution that moves our minds towards another plateau, then modest funding of efforts might stimulate many different approaches towards individual psychic calisthenics to be distributed widely.
At the least, we’d all have something to talk about and have fun with.
ESP-ing you…
The next frontier. A good enough topic for a few posts, Bob. A new frontier always comes, but I think it’s the younger minds that drive it, or champion it to use the corporate phrase. It might be a good idea to pose that question to a gymnasium of college kids,… if you can get them to put their phones away that is.
I like to think in terms of the agricultural / industrial / information evolution of our “societies,” not necessarily frontiers, I know, but at least I see the new movement being spawned from the former. So the frontier of space doesn’t seem to fit. And I hope it’s not war. But going on a remark I made above, I see so many kids these days, and adults too, messing around on their phones. That could be it, or partly linked to it. The social networking crap has caught on like I never thought could. What if you take that to the nth degree, make intelligent networks. Could be scary.
I’m not Americam,so my comment is global and longer term; our current capitalistic economic system is unsustainable. There currently isn’t enough human endeavors that can provide employment for 8~10 billion people worldwide.
Most of the new industries tossed around as the next big thing have one thing in common; they will be capital heavy but labor light. Those industries will not create the massive number of jobs needed now worldwide.
High-tech industries mean automation all around, which means less jobs, or very specialized knowledge which also means less jobs.
For the time being jobs are moving to cheaper labor markets (China and India) but on the long term the expected standard of living in those countries will rise too. So the problems that Europe and the USA now face of cost-competition with China and India, those same countries will face with Africa in 50~100 years time. Eventually the standard of living will be approximate worldwide. At that time there won’t be enough employment to go around but everybody will have the same expectations. Massive social turmoil will be the norm, with huge numbers of unemployed. Think about the London riots on a massive, global scale.
So I only see two options; either create a new frontier in space, replicating our society off-world, thereby creating entire new worlds, or change our economic system to something approximating communism, so that everybody has a minimum standard of living.
I agree with this assessment. Why has no one considered the impact of technology on productivity and the concept of “work”? What does the human race do with it’s time if the number of people it takes to produce goods is consistently reduced? Even if we have aspirations of traveling into space, we’ll have plenty of engineers employed to design the vehicles to get us there, but given the vast distances that require real time, machines will be better at that than actual people. Who will build these vast machines? Some mixture of people and more and more machines. Machines will eventually design and build more machines.
So where do we go? What do we do? How about making the existence for those of us that are here better? But how do we do this and make a profit? I think this is what Carlos is getting to… the concept of markets and profits becoming meaningless. To what end? How about the spending the energy and time making things better for everyone?
When we talk about employment (or paying) of millions of people, space doesn’t get us there (it’s not stopping me, though), power creation (nuclear, green, hydrogen, etc.) doesn’t get us there, war comes close, government comes even closer (dread the thought – our next frontier is government). Most of these employ a “limited” number of people, we need massive changes.
To maximize employment, and spread employment across a wide spectrum of skill-sets, we must all participate in digging this country out of the hole we are in. Engineers to plan the digging, skilled laborers to run the machinery, unskilled “diggers” to do the manual labor.
Hmmm – when you are in a hole – stop digging
Bob, you’ve outdone yourself with this one. I’ll take a different tack. The US government spends roughly 24% of GDP currently. Historically, that number has been closer to 18%, with notable exceptions of WWII and the great depression. As a frontier, smaller (or simply less consumptive) government is a laudable goal.
Bear with me on this – all this talk of efficiency and automation (great comments folks) has obvious application to government services. How many times have you stood in line for some ‘thing’ only to walk away afterward shaking your head and thinking “that was a waste of time – could have been done online”, etc? We have an *army* (no pun intended) of federal, state and local admin types who mostly shuffle papers and stamp things. Automate the whole damn thing, or at least as much as is possible. Free up that section of GDP for the private sector. Additional frontiers will appear once capital goes looking for them.
Having government hire additional employees during a recession/depression is like drilling holes in the bottom of a sailboat because you don’t like the direction of the wind.
If the boat’s sinking, it’s a lot easier to pick up survivors in lifeboats than each floating in the water alone.
The massive increase in the US government spending is due to the growth of entitlements, and not due to the growth of the number of government employees. The number of government employees has actually been shrinking.
It’s also due to how much we’ve been spending on war.
“The number of government employees has actually been shrinking.”
You have something to back that up?
You have some basis for denying it (‘xcept Fox News)?
91,000 jobs lost in top 3 of the 7 loosing states. 186,000 job increase in the top ONE gaining state.
“Big government grew a bit bigger in 43 states and the District of Columbia during the past decade.”
“A total of 1,601,200 Texans held government jobs in April 2001, a figure that grew to 1,888,000 by last month.”
“Michigan shed the largest number of government jobs over the past decade, reducing its total by 64,000. Next were Ohio (down 16,500) and Louisiana (down 15,100). Seven states lost government jobs over the 10-year period.”
I read a good free ebook a couple of years ago. If I remember right, it was “Capitalism 3.0” (http://capitalism3.com/home).
One premise was that that capitalism was created at a time when money was scarce and resources were abundant, which is exactly the opposite of where we are now, and it is the cause of many current problems.
It struck me yesterday while I was walking around and thinking random thoughts that today humans have become a resource, an abundant one.
Machines and technology are available to do almost everything, and there is money to develop them. Resources are getting rarer and more precious. There is fiercer competition for them.
Meanwhile the human population keeps growing.
What we may be seeing soon is a time when nearly 100% of humanity is regarded as a disposable resource, one that can be picked up, used, and discarded as needed, without a thought.
As a footnote, did you know that China and South Korea are buying up agricultural land around the world? They don’t want to be caught short when climate change decimates traditional agricultural regions. Some of the land China has bought is in the U.S. Iowa, if I remember right.
They’ll take care of their own. You and I aren’t among them. We’ll soon see how this works.
“when nearly 100% of humanity is regarded as a disposable resource, one that can be picked up, used, and discarded as needed, without a thought”
Sounds like where I work 🙁
Your company has a Human Resources department too then? Its only a matter of time til HR is merged with Facilities and Procurement, then they can manage all their resources in the same department.
If Bush-II had not cut taxes to the point where America is now bankrupt, we wouldn’t even be having this discussion. In a mere decade, America went from the most productive nation on Earth, to a third-world nation dragging the rest of the world down.
But this doesn’t have to be. All we have to do is raise taxes back to Clinton era rates, stop the two wars (in process), pay back about 5 trillion dollars in T-Bills, and change the tax rules to bring jobs back from overseas.
There’s LOTS of production that still has to be made. Steel, railroads, construction, appliances, automotive, even alternative energy. Especially alternative energy. The current unemployment crisis is because America lost trillions of dollars of value in the CDO crisis. And so we wail and despair that we can never get our dominance back. But what we’re wailing over is a mere few percentage points drop in production, which can easily be regained.
How exactly does raising taxes increase our prosperity?
The much ballyhooed trickle-down doesn’t work because the super-rich don’t spend enough. An equitable system of taxation should be thought of as enforced trickle-down.
Its implementation would do to trickle-down what the plumber’s plunger does to a blocked drain.
So what do the ‘rich’ do with that which they don’t spend? Stuff their mattresses with $100 bills? OR, do they invest it?
If they invest it, it still cycles back through the economy. Investing is just ‘buying’ assets you believe you can sell in the future for a profit. But ‘buying’ none the less.
Well, at the moment, actually, they *are* stuffing it in mattresses. Witness the vast drawdown from stock markets into treasuries and money market funds, which pay no (sometimes negative interest), because business doesn’t want to borrow. Why? Because no one but the rich has any spare money! As for the argument that investing equals buying: maybe, but there has to be something to invest in.
“So what do the ‘rich’ do with that which they don’t spend? Stuff their mattresses with $100 bills? OR, do they invest it?”
They invest in politicians.
We are all forced to invest in politicians by virtue of the taxes we pay. The more taxes the more government politicians.
Of course they spend it. But for the trickle-down theory to kick in, they’d need to spend it in specific ways.
Something they are clearly not doing.
The other problem with the trickle-down theory is the (fallacious) assumption, that the one receiving the trickle would have enough bargaining power, to actually get more out of the deal than just what suffices for him to stay alive and thus achieve a potential at personal betterment. Ask yourself, how much bargaining do the destitute have…
Let’s be realistic. The problem with big government is the redistribution of wealth from the productive to nonproductive activities and people to the point that it takes away people’s incentive to be productive. No one objects to government help for the destitute. It existed in the 50’s and was called “welfare” not “socialism”.
I think there’s a tremendously large opportunity in re-inventing and improving the crumbling infrastructure of this country. How much improvement have we seen in paving, rail or water and sewer piping? We should be designing the new cities for the rest of this century. I realize that it wil amount to a reallocation of tax dollars, but tech and processes can be franchised offshore.
Bioengineering.
@Geronimo “Bioengineering” is awefully vague.
Yes “Bioengineering” is a vague term but we are looking for an area of the economy to steer towards.
My List
Bioengineering
Nanotechnology (nano manufacturing)
Alternative Engergy
Energy Efficiency
I don’t have any particular idea our next frontier, but I do believe it has to harness the greatest communication advance in human history, the Internet. There is no way that next frontier does not utilize the Internet to create new industries and jobs.
Well, Cringe, let me fill in the implicit part.
And I’ll assume that you are speaking of frontier objective for us mundane morals who inhabit the U.S. of A.and not the rest of the World.
The main effect of a frontier is that a greater part of the populace is found to be useful, directly and indirectly, to each other.
Filling up the physical continental U.S. of A. made huge infrastructure building demands … driving much ingenuity.
Industrialization and two World Wars “soaked up” and redirected the excess agrarian population.
Consumerism (The Man in the Grey Flannel Suit, The Waste Makers) somewhat deployed a now mis-educated population that began to observe its own navel.
Next frontier? Whatever it is, to “succeed” it has to do what the prior ones did: easily find a place and a WAGE for even the left tail of the IQ curve.
The Frontier and Industrialization took care of the left-tail without much fuss.
However Consumerism and the development of “mass introspection” as a “leisure value,” has lead to the shunting of that left-tail into a kind of invisible ghetto.
So Bobby, whatever you offer up, check it out for it’s “ability” to assign a value and WAGE to the left-tail … and even the +/- 1 s.d. herd centered on 100.
And of course, that frontier must represent a 30 year concept-to-maturity horizon that also is not readily truncated down to 3 years by the as-yet untapped upper right-tail peoples in India and China.
Bozo,
You nailed it. All of the other suggestions, when there actually is a suggestion, rely on educated people.
What would provide a living for young uneducated men? A better living than dealing drugs.
Don’t forget they may or may not all speak the same language.
Space, under the sea, the net, programming, smart energy all need a well educated workforce. Read that as a small workforce. An expensive workforce where there is value in automating them away.
War is about all I can think of, and that makes me sad. These small regional conflicts clearly do not have much economic impact.
I’d like to second Seileromon’s second. I was a physics grad student who went back to work in the high schools, and the sorts of statements that imply that we will be able, as a country, to have a 100% level of college education simply do not reflect the realities of any large population’s intellectual abilities. I mention my switch in careers to emphasise that when I was in graduate school, I had similar notions. In retrospect, I think that when a person spends a few years (or, in the case of IT industry professionals, many many years) in the company of bright and capable individuals, it is easy to lose sight of the severe limitations that many others have to deal with, as regards the possibility of doing such work.
If our society is going to continue on with its views that every person should have to earn his own living wage, there must be, in that society, available jobs for people who aren’t super-brilliant. If the society isn’t able or willing to make such jobs, then it needs to be willing to think hard about how it will continue to be a humane society within the framework it’s chosen for itself.
I have to agree, there has to be jobs for those with lesser IQ’s to make it work. I work with a charter school that takes Jnr’s and Snr’s in high school that focuses on getting them decent paying jobs upon graduation, or they go to a trade school or community college. A lot of these kids start so far behind the 8 ball with respect to education that they are not capable of attending a 4 year college. It’s fact, and it’s sad. We can’t ignore this section of our society.
Bozo, I agree fully.
As I noted in my earlier post, this lot of readers is very much on the pulse concerning future innovations and trends (I would expect nothing less of Bob’s readers), and many of the ideas mentioned will be big (either by necessity, virtue or opportunity) and will generate fortunes.
The problem is, for them to be the “next frontier”, they’d need to be a lot bigger.
They need to offer employment on a massive scale, and not just for +1-2sd (the smart ones), but for every portion of the bell curve (maybe even weighed to the left, as that’s where the unemployment is higher).
Let me give you some idea.
Take the current amount of population growth in the US (some 2,5 millions in the working ages per year). Add to that the net effect of efficiency growth (at 3% (which is a moderate estimate) and a working-age population of 250 million is 7,5 million) and you end up with ca. 10 million new opportunitiues needed per year. And that would not even offset the current unemployment rate. If you want that down as well, you need to add a couple of millions to that estimate.
On a global scale, the numbers would end up in the hundreds of millions.
Energy independence can be attained through the 4S nuclear battery. Toshiba can produce a Super Safe Small & Simple (hence “4S”) 10MW power plant for a mere $5M (that’s cost), lasting 30 years. The inventor and patent holder, Dr. Hattori, envisioned a world without the need for struggle or war (his opinion was that economies and governments were aggressively motivated by their quest for power, no pun intended).
The new frontier should be space BUT cannot be focused on until world peace can be attained. This can be achieved when energy is given freely to all people. That was the compelling reason for Dr. Hattori to create the 4S system.
“i”
Ira, I think you may be on to something. But instead of “cannot be focused on,” I’d argue won’t be focused on, and I’m not sure there’s a need for total world peace as well. Two major events and one necessary property caused the European diaspora that shaped the world we know today.
First, Europe was in a relatively stable period, organized by the Pope of the Roman Catholic church. The stability of Europe lead to the rise of the merchant class. This class sought to increase wealth but couldn’t do that with available resources. Instead the way to do that was to simplify trade with the Orient (India and China to us moderns), as rare metals, textiles and spices were in high demand.
Second that stability was broken by the Protestant Reformation, creating a second actor who broke away from regulation, stimulating competition.
I’d contend that the modern merchant class is very happy where it is at, resources are not scares at all. At the moment capitol is, which is right where the merchants want to be. The merchant can cut back production to maintain profit (at the cost of revenue). So unless there’s a substantial disaster, which makes resources very scarce (like Medieval Europe). Or worse yet, resources so plentiful, as in the case of energy so cheap it’s almost free (think free land in the American West). The merchants won’t be stimulated to act. With out the action of the merchants, there is no engine drive a frontier.
I am American and largely agree with Mr. Azevedo. Automated productivity and consequent wealth are increasing so rapidly and so much, that deliberately created employment schemes will mostly be lost motion and completely unnecessary to give the average person a comfortable living without working at all; whatever jobs remain will often be just busy work to occupy time.
Creative and ambitious people will always create, and much better pay and extensive free time (a year-long sabbatical every four years) will keep them happy in the meantime. Unpleasant and/or necessary jobs where not automated out of existence, will likewise respond to larger rewards and more leisure.
Germans on unemployment can be asked to work if needed; they might be tending the laundry machines in a hospital or old-age home, or shuffling widgets somewhere, easy if boring work, which will however get them their money.
Of course, billion-dollar bonuses and blatant theft of most wealth by a tiny unproductive minority, as well as frantic merchandising of mostly unneded “goods” will go away, and good riddance. Once we fix our crumbling infrastructure, including public transporation, we can think about “something approximating communism” since living on an asteroid probably will not “grab” many.
JL
John,
Although I would like to agree with you and Mr. Azevedo I can’t. Pure communism may be desired as a humane way of dealing with the inequities of life. “something approximating communism” is what the USSR tried to achieve I believe. It’s been tried before and saying it wasn’t done right the first time doesn’t mean that the next attempt will work.
There are so many factors that keep humanity from achieving “Heaven on Earth.” Everyone I think wants to live in an Utopian society where life is “easy” or “secure” or “guaranteed.”
In general, you can’t make a rich man give his “earned” money away, you can’t make a poor man realize HE needs to take action to step up and out of poverty and you can’t make a man who craves power to be content with none.
The next frontier may not even be based on economics or politics. The next frontier may be that of the mind. Man does not need much to survive – food, water, shelter. But yet, we crave for so much more. I don’t know. I hope humanity finds the path to assured prosperity for all until the end of the Universe, but from where I sit today, the odds are against us.
In no time of humans existence on this world have so many had so much, but yet want and need more. There are 6.9 billion people living today. Six point nine billion all trying to build a life, build friendships, build families, build a future, live another day.
The next frontier should include an objective to figure a way out for each of these six point nine billion people to achieve their dreams. It is a daunting task, is Humanity up for it?
Bob,
How about Africa? It has all you asked for, not space, has wars (big and small), labor to be exploited, and natural resources.
As the standard of living increases in China and India, we will need another source of super cheap labor and a place to dump e-waste. Africa is the spot.
We can tie in food production, water (how about peak water, much scarier than peak oil), and renewable energy. Nice.
The problem with frontier is leaving the old stuff behind. The task for the USA is building a sustainable society – giving every single american a college level education, moving to energy and agricultura and industrial practices which can be sustained indefinitely.
You don’t need the frontier itself to generate millions of jobs. There are multiplier effects. All you really need to replace is the thing where we bought and sold each other’s houses. Also 1/3 – 1/2 of the financial industry, but that’s probably wishful thinking. The rest will take care of itself.
Replacing our energy infrastructure seems like the only sane frontier. Its also the only thing that has that old “frontier” feeling. Too bad the existing interests will have a hard time letting go. Historically they’ve always had a hard time letting go, and historically they always did in the end.
Robotics. Our concern is currently in connecting us to ourselves – radio, TV, phones, computers, internet, cell phones, data, Facebook. We have barely started on the true dawn of a robotic tech revolution. Our smartphones and laptops are only laughable starts at what will be coming for us down the road. At some point these machines will replicate themselves on an assembly line, rendering human intervention unnecessary, but that, too, will be progress. We will adapt and move beyond the tech development and maybe start valuing creativity beyond anything else. The i Robot generation may indeed be in our future, but like Star Trek there are always new frontiers to master. You just sometimes can’t see the need to build a Model T when your whole world revolves around the importance of a horse and buggy. I think we are in one of those transitional phases now. We are too focused on the current crop of technology and concerned about what Apple is doing to be focused on the bigger picture of where we want our technology to go and to do for us. However, the future will sneak up upon us regardless.
And will we complain when the machines run most tasks in our society? Will we develop a society that frees us from the burden of work, or will we look upon work as the center of our lives? And when Moore’s Law runs on over the next thousand years and all of the tasks we consider important today gets squashed down into algorithms for our inventions to replicate, we will have bigger concerns than how we keep 13% of our work force employed…
How about the frontier of software development? My company has almost 1000 open positions. Please email me directly if you’ve got a CS degree and are willing to work hard.
Robert, Nice questions you raise. I have a two faceted frontier to explore. One facet is the “Get Effing Real” educational campaign which needs to be presented in nauseating detail and repetition to all north americans and europeans, pointing out they they do not have some unalienable right to a standard of living 100 times better than the average of people around the rest of the world. A program that sent every high school graduate to a poor country for a year, living on whatever is the average annual income for that country, might improve the general understanding of how well off we are.
The second facet of the frontier is to remove all restrictions on the production, commerce and use of opiates. This will quickly remove 10% to 15% of people from the workforce or unemployment lines, allowing them to be content with lives at a low standard of living.
My point, of course, is that if we didn’t want so much, these times wouldn’t seem so bad.
The next frontier sustainability
1. Change corporate renumeration so that the highest paid employee (that includes the CEO) cannot be paid more than 100 times the wage of the lowest paid employee. So the cleaner is on 20K the CEO is on 2M, and if the CEO can’t live off 2M a year they should seek financial planning advice. The growing discrepancy in income distribution is the main cause of most of the social ills, sipping cocktails whilst the poor starve only lasts till they get out the pitchforks and burning torches. Sustainability applies to social structures not just economic models.
2. Flat tax everyone, this include companies, at a rate required to provide core social infrastructure, education and health.
3. Make all education from kindergarden to undergrade free. This will allow those with ability to get ahead not just the offspring of the wealthy.
4. Close all landfills, all waste must be recycled and the cost of returning goods to usable raw materials factored into the cost of the good sold.
5. Fix your core infrastructure.
6. Shift the worlds economy from carbon fuels to renewables, oil, coal and gas will eventually run out, its a fact, get over it and make plans.
The next frontier? Immortality
The (already not so) new frontier would seem to be based on “sharing”. Industrialisation and capitalism offset pre-industrialisation and pre-capitalism eras by being able to distribute their value and results across boundaries. Likewise, sharing has allowed disparate individuals to traverse boundaries and distribute efforts for which their (added) value would have otherwise been limited or even have gone unnoticed.
Open source software, wikipedia, distributed parallel processing and comments on blog sites are all examples of where sharing allows for fast refinements to take place. What these things all have in common is that activities of individuals taking place in their free time can be combined into something that’s arguably greater than the sum of their individual efforts, almost like defying Amdahl’s law. Many of these activities would even seem to have surpassed the level of quality (and quantity) achieved by paid professionals.
Contrary to industrialisation and capitalism, the activity of sharing doesn’t require any immediate compensation, at least not any monetary compensation. Coinciding with industrialisation and capitalism is that the results of sharing are (typically) for the greater good.
One could argue that the printing press or scientific papers have already covered a great deal of sharing in the form of sharing knowledge. The main difference is (obviously) the current level or speed of interaction combined with a low threshold to participate in today’s sharing mechanisms in comparison to the past.
I can’t say how sharing is to be America’s next or final frontier since it’s already a global phenomenon but maybe someone like Zuckerberg has an answer or at least an opinion, to share.
Very good column. Spot on in a global way, not just US.
The new frontiers recently seem to have been “fake”, like social networking. And the problem is that although a few have been made excessively rich, this wealth hasn’t created very many jobs at all.
One twenty-something multi-billionaire would pay a million people’s wages easily. The programmers and tech-bods who are employed are few and paid very highly.
This type of growth is unhealthy for any country even though the noise made sounds impressive, and as you say, the more menial tasks are being farmed-out elsewhere.
I look forward to part two! 🙂
How about a society that operates without money. This is has been mentioned in Star Trek (Times Arrow Pt2), Childhoods End and the Zeitgeist Movement.
Population control – one way or another.
Political Science; new ways to organize ourselves.
Perfect, brain-implanted video games that let people ‘live’ (a better life), while consuming less resourceage.
The ocean shelves.
Antarctica.
Bioengineering, as someone already suggested – give us chloroplasts in our hair and / or skin, to let us photosynthesize much of our own food (stolen from an SF story – don’t remember the author).
Hell, implanted videogames and photosynthesized food – that’s as much life as some of us would ask for now.
This is the very same question more and more people are asking/wondering here in Europe: what’s next?
To me, it really comes down to added value. Now that we’ve reach a sufficient level of productivity for food, shelter and comfort, wha
Oops… Firefox is playing with me this morning…
The question remains: how can we stimulate and encourage people in creating a different kind of value.
There could be two options:
* rise of the experience economy as discussed in 1998 by B. Joseph Pine II and James H. Gilmore – fostering memorable products and services, prioritizing quality over quantity. This clearly requires consumer education (e.g. how many T-shirt do you really need?)
* rise of spirituality, live better with less – again a quality vs. quantity issue with an intellectual spin to it. Our educational system should value much more the beauty of ideas and philosophy… This could start by raising the interest for cultural products and serviced.
Am I the only one dreaming here?
You get my vote for your “quality vs quantity” idea.
I live in an area where the cost of living is so high that everyone is a workaholic. Many people have two jobs and some have 3 to cover living expenses. On average I work 60 hours a week.
For some time now I’ve been seriously questioning the sanity (and sustainability) of a life style that requires that I work such a large percentage of my day to support our materialistic lifestyle.
What happened to the promise that technology would give us more leisure time as robots did our work for us. While we weren’t paying attention consumerism tricked us into increasing our consumption to match our income.
Perhaps it’s just my age but I’m becoming much more interested in spending more quality time with my family.
Having just finished reading What Hath God Wrought about the 1815-1848 era in American history, I think this question is timely. One of your readers noted that our capitalism began when money was scarce and resources were cheap, and that’s true to a point. However, one of the strongest drivers of our westward expansion was the exhaustion of the land as an impetus for farmers to move west. They had no incentive for sustainable agriculture, so they burned their resources as fast as possible before moving on, abetted by Jackson’s policies to force out the Native Americans.
A frontier makes that accelerated usage of resources possible. Human nature being what it is, a new frontier would allow us to use up what we have even faster. If the resources of the new frontier are sufficient to replace those we leave behind, and allow them to recover, that’s great. But if all we’re doing is selling each other ads on our mobile apps I don’t think that’s going to cut it. The energy requirements for getting into space are too expensive without an unprecedented leap in a unified field theory. Our next frontier has to allow us to do more with less… unfortunately, exactly what our current outsourcing and increasing roboticization is accomplishing.
I’ll be interested to see your solution. We can use up more resources as we move under the ocean or into nanotechnology but we still have to come up with the trillions of tons of food to feed actual people and barrels of oil to keep us warm and mobile. That’s a lot of mass we can’t do without.
Local food production is going to be our next national industry. As the cost of production and transportation of centralized food production rises (all oil based), we are going to have to return to this age old practice. It won’t be pretty for many people because it is hard work and the standard of living for those involved will be lower that today. This will no longer be a boutique industry for high end consumers, rather a necessity for the country.
Bob,
Thanks for another great article. I think your claims of our past frontiers need some work. The name “consumerism” is indeed controversial. Since it brings up political debates, as noted in the comments above, it’s not particularly suitable as the name of this frontier. You defined it as taking the economic value from where it was produced and delivering it to other areas where it was not produced. I agree, and I think it should be aptly named Transportation. That name invokes images of the frontier and our use of it. Now we can remove the political aspect of this conversation, and people like AllanL5 can shut the hell up. (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123629969453946717.html)
One glaring omission from your article, Bob, is the electronic frontier. You failed to mention the computer revolution. Expansion into this frontier is what made several of the world’s largest fortunes and many of its millionaires and billionaires.
A frontier is a large supply of something with little or no perceived value, and the revolution or expansion into that frontier really means its transformation into something of great value. The wilderness frontier presented us with huge swaths of worthless land. The westward expansion followed by two centuries of industrialization and free enterprise made real estate one of the most expensive things in the world.
Our society is technologically advanced and industrialized to the point that anyone can setup a shop with CNC tools and some CAD/CAM software in their garage and manufacture ANYTHING in scalable quantities. The real question becomes, “What should I make?” The answer brings us into the realm of intellectual property filings. Setting aside the pain of dealing with the government, my point is the real value here is in the original idea. To have a good idea that solves a technical problem or improves a technical process, you need education and knowledge it brings.
I believe the next frontier is knowledge. Today our media saturated television-watching first-world society has created generations of dumb people. The most important thing in their lives is what happened on Cheaters, Jerry Springer, or Tool Academy the night before. I perceive this culture as having little or no value. There will be an education revolution and people will begin to read again.
The educational revolution will finally get rid of illiteracy, and poverty stricken second and third world peoples will come to realize that free societies are the ones that provide wealth, prosperity, economic security, and hope. The motivation knowledge brings will rid us of the political oppression that causes so much suffering around the world.
Education will increase the number of doctors and engineers we have. The work they do will make us safer and increase our longevity. Education, economic prosperity, and economic potential will allow us and motivate us to terraform Venus and Mars, which in turn will provide us with more real estate and curb the perception many have of over population.
More education will make everything better. It helps us take advantage of the endless possibilities that lay before us. Armed with that knowledge, everyone can accomplish something important and valuable in life. I hope the idea of accomplishing something noteworthy will motivate people, and this in turn will diminish the television-watching culture.
Bob,
the question you are asking is a profoundly meaningful one. And although you seem to be asking it from an american perspective, let me assure you that wise, forward-thinking people all over the world are asking them the same question (although they might phrase it differently). So allow me to not comment from an U.S. specific viewpoint.
What I think needs to be thoroughly explored is whether humanity (or any part of it) needs a new frontier in the classical sense. What I’m in fact saying is that the concept of a frontier implies expansion. Just as the original american settlers first travelled westward, and then turned inward to raise the country upwards and onwards (citius altius, fortius comes to mind), that is maybe precisely what humanity needs to do. You could call it “inwards expansion”, with a twist.
Some readers here have pointed to emergent technologies, and I’m pretty confident most of those will be playing a part in our collective future.
Some other readers have pointed to earth, and it’s limited resources. The implications of that are threefold: there is a limit to growth as we do it today; there is potential for raising the efficiency of resources consumed; there is another way as well – something the “degrowth” -movement (in its various incarnations) has latched on to.
Still some others have dreamed of space, thus easing the resource constraint. The Apollo program is living proof of that humanity has the ability to reach the skies, if sufficient resources are made available.
Still some others have presented their suggestions for silver bullets (such as the 4S). I’m not saying that the ideas would not work, but I consider branding a solution a silver bullet is like jumping out of an airplane without a parachute and gamble on a miracle happening.
The question I’d want to ask, is whether you believe a new frontier to be necessary or even healthy for humanity?
For those of you with a business background: is a climate of growth inherently healthy for companies? Sure, it spurs corporate growth, but does it make the company more healthy? Sure, it allows for supernormal profits, but is it the company which creates the profit, or is it the market?
I know we (most of us) are growth-oriented, but do we need to be? Is it inherent to humanity or is it something which we have learned (and can unlearn)? What if we had less growth-oriented metrics to judge people, companies and nations by?
Someone here mentioned the Gini-index (a statistic description of material equality/inequality). According to classical capitalist (or free market oriented) economic theory, the accumulation of capital (that some have a lot more than the rest) is a perquisite to the ability to invest, and that the ability to invest is necessary for growth or the entry into new or emerging markets. So according to capitalist theory inequality is a necessary perquisite for economic growth (I’m not disputing it either).
Doesn’t this also imply, that to be able to achieve higher equality, we need to forgo (at least some) growth.
Considering that the turnover of the global cosmetics industry is more than the yearly income of the world’s poorest 3 billion people, would it be too much to ask to strive for higher equality?
– – –
Efficiency is a problematic word, because although it should be understood as “efficiency in achieving set goals/realizing held values”, it is usually applied related to the dominating metric – a value blind input / output verdict.
Efficiency is also problematic in another sense. Let me illustrate: An increase in efficiency leads to that the production of everything humanity needs can be achieved by a smaller and smaller number of people. The inherent problem is twofold:
Firstly, the higher wages associated with higher efficiency are (globally) concentrated on the western/northern hemisphere, and do nothing to alleviate the problem of low-efficiency societies not being able to purchase these efficiently produced goods. So if country A attains supernormal efficiency, it (in the current m.o. of international markets) it only leeds to country A gaining in comparison to the rest, but (as the prisoner’s dilemma shows) is not necessarily better off than they were before.
Secondly, we still (even in social-market countries like in Scandinavia) have a rigid relation between work and material affluence. If efficiency increases (as it would if robotics would become widespread), and the market cannot grow (unless we start exporting to Mars), it will only lead to increased un- and underemployment.
The current ideology linking personal material resources (i.e. income) is (in the long run) not compatible with continues advances in efficiency.
Thus far affluent countries have been able to not feel this pain of growing efficiency, partially because they have “exported” the problem to less lucky countries.
J.M. Keynes, a in many ways influential economist, should really be credited for being the first to profoundly understand the demand-side of economics (something the Chicago school has had the luxury to disregard as in the western world demand is created through marketing in conjunction with reckless lending).
– – –
Dave Sailer noted the Capitalism 3.0 -book. Not only is he spot on in the notion of resources and capital having changed roles in between, but even more, most economists and businessmen have no idea of what money has become (look up “money as debt”). If we base everything – our material life, our inequality, our whole method of resource sharing and all our central metrics on something which is simultaneously non-existent and entirely arbitrary, where does this leave us?
How does this reality and the realpolitik we base on that any different than any role-playing game, if there is no reality behind all this, just a series of rules of “what money is”. (An in case you’re dismissing this as a commie’s ranting, please reconsider)
– – –
Downshifting?
Do you feel tempted?
Would you feel tempted if you could not get more (money/income etc.), whether you worked 20h/40h/60h /week?
What would be needed to make you feel tempted?
Thanks, and apologies.
What we really need to do is reward companies for taking long term strategies instead of trying to boost the short term stock market price. If companies are encouraged to do this, it will increase the R&D in products and manufacturing. Maybe we should raise the capital gains tax on stocks held less than 10 years?
Do we need another one already? The Gold Rush went bust, but we’re not finished taming the Internet yet.
If we’re asking what the next big thing is going to be, we’re just asking for trouble. In all honesty, we’re just talking about what is going to be the next financial bubble. The last bubble was real estate and finance, the current bubble is commodities, and the next bubble is going to be information technology (again). If anything, though, technology will decrease jobs through automation.
So where does that leave us? My take is that we need to do somewhat of what Europe did. Go back to agriculture and cottage industries like watch makers, shoe makers, tailors, mechanics, glass makers, wine makers, etc. These occupations have been around for hundreds of years, and these positions, while somewhat skilled, are not hard to train (no college required). What people lack is the motivation to do these things. Everyone wants the “easy” way out, to follow the 1-2-3 plan of get a HS diploma, go to college, and get handed a job.
It has to be Alternative energy.
Space at this time is beyond our real abilities. Moon, so what. Mars why? Beyond Mars and some probes I think our odds are better of waiting for aliens to come to us. Get the house in order and only then with full global US,Europe(Russia,China & Japan support should any off planet efforts be made.
In the 1930’s during the Great Deppression capital siezed up. The infastructure of industry was still there/present. It just needed catalyst to start up. In many ways this is worse than the 1930s. There is nothing to start up.
Doing something -pump priming – starts and keeps an economy going. Whether it’s dig a ditch and fill it or build a space ship. In Egypt there was probably a few key people that knew the Pharos pyramid(s) were really economic engines.
For the US the ditch to dig and fill is -infastructure – roads & bridges. Start putting utility lines underground. High speed rail – real high speed not some 40 mph choo choo. On the 40mph – ditch standard go metric and join the modern world.
The United States is not “shipping jobs overseas”. Americans have priced themselves out of the labor market.
What we have right now is a labor surplus. Surpluses are only caused by one thing: high prices. There’s no limit to how many jobs we can have, and there’s no need for a “new frontier” to make them. All we have to do is lower the cost of employing Americans.
Like button needed here. 🙂
I think Sustainable Localization will be a new frontier, given the convergence of several trends: increasing energy prices, diminishing supplies of fresh water, climate changes (droughts, flooding, etc.), eroding infrastructure (roads, schools, sewer/water systems, etc.), eroding social programs (pensions, healthcare, etc.) and diminishing capital (flat/falling salaries, reduced tax revenues, rising entitlement expenses, etc.), to name just a few.
People, communities and organizations will have to become more self-reliant and more focused on addressing their own local issues, instead of relying on regional, state and federal government for help. This, in turn, will spawn demand for new local jobs (that can’t be off-shored) to work on improving local resources for energy and energy efficiency, food, water, transportation, healthcare and elder care.
Americans and people everywhere will be forced to regroup around walkable, human-scale towns; organic local economies of small farmers and tradesmen who will replace an alienating corporate globalism; strong bonds of social solidarity will be reforged; and our heedless, childish culture of consumerism will be forced to grow up. But not without tremendous cost AND expense.
Although I hope/pray for future generations that it doesn’t get as dark as depicted in James Kunstler’s “The Long Emergency,” unfortunately I think he gets a lot of it right.
“Sustainable Localization” is to me the primary opportunity and I would put it to “agriculture”. Agriculture in this case is the growing of food not commodities (corn & beans).
I feel fortunate that I can buy tomatoes that were picked less than 50 mi away even when the average temp is 20F. We’re told that we need to eat fresh veg and fruit but things like cantaloup tend to come from Chile which is thousands of miles away (think I’ll pass on those from Colorado for a while). Cheaper / more sustainable power to keep multi level green houses (safer) going year around in cities using folks from the full IQ range (it is those on the left side of the curve that have the least opportunities for productive work). This would be capital expensive in the beginning but probably a fixed cost for a decade or two. My hope is that the employees would be well fed and get a reasonable wage.
I’d also be inclined to have hogs / chickens in the green house to supply some heat, C2O, and a way to recycle stems and other parts humans may choose not to eat. Ideally, it might also be a bit more humane that the isolated factory farms.
The only other thought is accept the idea that some work is really “make work” work. Adding nurses aids in hospitals and nursing homes add costs but it is the higher educated plus capital equipment that drives the real costs. Or maybe a few “nurses helpers” who might be in the -2sd range but are concerned about the needs of others and feel better about themselves when they are helping. Another area is that of “clerks”. They seem to be disappearing in stores and a focus point for savings – cut a few $24k / year folks to justify a CEO at $5m isn’t, to my way of thinking, a moral action.
Lastly, we are or will very soon have become a low cost labor market at least for the left side of the curve. Start bringing it back especially for things that cost a lot to ship. Does it make any sense that dumbbells would be made in China and shipped here? This is becoming a bit more obvious for industries with high levels of automation but me thinks it will become true quickly for labor intensive tasks. Cell phone assembly is moving from China to Brazil, where next Africa and then perhaps next door.
Localization is the key. Produce near your consumer reduces costs and can, in part, justify a higher labor cost.
A new frontier?
We have yet to completely decimate the entire ocean bottom, the majority of our planetary surface.
Think of all the cheap disposable uneducated human capital that can be expended on this frontier; keep pushing them in.
We’re already well on the way- keep burning those fossil fuels!
The oceans around us
Yes, the United States IS shipping jobs overseas. The allure of cheap labor is intoxicating to U.S. CEOs, so much so they simply can’t smell the stench of incompetence and failure associated with this. Frankly, these guys wouldn’t even understand what they are smelling, because they understand very little about what their companies actually do. They’ll think it is a side effect of burning money. You get what you pay for.
If we have a labor surplus, why all of the H1B Visas? Those are supposedly needed because we have a shortage of talent. Tell that to the 30+ experienced engineer on the unemployment line.
Companies don’t want to pay for talent—surprise, surprise! So they are stridently proceeding with commoditizing skills so that there is no need for talent. Just like the move from skilled craftsman to assembly lines, a good education (which != rote memorization && test scores), experience and intelligence simply don’t matter when everyone is a Widget. A handful of talented people will still do well because they will needed to clean up the mess created by this race to the bottom.
The guys who used to beat the nerds up in gym class all got MBAs using Daddy’s money and formed a formidable little oligarchy where the smart guys have all been commoditized and all you had to do to win was to vote up each others salaries (Boards), bribe public officials through our lobby system, and be as morally bankrupt as possible. Call it ‘good capitalism’. (Bet MY Dad who was in WWII didn’t know that was what he was fighting for; so many American lives so that oligarchs will have the freedom to send our jobs overseas.) Just like the good old days when they used to just steal lunch money, they have stolen pensions, padding their pockets through stock buybacks.
While they are working so hard to make talent and intelligence irrelevant, they exempt themselves from the same level of scrutiny about whether their ‘talent’ can be commoditized. Frankly, other than a very small handful of CEOs (oops, one finger less; Steve Jobs is gone), it is hard to say what talent most of these MBA-trained CEOs and VPs actually have that make them deserve lottery-size salaries.
Stealing and layoffs, typically, involve very little intelligence, talent or skill—I am pretty sure that you could automate such behavior with little difficulty; think an ELIZA program used in intro CS classes. That level of complexity should easily outflank your average multimillionaire ex-HP CEO, for example, for a lot less money. You can get a cheap Indian programming to throw together a CEObot for cheap; and there is always a few of those U.S.-trained ‘top skill’ engineers hanging around to fix the code if it turns out to be a buggy can of crap.
>One of the big problems today is we have no real emerging industries,
The big problem is that the american political class is inbred,much like 20th century UK:
http://oilgeopolitics.net/History/Oil_and_the_Origins_of_World_W/oil_and_the_origins_of_world_w.HTM
>the implications for America of being without an obvious frontier
There was always Mexico and Canada…
>First there was the wilderness, then industrialization, then consumerization.
America has had a bogeyman for each of its 235 years. Several important bogeymen were indians,communists and now muslims. The muslim bogeyman is only motivating half the (inbred) population: http://politics.salon.com/2011/09/29/fbi_terror/singleton/
> and in energy the old fortunes aren’t yet ready to let go.
At least we get a gallon of gas for our pound of flesh.Big oil is only half the problem. The cancerous Wall street parasites threaten the host:
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/stiglitz131/English
The host is preoccupied with fear:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XR5hQqpa6H4
How about getting our society/economy from a 747 flying at 37,000′ to a DC-3 at 8000′? Downsize and simplify everything. Going from supersize to small or even micro.
Next frontier could be nutrition: and the way food is grown, processed, distributed, consumed and consequent medical treatments if badly done (as it is right now).
https://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/aug/28/ict-changes-needed-national-curriculum
We may need to review how kids are influenced to use their brain actively (as in your R&D commnet)
Agriculture and the ocean seems like two good places to start. Take the Blue Ocean strategy literally.
Anybody have any ideas on what you could do differently with the ocean?
In 1951 Cyril Kornbluth published a short story called “Marching Morons.” He predicted the dilemma our society is in. Most of the work is done by a small percentage of geniuses (or in our case, those in power) and the rest of the population (morons) is sold a “bill of goods”.
We are already in the next frontier, which to me seems to be using technology to control the masses so they forget there’s anything they need to do: Not that this is new, but technology makes it easier to reach so many. Who needs a real life when you’ve got hundreds of “friends” you’ve never met on Facebook? Whatever someone’s fancy or addiction is, there’s something to engage it technologically or on the internet.
Those with money, with power, continue to do what they do with less interference because the masses are distracted. How do we educate or demand this elite class, steeped in Lysenkoism for their own benfits, to be more accountable and responsible to us and our mutual home? Become caretakes and not users? When we finally wake up and realize how far things have moved along out of our control then the next frontier will be saving ourselves and our home planet. If it isn’t too late.
I think we need to take over the planet.
Consider that our defense (offense) budget is the world’s biggest and our weapons are the world’s best. We are concluding one of two wars (Iraq) and are looking to conclude the second (Afghanistan), leaving space on the military calendar for future wars. Our armed forces are fully trained, lead by experienced capable people highly committed to American ideals, and we have an extensive network to get supplies to the troops in the field, wherever that field might be. Don’t forget we have nuclear arms and quick delivery vehicles to back up those armed forces. We’re the only nation to have actually used nuclear weapons in combat. We’ve done it once; we can do it again.
Taking over the world will require that we move to a full war footing like WW2, but this time, we’ll get ready before we strike at our enemies. Entire industries will have to start making war supplies and stop making consumer goods. We’ll need a draft for more manpower – an all-volunteer force will not be big enough. War R&D will have to be increased and new weapons designed, built and moved to the battlefield. The economy will start moving again. Our currently under-employed workforce will be fully employed again. Our national treasure will increase from the wealth we’ll be conquering and sending home. This time around, the world will be safe for democracy.
Yeep, I am drunk as well…
Nonetheless, I think your plan has one vital flaw: hasn’t USA moved its manufacturing offshore?
A quick note on space. While I would like to see more programs and space science, this is an area where we need to keep our expectations grounded. It will never be economically practical to expect to colonize space or get raw materials from space. The cost to do so is and will always be prohibitive.
Lets suppose you could find on the moon’s surface a lump of the most valuable substance known to mankind. The cost to find it and return it to earth will be far, far greater than its value. It will be easier and cheaper to make it on earth, even if you have to use nuclear technology to make the atoms and molecules you need.
Any effort to build a station on the moon or to send a person to Mars will be profoundly expensive and inefficient, and a reckless waste of the worlds resources. That said we SHOULD continue to invest in space and leading edge R&D.
Global zero population growth for about a century. I know, it’s hard to stop.
My question is….when are we going to be able to buy a Sony Personal Space Shuttle?,,,,lol
I thought for sure we’d have flying cars by now. The funny thing is that the fragmented technology exists for so many problems to the world’s energy needs, yet nothing can seem to pull one or 2 key approaches into mainstream acceptance. (for example, hydrogen fuel cell tech and the patented Tesla tech used for “energy from the vacuum”)
Bob, if we want an economy that performs, that is a different question that “what could be a new frontier?” A new frontier should be able to exist without conferring an economic benefit, and a well performing economy should be able to exist without a new frontier. Even based on my believe in those two statement, I think I can still contribute to this discussion.
Pekka Butler sees some of the same issues I see, just from a different perspective. We are all different, and sharing ideas with those who are different is an important part of changing the world for the betterment of all. That can sound communistic only until you actually read extensively the quotes available of leaders of communist and other extreme forms of socialism, especially their own take on what the average member of the society they would create deserves or should accept in the opinion of those leaders.
How about this for a new frontier. A new frontier of thought in this country and the rest of the world. How about we start taking advantage of how the world is, vs how trying to make it like we are told it should be. As if our world, or even just the US, should require a new frontier in order to create an economy that improves the lives of all those who participate even better than the one we have now…
“DaveTX” mentioned that government is “roughly 24% of GDP currently”. Almost everyone talks about the economy in terms of “GDP”. Why? Because we learned to in high school economics class that GDP is how to measure the success of a national economy over time? Because everyone else does? So, Government spending is included in “GDP” as part of the product (output) of the economy, however…
When someone takes valuables you using the threat of force and then spends that ill-gotten gain in the economy are these thieves productive members of the economy? Well, all they are doing is taking from you to give to merchants in exchange for what they want. Is our bar set so low? Is that all that is required to be “productive” in the economy? Should I start talking your money and spend it on what I want and call that a “job” or a “business”? Would I be working to exact value from economic transitions, or just a thief? A “socialist” thief, a ”democratic” thief, a “bank robbing” thief… Should they all be included in the measure of or national economic success?
Redirecting actual productive output of others is not economically productive activity. Economically productive activity is the value received in return from either labor on behalf of a business working to satisfy the demands of the market place, or the fee a business charges above its costs for satisfying of demands of the marketplace. Taking money from workers or businesses and spending it on what you want to instead is not productive economic activity. It is just redirecting economic output from one group, in this case tax payers, to another group, in this case the “special interests” that can convince the political class to act against the rest of us on their behalf.
Convincing the political class of much of anything usually involves giving them money to use to mislead enough people into voting for them so they can then have the privilege to enact and/or enforce policy. Often times the policies they enact or enforce are those of the “special interest groups” who gave them enough money to succeed at misleading enough people, not the policies they committed to enact or enforce while they were actively misleading people, otherwise known as “campaigning” in an “election”.
The money our government spends to enact or enforce its collective policies comes from all of us who pay taxes. First, those who pay taxes earned their money though some productive activity from which they received income or profits. The government then takes as taxes money which would have been spent on something else. As a result, we will never get the benefit to the economy of the items that would have been purchased if the money to purchase them was not taken away by the government.
Some things government spends money on:
1. Loans to Solyndra.
2. Loans to Enron.
3. Regulations out of the Department of Education on what constitutes an “approved” economics textbook in high schools (So we can all learn about “GDP”).
4. Bridges to “nowhere”.
5. Creating and unsuccessfully enforcing rules that prevent foreigners from moving to a better neighborhood, if that neighborhood is in our country. Though this fails to prevent foreigners from moving here, it does impede the process of the division of labor from progressing in the most optimum way.
Some things I would spend our household’s income on if we were able to keep more of what we earned:
1. and 2. Loans to start a family business
3. Send my daughter to a school who taught that national economic success was not in evidence by an increasing national “GDP” over time, but instead through ever increasing productivity of our productive economic output, resulting in the price per unit of items produced to fall in terms of their cost per unit of a monetarily-stable currency over time, thus increasing the standard of living of everyone who participates in the economy – all of which is due to the successful application of the process of working towards “the (optimum) division of labor” in economic life. –Assuming of course that this school was not closed for teaching from an economics text book that was “unapproved” by the Department of Education.
4. Charity to those causes I personally decide are worth receiving some of the income I earned through productive enterprise
5. Move to a better neighborhood in our country
Some things businesses may spend money on if they were to keep more of what they earned:
1. Additional loans (borrowed capital) at extremely low interest rates, kept artificially low by the federal reserve’s interference in the prices of the marketplace for capital, so the business can invest the borrowed money in machinery or the migration of workloads overseas to replace the US workers who are unable to compete with such artificially cheap capital, especially, where possible, those workers who unions have successfully priced above the current market rate.
2. Hire the workers not priced out of the market by the government and union action from item number 1.
3. Invest in training workers on job skills that improve their productivity not priced out of the market by the government and union action from item number 1.
4. Give back to the community in ways that directly improve the community where they earned their profits.
5. Expand into a new geographic area
Now we still need to talk about the cost of complying with regulations that the government is happy to create on a daily basis. Ok, never mind. I am sure you see what I am getting at with this one.
Now we also need to talk about all the future gain in productive economic output that we will never see because of the money diverted from investment by economic actors in the future growth of their enterprises and spent instead paying the cost of complying with those same regulations. Economic progress which is now gone forever. Sometimes called the “hidden cost of regulation”. I really prefer the “lost economic gain for everyone because of government interference”, because it seems clearer to me. To me, it is similar to “quantitative easing” vs “printing electronic fiat money”.
Is it really so hard to see why the economy does not produce as many jobs as it should when government interferes more and more in the economy every time it takes from everyone else an increasingly large part of our current and future productive output? 24% you think DaveTX? Remember, it is the government who reports that statistic.
What about when the government, through their favored actor the Federal Reserve, artificially cheapens the cost of capital on the open capital marketplace? This activity diverts spending in the economy away from hiring workers, and instead spends it on investing in tractors, IT infrastructure, and all other activity that generates the kind of labor reducing productivity enhancements that would normally be to capital cost intensive to replace workers.
In capitalism, the most feared class of capitalist is not the “entrepreneur” called both “robber baron” and “capitalist” as if all economic activity were under their preview, but that most dreaded of beast… lied to and put down and buried under piles of deceit… the capitalist class that has ripped billions of dollars of capital from one enterprise and handed all of it and more over to another enterprise, at merely their slightest whim…
The “consumer” class of capitalist.
Who is going to protect you from the “terrorists” and the “capitalist robber barons”? You are. All of us consumers do a fine job of it.
Any illusion which exists that the government or even unions can protect society at large from such things or otherwise increase the well being of the entire society, vs just increase the well being of members or other favored actors of unions or government, is an illusion created by government or by those members and favored actors. For example, we have told young children “how the world should/does work” for decades using Department of Education “approved” story books better at their job than the novels of fiction they resemble because they are the “official word” provided to teachers to provide to children, who are mostly too young to question it. Mostly. Not completely. The wisdom of children as yet uneducated in how things “should be” does regularly manifest itself in the classroom, at home, and elsewhere in my experience.
A problem we have in our economy is not the failure of “capitalism”, it is the slow choking off of capitalism through more and more interference by governments in the economic affairs of everyone as time goes on. Interference that cannot ever be “economically productive” but only divert resources from “productive enterprises” to favor “special interests”, whether or not government spending gets included in some make believe fairytale called “GDP”.
I can also say that this is not how the “Department of Education approved” high school economics text book I read talked about the economy, but that is not surprising because it takes moral fortitude for a DoE worker to “approve” themselves out of a job as then when these ideas came home to roost after being taught to our children, surely there would no longer be federal government employees with mandates to produce “required approvals” of ideas in books given to the children in our schools.
Department of Education workers who approved a realistic economic text book would still not constitute the level moral fortitude shown by leaders of the American Revolution by agreeing to participate before knowing they would succeed, but definitely while knowing they would hang for treason to the crown should they fail. In the US, we trade perceived security for some of our civil liberties on a regular basis. We are told, “the government should take care of us.” And, “It is our right that the governments stand up and guarantee our rights.” A government that enforces all your rights is known as a “police state”. It is no “accident of history” that we are headed in that direction. It is the choices we make to not intervene in the process of the destruction of liberty by the privileged few through the delusion of the masses with the power to stop them.
Ben Franklin is one of the leaders of the American Revolution who risked the loss of his life when his government of the time did not provide the liberty he felt the citizens of a nation deserved. Not the kind of risk we facie in these supposedly “post 9/11” times, but real honest-to-God danger to life and property. Some of the liberties he would recognize as necessary today would no doubt be the liberty to spend money how the citizen felt was best and the liberty of thought and expression without needing to have a government “approved” book to teach from. He had this to say to his descendants in this country, and I hope that soon we will all be listening:
“Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
-Ben Franklin (1706 – 1790) Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759
The temporary safety of slightly higher wages from union activity that prices businesses into investments using artificially cheap capital in order to replace expensive workers with productivity enhancing capital expenditures, the temporary safety of a government job helping to regulate the behavior of everyone else, or temporary safety from terrorists through warrantless wiretapping of US citizens, it matters not…
He was referring to all of those losses of liberty in our society today, even though he did not yet know how far down the path he spoke against we would be willing to travel in this, the future we have made from the country he fought to create.
Whether we trade our liberty against the remote possibility of the threat of terrorism, or for “protection” from “capitalists” who will “take our money”, we are trading what is our responsibility to secure for ourselves, in exchange for a government that decides for us what we need. I don’t know about you, but I enjoy my right to work things out with my neighbor. Or with my employer. Or with my wife. Or even with my own child. This “abdicating of our responsibilities to others who say they know better than we do what is good for us” will go way too far, way too fast, if we let it.
We are currently letting it. We must stop. At some point only a large number of Ben Franklins will be able to stop it, so let us not wait that long.
There’s just as much “frontier” now as there ever was. The problem now is vested interests are in control and would like to keep the staus quo, from which they benefit.
The real value of a frontier is that it allows escape – escape from Europe, escape from the populated cities of the American East Coast, escape from control.
What about service?? Who likes to talk to the automated servcie when you phone the telco or any large corperation?? I usually go straight for the 0 to get to an opperator and work my concers out with a human.
To provide a good service requires man power. They don’t even have to be overly educated, there just has to be lots of them. So what do you do with lots of uneducated, unemployed people?? teach them how to function socialy, to be polite and provide a quick and efficent service. each one becomes a specialist in their own domain/subject and away you go.
I would love to pull up to a gas station and have someone fill my car, wash my windows, check my oil and tire pressure and offer to get me a coffee, all well i sit on my lazy butt and wait to get back on the road again. I’d even be willing to pay a little extra for that.
it’s not rocket science, but it’s a though.
The reason we have poor service for tech (and gas as well) is because labor is expensive. You say you want the service but would you be willing to pay double for the same end product be it a TV, computer, or gas in your tank?
I’d like the answer to be Space but it isn’t. We can’t really go to space because we don’t have cheap heavy lift capability. The next big frontier is medicine. There are increasing numbers of people. They’ll need health care. The ability to transcend the human condition using genetics and technology could create a lot of jobs. Once we get there a lot of the other problems become simpler. Going to space is easier if you’re radiation tolerant and can work in vacuum without a suit. Growing a rat brain that could be programmed is lots cheaper than building a PC. We just have to work out how to play World of Ratcraft though…
I’d like for it to be space as well, but I think it costs something like $82,000 to take lift 1 lb of anything into space. Until we get that number down then not much is going to change. I’m all for the space elevator or even deriving solar power from space.
Space X
50 Tons, $50 Million per launch. figuring half of that for cargo, and half for container, gives one Million per ton. one ton is near enough 2000 Pounds. That gives a cost to orbit of $500 per Pound, right now.
Of course, it will take well over a year to schedule, but that is where the market is right now.
Your figures are for the Space Shuttle, which was more a jobs program than a space program. The Air Force has known for a long time that the way to keep costs down is to find ways to minimize the ground crew. It took 10,000 people at the Cape to keep the Shuttles able to fly. It takes a couple of dozen for a Space X launch.
More at the factory, of course, but the shuttle boosters and the big throw away tanks took a very large labor force too.
The labor cost is more important than the cost of the vehicle or the cost of the fuel. Fuel costs to reach orbit are in the range of $50/Lb. All the rest can be reduced. Still expensive, but doable. In relative terms, tickets on the Titanic, or aboard the Hindenburg were in a similar range when compared to the average wage at the time.
Where the advantage for Space lies is that the high cost is to go up. Going down is very cheap. If materials are being shipped to Earth from the Moon, or from some asteroid, the costs can be mere pennies per Kilo, or a few dollars per ton. It takes careful aiming to get the cargo down safely, but it is more a question of timing than of cost.
Even so, Space within the next 50 years will not be a source of employment for more than a small fraction of the society.
Right now, agriculture employs around 10% of the population. 200 years ago it employed 90%.
Right now, manufacturing employs 30% of the population. 100 years ago it employed 60%.
Right now, the Energy Industries (Oil, Gas, Coal and Electricity generation and transmission) employs less than 10% of the population. 50 years ago it employed 40%.
The rest of us work in things that are appendages to those two professions. We need them to stay alive. They don’t really need us to stay alive. That’s 50% that aren’t really producing anything that other people need. the next ‘frontier’ Bob is talking about needs to be something that can profitably employ around 50% of the population.
Service isn’t it. But, we don’t know what it might be. Entertainment, programming, etc. have never been big enough to employ any significant fraction of the population. So, you will need to look elsewhere.
It will need to be something that people will be willing to pay for. I don’t know what would do that either.
I think you’re on track with Medicine, but I’d rather classify it more specifically as bioengineering.
You could reclassify the frontiers in terms of engineering:
Civil engineering era: land expansion frontier
Mechanical engineering era: rise of manufacturing and machines (factories, cars, etc.)
Electrical engineering era: rise of electronics, computers
Bioengineering era: rise of genetic engineering
Not to offend other types of engineers 🙂 Aerospace and Computer engineering and anything else can fit into those very broad categories as there was always a lot of specialist activity in those eras. Maybe there’ll be special cardio engineers or something in the bioengineering era, too!
Hi Bob,
Our next frontier is … time.
Life expectancy has increased significantly in the last century and has reached unseen level in history. Plus it’s being generalized to everybody in our developed countries and soon enough worldwide.
Our longer life is the main source of disturbance on our planned development. We could deal with our higher density on earth but a longer life expectancy is a real wall.
How are we going to deal with its consequences? How will we organize the distribution of work and revenues between generations? We are already fed up with debt. Futures generations won’t be able to do add more debt as we did therefore we are living at their expenses. How will we organize the funding of rising health cost that will soon become unsustainable for our societies? How do we get young generation to accept to pay for older ones without rebelling ?
Time and its management is our next frontier.
Best regards, and thank you for your witty columns.
We may well have functional immortality in the lifetime of many people alive today. by functional immortality I mean people won’t die of old age or disease. being squashed by a 16 ton weight dropped from great height will likely always be fatal…
Don’t count on a great leap in life expectancy any time soon (or ever, for that matter), but also realize it doesn’t take a big change to have a big impact. 80 million people living an extra 5 years on average can be huge, particularly if they are not in good health.
we’re already able to grow simple organs (like an esophogus or bladder) and more complex organs aren’t that far off. Once we’re able to print an entire human genome and package it properly (histones, methylation, etc.) in a stem cell nucleus, we’re there. we can already do simple bacterial genomes, btw.
Hi Bob
Analyse the Flash/HTML5 thing in the context of mobile apps. Slideshare and scribd jumped ship from flash…
What about our government? It strikes me that much of the developments in information technology over the past few decades could do much more for societal progress if applied to the intractable questions of political economy. (Rather than just throwing human capital at the next Angry Birds, which does little really to advance the human race.)
Consider: Information information asymmetries are a huge hobgoblin of regulatory schema (cough financial crisis cough). I figure the vaunted ubiquity of information you valley folks keep talking about might have something to say about this.
Or consider: Trite but true, money speaks in modern American politics. Yet today anyone can get thousands of people to spontaneously do something (usually stupid) provided they’re convincing enough. W/ the internet, the quality of an idea can become more important than its financial backing. I figure harnessing social networking tools might have implications for democratic elections.
Just a few initial gestures. Anyway, the barrier that prevent these sorts of changes from flourishing as I see it is the zombie-like persistence of antiquated institutions.
I think you are mistaken on one point: there have been MANY frontiers and there will be many more. Frontiers are created. They are created by those with the vision and ingenuity to see what isn’t there and see what it could become. They recognize how to exploit the resources available. Without these individuals, the frontiers never would have been recognized or developed. During the land expansion, people learned how to leverage untapped resources including the willingness of people to relocate. During industrialization, people learned how to leverage manufacturing methods and technologies. During consumerization, people learned how to leverage innovations in supply chain and marketing. But there are many other frontiers that people have expanded into. Most recently, one can see leveraging the internet and its connectivity, and the financial industry leveraging the liquidity in capital and the power of computing.
There is this assumption that one of the things that makes America great is that we have creativity and ingenuity. But, that is just wrong. SOME of us have these strong character traits, most don’t. Those that have them have created and opened up the frontiers that benefits the rest. In the past, those frontiers have always needed people to pull them off, even if the labor was just in supporting services. But, increasingly, the frontiers that are being created don’t need labor, or can easily use labor abroad. They don’t even need many supporting services that are local.
The people with the vision are still being extremely successful at creating and exploiting new frontiers. The problem is that the average American is no longer coming along for the ride. Mainstream America no longer has any competitive advantage, We don’t work harder than people in China or Mexico. And we aren’t better educated than most of the world. So, the average Americans have lost their usefulness to the people creating and exploiting frontiers. As this trend continues, more and more Americans will find themselves less and less useful.
But frontiers will continue to be created and those new age industrialists will continue to prosper.
Inner space. Now we can begin to develop ourselves and become better people. And there is great need for that to happen: better stewardship of the biosphere, elimination of poverty, building a better electronic infrastructure so that we may enable better and more community participation in the running of the country, and more.
Kumbaya my lord, kumbaya…
Simple. The new frontier is to find an alternative source of energy for the world.
Whoever gets ahead in the race to create and sell commercially viable nuclear fusion reactors will have an export product the size of all the oil in the Middle East. The US should have treated this like a Manhattan or Apollo Project for the new millennium ten years ago, flooding it with all the money and brains available. Instead, gazillions have been utterly squandered trying to blast middle eastern states into stability, and the issue of alternative energy has been lost in the mire of an irrelevant debate about global warming.
The new frontier is the biggest challenge human society faced for a long time: a complete socio-economic shift of paradigm to deal with the disappearing jobs.
Jobs are disappearing because:
1) Unprecedented accelerated technology, aimed to achieve more efficiency by cutting out or reducing human involvement (from software that allows one person to do what ten did in the past to complete robotic factories). None of the newly created industries result in creating more jobs than the dead industries needed, either individually or combined.
2) Unprecedented growth in human population, looking for work.
3) Unprecedented extension of life expectancy that requires funding to support life.
These trends are in obvious collision-course with each other: together they have caused an unprecedented rapture in the labor market supply/demand.
The broken paradigm is that people make their living through their work.
Clearly: there is more labor supply than demand.
This is no longer a short term cyclical imbalance: it is a long term, ever increasing new trend.
The world has to grasp the fact, that not all the people will have the opportunity to work – simply, because there is less and less need for human work to keep the economy running the most efficiently, which is dictated by competition on the market.
The world has to grasp the fact that we need to re-invent the ancient rule: one needs to work to make a living.
Currently politicians, economist, etc. have not even grasped the fact that we are here, at this point.
Once they do, it will be an extremely difficult task to deal with it.
The huge shift of paradigm we need to resolve is: how to slice the pie, without the need to work for living.
How to slice the pie, where work for living is not the exclusive source of getting a piece.
The seemingly simple “one needs to work to make a living” rule is the bases for all the current economics, ideologies, cultural traditions.
We can not even imagine how else could we slice the pie, without this ancient guide-line.
But we must find a solution, unless we resort the easiest resolution: wars, until the loss of population re-balances the labor supply-demand for a while again.
The answer for dividing the pie is simple and it is almost what we have now. Everybody gets “firsts” – enough food, shelter and education to make a decent citizen out of them. Then, people can compete for “seconds” with everything that is left of the pie *after* everyone has been served. People who want more than bare subsistence can compete for whatever jobs, resources, wealth, etc. remain.
Considering that no one starves in America, we almost have this now. Most people are able to get “firsts” (though we would be far better served if the firsts included full education.)
The big problem is, as you suggest, the ideological position that work equals living. People who are not working are seen as unworthy human beings, and undeserving of firsts. Among other things, this means that austerities are taken out of the “firsts” instead of out of the “seconds.” And that hurts everyone.
If we could change the ideology to reflect the new reality – technology really is freeing humanity from work! – we could provide for very basic needs AND compete (relatively) peacefully for resources as we do now. The difference would be the losing the perception that only the “working” are viable human beings, and that human worth is determined by accumulation. Instead there would be a baseline of human worth independent of work, and all could expand on it in any way they wished, even ways that are not lucrative. We could appreciate the value of a humans for what they can do and be, not just what they can get.
It takes only a mindshift. And it is already happening.
My pediction: For corporations, it will still be consumerism but it will be Chinese and Indian consumers that they care about. Wall Street will go after social security, pensions and IRAs and bet on dead peasant’s insurance for those few still employed or perhaps they’ll find a way around that such as dead taxpayer’s insurance or a sort of death derivative by race or socioeconomic class. There will be categories and subcategories such as how many in a given pool die of cancer or heart disease, etc. Someone please tell me I’m wrong! Ever since I read a story on huffpo about Perry and UBS and retired teachers I’ve been a little saddened. Even though nothing eventually came of it, just the idea was disturbing.
Well… Where do I start!
Lots of interesting concepts, rants and well… ideas, I suppose, are showing up here. If we all vote on the comments noted herein, do we see anything that resembles “The next Frontier” or “The next Big thing”? (mine not excepted)
Not really. Why?
Well, mostly because it’s way too early for America to need a New Frontier.
Everything is unfolding as it should. (I don’t mean that in the biblical sense either) Let’s lay out a bit of historical perspective here. Empires grow, are built and then collapse. End stop! America has had its run and its over.
When I was a young baby boomer in the early 50’s Japan was destroyed by the war. America rebuilt it for them and I remember the arrival of Japanese toys at Christmas time. Many of them never made it past Christmas dinner, because of quality issues. Over time, quality increased and along came better ‘things’. Next came Hong Kong, next Taiwan, then Malaysia. My business used to buy TI (Texas Instruments) calculators originally from the USA and over time, I think they showed up with a different country name on them every seven years, until now.
Then came the name ‘China’ on the back of them. Well… you get the picture. With each change in country, the USA lost jobs. You know, there are only so many MacDonalds in the country for Americans to work at.
And so the story unfolds… America sheds jobs and China (and Asia in general), grows very rapidly. Bare with me…
The usual wars that the USA used in the past to get themself out of a fix, by selling military gear to other countries, now needs to be sold to itself. Gee, after ten years, there’s not enough money in the kitty to pay for that. America is broke! Really broke! We all know when there is a borrower and a loaner, who the boss is. So, America now has new bosses – and they aren’t American.
The same thing is happening in Europe, where inefficient and older politicians and bureaucrats can’t change what they have messed up, because they don’t want to lose their pensions. You think they will vote themselves out of their retirement plan? Not going to happen. So they spend and spend. Dreaming that it’s only a matter of time before the economy ‘turns around’ and all will be well again. Who cares if they are spending borrowed money, propping up declining empires? Let’s do a bit of ‘kiting’, right?. Borrowing from Peter to pay Paul What a great plan! Not! Only one problem… Europe isn’t going to bounce back and neither is America.
Greece will default. That will cause a financial earthquake that will rock the world, and after them will come Italy, Spain, Portugal and Ireland etc. Not too long into the cycle, the United States will need to massively start printing money because their new masters will lose interest in putting good money after bad. That won’t make the new masters (China) happy, because it devalues their loans. The USA will enter into a depression along with Europe, of such massive proportions that food alone will be what most people would die for – and will. (literally)
So… it’s a little too soon to be chatting and musing about how America can ‘find their way’. China is developing so fast, that soon their own internal markets will be one of their biggest markets.
There will be circumstances where America can sell specialty items into that Chinese internal market at world price levels and be reasonably successful at doing it, because China will experience the desire for US brands like Apple, Hollywood, etc. It just won’t be enough to support the aging population of America.
Some of you reading this might already be planning to move to China to get a job. If not, there’s no time like the present. Like many older countries, there has been mass movements of peoples looking for work. (Ireland is a lame example, but not that lame) Americans need to go where the jobs are and stop whining about the change of economic winds. America is now the new servant to China. The new whipping boy. It’s hard for most Americans to stomach, but hey, it’s already here and upon us and nothing… nothing, can forstall that. It’s already written in history. People just can’t yet bring themselves to see it.
So, what’s the next frontier for America? That’s what you’ve all been waiting to read about in this trashy posting, right?
Well, it’s food and water. Do most Americans know that China is buying up as much food production, growing and distribution companies worldwide as they can? Clean water and bountiful food is the next thing for a world whose population is massively growing – and fast! Even the US itself is projecting a population of over 450 million people in short order. Don’t take food and water for granted.
China will not have enough American dollars to continue supporting the US ongoing in its decline and they will start to take US assets in trade for debt. If China doesn’t buy everything in America, they will take it as collateral agains their loans. The US government will probably consider selling the Statue of Liberty to the Chinese, just to raise money.
The point is, that economies ‘swing’ like pendulums. America’s swung to the upside after the war. Now it’s on the downswing. Only a fool would get in the way, until it passes the bottom of the curve – and then starts it’s upswing again. If you do get in the way… you-will-get-crushed!
So don’t worry, things will get bad, very bad, but it’s the natural evolution of things. It’s supposed to get bad. (It’s about history.)
In about 10 to 15 years from now, Bob C. will be able to dust off this column and reprint it, just about the time America will be ready for “The new Frontier”. China’s upward run will be nutralized by the fact that it will be an advanced nation by then – the new America. China will have around a 50 year run at it, and then it will be somebody else’s turn.
It’s fun to muse about America becoming great again and being a power economy again; about being innovative and creative and having the American people go back to work, but “it just aint gonna happen!”
(Food and water guys… that’s the next ‘New Frontier’) 😉
Maybe that is all true, but only if we care about the Chinese, and anyone else for that matter. Let’s prop each other up when in need, and screw the world. Globalism (business, social, etc.) is killing us because we are starting to believe that it is bad to be American. We are earthlings, right? How about group hug? No, how about a Get Off My Lawn! We can sustain ourselves; let the Chinese try to cash in the debt they own by force.
America first (if you are American). Not because we are better than everyone else, but because if we don’t take care of us we become slaves to those who can. Remember the last time you flew commercial? Put *your* oxygen mask on first, then your children (I’ll leave it up to you to decide which child goes first).
I’m sure their are countless historical parallels about which we have long since forgotten. Before we forge the next frontier, let’s all go back to history class.
Q: Is globalism the new frontier? (and does that make the developed-world the equivalent of the Native Americans?)
Don’t you remember when Japan was going to take over the world and be our new masters? hahaha
Now they are “a bug looking for a windshield” according to John Mauldin, and he makes some good and obvious points about the economic shape the currently find themselves in.
Also, there is an old saying about debt, though it is from back when our money was worth more so maybe mulitply everything by at least 10 or so:
“I owe you $100, you own me. I owe you $100,000, I own you.”
It just means that, when you have a lot “invested” in someone, you are very “vested” in thier success. Their success is your “success” at getting back any of that money they owe you.
We “own China” in this regard. They have worthless paper “promises to pay”. If we CAN’T pay, we WON’T. That is related to this old saying:
“You can’t get blood out of a turnip.”
Futhermore, if anyone could get blood out of a turnip it would be the chinese. Of course no one can, but they likely wouldn’t let a thing like reality stop them from trying. You’re right. They “grow” quite fast. Isn’t that measured in GDP? (lol, never mind on that one in this post) I would think all the “empty cities” they have built as part of their “growth” will eventually come home to roost. As they put more and more bad debt in more and more zombie shell orginazations at some point something will change.
So, they are about as broke as we are, they’re just way better at hiding it in their “command economy” that is as disguised to resemble “market economy” on superficial examination as they can make it. You see, most institutional investors are so sold on the incorrect assumptions of economists who can dazzle them with math that they don’t even bother to really look at what they invest in. If you invest in an “oil company” that is 85% owned by the chinese government, through proxy orginazations, and you EVER compare that directly to investing in, say Mobile, – you deserve what you WILL get if you hold that investment too long.
You see, we in america could build vast empty cities and call that “growth” if we wanted to, but only a severely socialist/comunist country would have the huburis required to think they can do something, anything at all, and it counts the same as doing what the people actually want and need to use.
Well, at least to the extent of building entire cities. Our government pays for research no one cares about, pays $24,000 to give people a $4500 incentive to buy their car in August vs November, creating a spike and extended plumet in sales forcing car dealers on the margin of existance to close and fire their workers, and to increase the scarcity of used cars on the market and thus their prices (documented results of the “cash for clunkers” program). But so far there is no governement agency pushing to build entire empty cities just to pad the national growth numbers and for all intents and purposes be a “jobs program”.
The illusion of success IS valuable, but China will not be able to keep it up forever. When the average invester sees through to what is behind the curtian, they are done. They can sell to themselves the same empty apartment buildings over and over again for a profit, but that will not save them. They need the rest of the world, more than the rest of the world needs them. That is a fact. And, so do we, so does Europe… so do we all.
Plus, you know they only have all those dollars because it is required for them to keep up their “mercantilist” policies. Mercantilism was shot down in the 1700s, but if they want to prop up our fiat currency with their self-defeating policies, I will not weep for them, that is for sure.
I will certianly not fear that poor “paper tiger”, either. I pray for their citizens, however. No one deserves what they are stuck with.
I am a contract engineer currently working for the past year at Fluke in Everett Washington. Fluke, along with Tektronix and many other well known “hi-tech” companies, were acquired by the Danaher corporation. There is much of what Bob and other talks about is in evidence here. Not much R and very little D here at Fluke and they don’t manufacture component PCBs anymore. The plant here does final assembly and test of components built in Asia.
The few resident design engineers here lament about an age gone by when invention meant creating something new and exciting. One group I’m close to is charged over the next couple of year to re-implement a highly profitable 25 year old product. The motivation is that the older product’s components are on end of product life. Avoiding obsolescence is a poor substitute for R&D.
I’m one of a very small group of 5 people that are working on something brand spanking new, and that is due to Fluke getting funding from NIST to build a new instrument for use in the smart power grid. Funding was made available on the condition that new hires would work on the product. Yes, I got a job due to a stimulus package, but don’t hold that against me.
In my own company, I’m pursuing designs of alternative computing with some rather startling results. We will be going for venture capital shortly and my partners and I are in the process of formulating business plans. Part of this is figuring out who we might want to work with as strategic partners at different stages of product development. For HW manufacture I might have considered Fluke before I got to know them. It is not outside the realm of possibility but I want to find someone with an interest in investing some of their own money in real R&D. There is a lot of IP remaining to be developed and not all by my company.
What has this got to do with new frontiers?
Outside of energy and space, it is very difficult to find something “great” one can point to as one of those “great frontiers”. I see the economic landscape as a collection of many small frontiers. I speak to my contemporaries from time to time of what I see as technology holes remaining to be filled. We still have a very long way to go before we have flying cars, personal robot attendants, and ubiquitous computing.
Finding the new frontiers is still the defining characteristic of the start-up company to boldly go were……you know. At least until they are acquired.
Get off your butt and start a company you High Tech Pioneer!!
I agree TOTALLY! That’s what i did!
Sorry to hear about Fluke. I knew Tektronix was not what it used to be, but Fluke was a leader in its field for so long, sad to hear they’re sliding into irrelevance by ditching R&D.
“We still have a very long way to go before we have flying cars”
Really? Have you checked out moller.com lately?
I envisage food and space ( land ) will be major problems in the foreseeable future. Cities, population and infrastructure are increasing all the time. Farming land and forests diminishing at a rapidly accelerated rate. The world’s supposable warming climate, changing our farming and natural water regions.
The web, good and bad has changed the way we live forever, the way we purchase goods, communicate, work, play, engage in relationships with others. The world has become a smaller place in just 20 years, overshadowing any human developments in the last 500 years. Mobile devices are now taking all these to a whole new level. The way we generate money is already changing.
We use up so much resource in our daily lives, this will need to be addressed in the future. More people will work from home or a central point. Without the need to travel to the office, also requiring less fuel, road and commercial space.
Energy creation I believe, is a short term problem. Mankind will live without fossil fuels in the future without a problem. Example, the electric vehicle, ( whatever guise ), will go further and quicker in the not too distant future. Look at the advancements the automobile made in 70 years. Onboard systems such as ABS, GPS, Vehicle Stability etc; standard equipment in automobiles these days where undreamt of 90 years ago…maybe even 25 years ago.
We are only just starting to seriously develop Nuclear, Hydrogen, Solar and Battery powered machines.
We are say 20 years into a 90 year cycle such as my example, the automobile.
Think about it, our power generating devices are as sophisticated as a 1920’s car.
Now I’m a little freaked out — and curious. The guest on The Daily Show on Oct 3 was Thomas Friedman and he talked with host John Stewart about exactly this topic. Coincidence?
The next frontier in job creation? For humans, there isn’t one.
For robotic devices and servers running artificial intelligence applications, on the other hand, the future is rosy indeed.
For example, Walmart is one of our country’s largest employers, with a workforce of 1.2 million people. Most of them work at menial jobs, and I’d guess that about 100,000 work in various white collar capacities.
In the next five years, it will be possible to run a completely automated Walmart or Sam’s Club; the “intellience” need
Effing iPad keyboard…
Anyway, automated systems will be all you need for both ordering new materials, and stocking shelves. Once Walmart does it, every big box store will have to follow suit.
Nano.
Ditto on the nano (dittonano or nanoditto or nanonano).
With all the sub-microscopic and quantum stuff happening right now it seems inevitable that we will create unbelievable stuff and possibly (probably) chaos with this technology.
I think robotics are the next frontier. Robotics will not make jobs overall. It will probably hurt jobs. But that is the type of thing progress and the next frontier usually does.
I would say waste is the final frontier. If you look at the world economy as an ecology, it is very good at consuming, but very poor at handling the waste. In the real ecology, one organism’s waste is another’s feast. We need the technologies that will truly make it easy to reuse practically everything we discard.
Why isn’t everything tagged with easy-scanned markers that say how to recycle them. I’m not talking about printed labels, I am talking nano-tags within the materials that can be read by sorting machines. Heck, I am not really sure how to do it, but we are currently chucking way too many preprocessed materials away, just to go and dig and chop some more. We need ways of reusing everything. Cheap ways, that is.
I think it is going to be manufacturing.
Walker makes exhaust systems in the USA and in China. In China most work in done by hand. In the USA it is done by machine. The US division usually meets or beats profit goals and makes a far better product. The Chinese do have issues with Quality.
China does make a lot of world class product. Engine parts out of China can actually come in perfect. I mean right on the middle of the spec within .0001 of an inch. The same part in USA is still a little more expensive.
Audi is going to build a car factory in the USA. The USA is currently the cheapest place in the world to build cars. Why? We build a car today with a lot less labor than used 15 years ago. (Yes, we have to thank the unions for eliminating their own jobs). We make more Steel in the USA today than in World War Two with less than ten percent of the people we used then. Plus we have the screw ups in Washington DC that have assured the Americans over time the Dollar will sink 10 to 14 percent every year. This has not happened yet but it is starting. Notice how things go up in price these days. Ten dollar Cashews are now Fifteen Dollars in lass than a year. Gasoline is now 30 percent higher in the past couple of years. You can still do it but it is really really hard to buy a half gallon of Ice Cream any more. You still pay the half gallon price for a lot less Ice Cream. This is real inflation no matter what the government says.
If we can sort of keep our act together and allow immigration of smart young people the USA will be the highest quality lowest cost producer of almost everything again. The USA still should be the place to come to make money and a lot of it based on world standards. This will probably get to the point where the Chinese will be very unhappy about this.
The next Frontier **should be** Creative Thinking.
1. It will need a national-level champion (read Kennedy “..man on the moon”)
2. The schools will need to incorporate and emphasize creative thinking similar to science education after Sputnik.
3. It needs a popular national-level TV show (“I became an engineer because of YOU, Scottie!”)
4. Find and enhance the “Creativity Zones” that already exist but are hidden in the nooks of our urban areas. Read “Where Good Ideas Come From” by Steven Johnson.
Then we need to support the “insurgency thinking” you attributed to Google 2 columns back. There needs to be public support for “wildly inventing” in every direction.
We will have so many frontiers from which to choose….
I think it’s hard, if not impossible, to really say.
We’re exploring a multitude of possible areas of advancement – space flight, computer advancements, divining the tiniest fundamentals of our universe through physics studies, and testing the potential for physiological advancements with biologically interfacing circuits and various advancements in genetic engineering. Independence in the truest sense of the word, through renewable resources and wider adoption of recycling initiatives
And that’s just the tip.
If one were to be a pessimist, it would be a form of wilderness again – the conquering of our neighbors and their lands and resources. The quest to be the king of the hill, if not the only one on the hill.
Domination, I guess. Or unification.
If consumerism and globalization is coming to a head, a culmination, then (like every frontier you mentioned) inevitably, our next frontier will be a logical leap from there. And I guess I’m just too young or inexperienced to be able to guess what else that could be.
Actually, now that I think about, there’s the obvious road we’ve been traveling, which is the consistent and ever-increasing desire to automate and computerize and abstract away all of the processes and jobs that we can.
Inevitably, that leaves us with a bunch of workless people, a lot of spare time, and a lot of scientific puzzles and provisions.
Bingo. And all of those workless will be dirt poor, the working will be barely eating and living at their jobs, and those at the top will have it all but will feel they did it all themselves, and shouldn’t be taxed because of this. I think you’ve got it.
Funny, that’s somewhat how I describe my work as a programmer. Fewer and fewer are entrusted to write the core code, leaving those further downstream to inherit from the base and then provide only necessary customization on a per client basis; customization from which, of course, we try to steer the client. Programming as the majority job is replaced by parameter table set up. A fair amount of that is automated.
My joke has long been that one day all of our jobs will be so specialized that we will only need a single key on our keyboard, and even then we won’t have to know why or when to push it – it will light up when it needs pushing. This only puts us one step from self-pushing buttons, making the only required job “button maintenance.”
The next frontier could be the development of Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors:
https://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2010-08/thorium-reactors-could-wean-world-oil-just-five-years
https://www.forbes.com/sites/williampentland/2011/09/11/is-thorium-the-biggest-energy-breakthrough-since-fire-possibly/
https://www.thoriumenergyalliance.com
+1
Well, on the point about unions…they once served a purpose. Now all they do is drive up cost, and take workers money in most locations through required dues regardless of whether the worker wants to be in the union – they’re required to be because a majority at some point decided a union was needed, and now the minority that still want it is enough of a mafia influencer to keep it there despite the majority that may not want it at all, but who (again) are forced into the various aspects of the union life – dues, strikes, etc.
Many good points by many commenters. The next frontier for Americans will be : Being the minority. Traditional power base White, European descended males will lose their position or be heavily diluted. Americans will lose our position at the head of the line globally. Our frontier will be dealing with that without tearing ourselves or anyone else apart.
We MAY find a newer frontier (robotics, waste processing, creating healthy plentiful food (non GMO), interplanetary travel) to keep us from sliding down the demographic curve, but it’ll be an uphill battle.
Molecular Biochemistry.
For finding the cause and cure for degenerative disease.
This idea may be unfamiliar, but it’s not my own, original idea. The next frontier, out of necessity, is conscious evolution. We don’t have much time to evolve the ability to solve the crises that the previous frontier conquests have left behind.
First step would be to stop using the DOW average as a measurement of success.
It’s very hard to explore the next frontier when we are still paying the price for the earlier frontiers economically, environmentally, and socially. People forget about total cost and think if we can find the next bubble we can operate forever like Bernie Madoff. There is no free lunch.
As for something concrete, say Space, the 2 major challenges are energy cost and biology. Scientists have concluded humans as we are now cannot survive long or procreate in microgravity. So before we conquer space we must conquer a whole host of challenges that will help us live in that environment. Perhaps that paves the way for new frontiers.
Politically and financially we need new frontiers too. The current system, like an aging OS, needs an upgrade. People argue or different sides on tax, government, etc., as if tweaking a few variables within a closed system would actually improve the underlying CPU, memory, and file system. Nothing said here could have or will stop the next housing and credit market meltdown.
Of course on our way to technology solutions there’s always the 50-50 chance of Skynet or some other self destruction and boom – only a small percentage of humans survive on the whole earth as a new big frontier again, and humanity will go through the boom and bust cycles of growth again.
1. Bring back the Glass/Steagall Act and repeal Gramm/Leach/Bliley Act
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OvnO_SH-4WU&feature=related
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/11/glass-steagall-act-the-se_n_201557.html
2. Regulate Derivatives and repeal the commodity futures modernization act
http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2009/04/01/read-the-bill-the-commodity-futures-modernization-act/
3. Make it ilegal for any legislature to have investments in funds that would profit if the U.S. suffered a default.
https://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/rick-newman/2011/07/22/how-elites-could-profit-from-a-us-debt-crisis
4. Publicly fund all elections at the national level to address the problem of money and politics.
5. Isolate and address the real problem.
http://robertreich.org/post/11033625495
Bob, as you said, new frontiers = free land.
America’s available space is the home. We leave home and drive an hour to work on a computer, work that we could do at home. American companies need to start laying off their buildings instead of their employees, relocate to the computer, phone, network we already have. By doing so they will get the free land that is the hallmark of new frontiers. They will have a new kind of cost structure that can’t be readily reproduced in the developing world with a better workforce.
There are frontiers everywhere. There always have been, there always will be. Its pretty easy to make the case that what is currently known is a tiny fraction of what is knowable. We are a small, argumentative species on a backwater planet in a backwater galaxy. We’ve had leg races, we’ve had arms races, why don’t we try for a truly humane race?
I sincerely hope that the next frontier isn’t Exploitation. One can build a strong case that those who occupy the upper financial strata have decided to “get theirs” now while there is still something to get. The signs of this are evidenced by the recent/current economic unpleasantness and the “class warfare” clouds just beginning to appear. These folks don’t seem to be concerned at all with the longer term future; the added wealth will ensure their future.
2012 is going to be interesting.
Italian Restaurants?
They’re good
In my book power is still the most likely new frontier, despite the entrenched opposition. There’s been enough traction amongst solar and wind manufacturers that they will continue to drive prices down. We can probably thank the Germans and other Europeans for that but no sense not taking advantage of it. Simultaneously, the price of extracting traditional sources of energy goes up so that’s another big factor. At the very least solar pricing is coming down fast enough that the ‘grassroots’ can really work. People can afford their own solar or at least some fancy solar financing arrangement. If the government withdraws subsidies due to industry pressure, I think it momentum is far enough now that it only delays the inevitable as the big 3 solar manufacturers aren’t done dropping costs yet.
Also, don’t forget the ugly word conservation. Industries related to that are growing as well. Another ‘grassroots’ opportunity. People have the ability to save money for no real pain and I think they are ready to care about it as simply a way to save money in hard times when money is tight.
The real question is will this turn into a big frontier for the US or will we turn our back on it and let the Europeans and Asians take most of it as their frontier. Sadly, it does look questionable, but it could happen and is one of the few frontiers out there.
The last time we drove back from Yellowstone we saw quite a few wind breaker fences set up along the highway. They already know the direction of the wind, instead of just putting up fences, why not put up windmills, or have mini windmills as a part of the whole fence system with a collection/transmission or energy storage unit every mile or so?
I’m still waiting for thin film solar film to be available for homeowners to put on their windows. And think of the energy savings if thin film solar film were put on the windows of skyscrapers. But nothing gets done.
I don’t know if any “New Frontier” is viable if we can’t get past SMS (Stupid, Mean and Selfish). Even those with half a brain I speak with universally recognize and acknowledge SMS or whatever you may call it. I honestly cannot ever remember our society being so corrupt, so violent, so depraved. Even advertising has turned to violence to get us to pay attention. That would have been advertising suicide only a couple of decades ago.
To look at previous societies that evolved to the state we seem to be in, catastrophe resulted; either war, depression or dissolution of that society. We can point to Easter Island, the Fall of the Roman Empire, Nazi Germany, etc. There clearly is a tipping point in great societies where common sense no longer counts in the zeitgeist, even in the face of peril.
In the 1950’s we were paying for The Great Depression AND WWII AND the Korean War and still it was arguably one of the best periods in our history. To say America can’t handle a dept situation is pretty insulting. Of course we were the only empire left standing after WWII but that’s a detail that shouldn’t cloud the greater issue. Previous cooler and thoughtful minds got us to number 1. SMS squandered that. America’s current political and business policy is “Lie, Cheat and Steel”. If we can’t do it through LCS, we just don’t do it. We actually have the Next Frontier(s) on a silver platter right in front of us, but SMS and LCS will prevent us moving forward.
There are folks that want to return America to a time before that evil Income Tax.
I’ve always wondered how America got along before income tax. I watched the first night of Ken Burn’s Prohibition. Haven’t seen 2 & 3 so don’t spoil it. The two big things I took away were that before income tax, American government was seventy percent financed by alcohol. Our government had a vested interest in national inebriation. The age of consent was 10. I thought I heard it wrong, I had to play it back. Any idiot who thinks we need to go back to THOSE good old days needs a good spanking.
Here’s the thing about tax or the lack of it. In any machine, skimming off all the lubricant (money) will result in failure of the mechanism. When the lubricant is extracted and held apart from the machine by any entity, well you get the point. SMS at work.
Even with the turbulent 60’s America was a great and civil nation. A certain level of Lie, Cheat, and Steel has always been with us but Stupid, Mean, and Selfish is a cancer that has become overwhelming. It’s very painful to see what has happened to our country. It’s hard to point to any single thing at fault but probably the political contribution process is at the focal point. We’ve got to acknowledge and deal with this LCS SMS cancer before we can deal with any more frontiers; they would be frontiers spoiled.
It depends on the type of lubricant. Try putting grease in your crankcase instead of oil.
Many economists engage in magical thinking when it comes to the economic future of the United States, i.e., because good things have happened in the past, they will continue to do happen in the future.
But we are now at a point where we have multiple forces putting us in a vise: an enormous population (312 million, 3rd largest in the world) that is growing rapidly; technology that allows jobs to be moved around like raw materials, in a world with way too many desperate people; the continued rapid advance of automation to eliminate jobs; the end of cheap oil and gas; and increasing dislocation and costs coming in the decades ahead due to global warming.
At the same time our politicians and many citizens are in denial, going out of our way to invent problems as a distraction from facing the real problems. We’ve been lucky at key points in the past to have strong leaders emerge when we were at critical points: Washington, Lincoln, and Roosevelt. In the last decade instead of such a leader, we’ve had Bush and Obama, coupled to a Congress that is almost beyond dysfunctional.
The future does not look good.
The next frontier is social justice. Without it, everything else we’ve built will fail. With it, we’ll leap forward with great abandon, standing on the shoulders of the giants who have come before us.
Water, as mentioned above, is the great planet-wide issue of the coming years. There is a growing pressure on a diminishing resource. Could someone make the great dust bowls of the world productive by creating a simpler or more scalable desalination process?
For manufacturing, the big change approaching is additive manufacturing (or 3D printing). We don’t yet have the technology of Clifford Simak’s Carbon Copy machine, but we could be looking at a future where anyone can create almost anything they want and share the design. See Peter Day’s podcasts for the 6th and 13th of August https://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/worldbiz/all
Total revolution of education, worldwide. Free. Easily available. Companies have to provide time for every worker to study a topic up to 20% of their work time. Computer/Internet based. Eliminate general degrees.
The rest follows from this (space exploration, nano tech, food crisis averted, more stable democracies and less wars and so on…)
Space is a new frontier. The slow steady road to space will take an elevator to a Dark Sky Station and then a slow acceleration from there via inflated VASIMIR craft to orbit. If you need to get there faster a fully reusable VTVL Falcon 9 or New Shepard will get you there pretty cheap. Both people and heavy equipment can make the trip.
“Up” is a new frontier. The future of mankind is density and urbanization. Buildings will get taller and more self-sufficient. They’ll be built in an automated manner like the Broad Group is doing in China today. Don’t worry about traffic. Self-driving cars and personal rapid transit will get you there.
Recycling is not a frontier. It’s a cost. But one we will have to pay.
Biotech and computer-tech are not frontiers because only the top third of the bell curve can really participate at those companies. A frontier must have a role for average people. Mostly programmers destroy more jobs than they create, unlike Henry Ford. Some tech companies (like Google) create new capability, but most of them (like EBay) just do something we’ve always done more efficiently.
Lifespan is a new frontier. If a frontier is “found wealth”, what will people do with decades 8 though 14 of their lives? Baby boomers will be back on the job by 2030.
Thorium or fusion could be new frontiers. If they merely replace oil and gas, then not. But if they finally deliver on Densely packed energy “too cheap to meter” that will be a brand new world.
I have been a member of 2 unions and my perspective is that employees vote in a union because they are disgusted with pointy haired managers. They then find that union management gets in bed with the pointy haired managers and works with them to screw the customers and share holders. The pointy haired (GM, PanAm) managers then say, “What can we do? It’s the unions.” The UAW gave Detroit management an excuse to be losers. Yes, I know all about NUMI. Those who don’t should listen to the This American Life show on the topic.
We have a skilled labor shortage. As you often point out, 50% of IT projects fail due to lack of skilled labor and management necessary to make them happen. We throw away talent in poor urban and rural neighborhoods with bottom of the barrel schools, management, and teachers. For a solution, start at Kahn academy. We have also lost the ability to train skilled craftsmen. Let’s do that too.
One of the next major frontiers will be creating new media experiences for mobile devices. Steve Jobs, the most innovative businessman of our time, created the most valuable technology company through the seamless integration of technology, entertainment and communications. Yet, the majority of his wealth came from selling Pixar to Disney for $7.4 billion. Pixar developed a new media experience, the computer animated feature film. There will be a great deal of wealth generated in the coming years from creating new media experiences for mobile devices.
The Final Frontier Pt 1
Look READ the “Hitch hikers guide to the Galaxy” not as fiction but as reality!
1 There is no where to go except Antarctica and space.
2 I’ve argued that the Arab spring is just a “mouse plague syndrome”.
You have a “mouse plague syndrome” also, but USA has drugged their citizens to stupor by myths, ideals, bull and drugs.
3 Too many indians and the chiefs take everything!
In Bush43’s tenure 50%+ of USA GDP was made by Las Vegas East — Wall St.
Nothing for the indians except small pox, well diseases, drugs, debt, and removal from their lands.
You see a USA pattern here yet!
4 I’ll repeat my statement — ad nausium till you remember it — that Henry Ford gave his workers a pay rise, against his capitalist friends advice, because he saw that his business would PROSPER when the workers bought the products they made.
5 When Wall St sells only bull$h!t you know that it goes down the can and helps no one else. Look at Thailand 1998. Look at USA 2008. Look at Greece 2011! EVERYONE OF THOSE WAS ADVISED BY Goodman Sachs!
You see a Goodman Sachs pattern here yet!
6 YOU will know that USA has turned around when Chinese companies makes iPhones in USA in dormitory factories providing food, health, shelter and by extension self-actualization for their workers — something many USA companies fail to do!
7 Food, health, shelter and by extension self-actualization* is all the mice WANT as well!
* If you believe Maslow’s theory only applies to humans then you expect 72 virgins in the after life!
ekologichna ocenka…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive » The Final Frontier – Cringely on technology[…]…
smith magenis…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive » The Final Frontier – Cringely on technology[…]…
Mafia 2 Trainer…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive » The Final Frontier – Cringely on technology[…]…
Thanks for another informative site. Where else may I get that type of info written in such an ideal way? I have a venture that I’m just now working on, and I have been at the glance out for such info.
alpinestars motorcycle boots…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive » The Final Frontier – Cringely on technology[…]…
Audi A3…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive » The Final Frontier – Cringely on technology[…]…
matrix glitcher 360,360 glitcher…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive » The Final Frontier – Cringely on technology[…]…
From time to time, beats by dre find that even with no beats by dre studio router, they’re still picking up a wireless signal. that is the price we could accept about louis items, their wireless alerts may be broadcasting via your louis vuitton men bags space. An answer here might be ask the neighbor to show off the facility to their router before they go to mattress, to your monster beats by dre studio and theirs. the dr dre headphone features simple silver trim and closely resembles the classic handset style beats by dre solo is known for and for those who crave a little louis vuitton shoulder bags and more colour. As a common rule, limit cell cheap beats by dre phone usage, particularly lengthy calls.Driving for hours can really be boring so having some louis vuitton denim entertainment could really help to break the louis vuitton monogram handbags monotony. Think movies or music or crayons and drawing pads, even books!
oto cu gia re…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive The Final Frontier – I, Cringely – Cringely on technology[…]…
Technology has evolved alots during the past years! I’ve compiled a blog of information about the evolution of Computers…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive The Final Frontier – Cringely on technology[…]…
vietnam oto…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive The Final Frontier – I, Cringely – Cringely on technology[…]…
geri chair…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive The Final Frontier – I, Cringely – Cringely on technology[…]…
Rechargeable iphone 4 case…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive The Final Frontier – I, Cringely – Cringely on technology[…]…
I was wondering if you ever considered changing the structure
of your blog? Its very well written; I love what youve got
to say. But maybe you could a little more in the way of
content so people could connect with it better. Youve got an awful lot of text for only having one or
2 images. Maybe you could space it out better?