57 replies to this topic

[Zachemc2]

I know that some of you will want to move this to the fictional future section. Please remember that these predictions assume the following:

• The budget will be balanced through a constitutional amendment or congress
  
• The 2020s will see an economic boom through holographic technologies
  
• Taxes are reduced to a more sustainable rate
  
• The late 2040s will see another economic boom through the Robot Age

Okay? Let's begin. The US GDP is predicted to be $15.227 trillion this year. I'm predicting it will grow by 3.3% averaged until 2020, giving us a 2020 GDP of $20.394 trillion. As seen above, the 2020s will bring an economic boom - larger than the 1940s one. My prediction is 10.6% (yes, I know, but remember that the Great Recession was very horrible), which will bring us to a 2030 GDP of $55.855 trillion. The 2030s will see GDP growth of 4.2%, an extra one percent due to technology, bringing us to a 2040 total of $84.284 trillion. The 2040s will see the robot age, so GDP growth of 4.8%. This brings us to a 2050 GDP of....
$134,697,000,000,000.

[Unrequited Lust]

lol you can't just pull numbers out of your ass and call it mathematical reasoning.

Where do you get the number 3.3%, 10.6%, or 4.2%? Maybe you can revolutionize economics with your new method of generating numbers based solely on intuition.

[Zachemc2]

It's a prediction. I can't go into the future to see what the actual GDP growth rates are so I have to "pull numbers out of my ass".

[Unrequited Lust]

It's a prediction. I can't go into the future to see what the actual GDP growth rates are so I have to "pull numbers out of my ass".

No economist pulls numbers out of their ass. They look at graphs describing the past trend of what number they want to predict, they do regression analysis, and if r^2 is high enough, they extrapolate.

[Zachemc2]

It's a prediction. I can't go into the future to see what the actual GDP growth rates are so I have to "pull numbers out of my ass".

No economist pulls numbers out of their ass. They look at graphs describing the past trend of what number they want to predict, they do regression analysis, and if r^2 is high enough, they extrapolate.

How can any economist make a good prediction of GDP growth 39 years from now? Predicting even 5 years into the future seems to get a little "fuzzy".

[Unrequited Lust]

It's a prediction. I can't go into the future to see what the actual GDP growth rates are so I have to "pull numbers out of my ass".

No economist pulls numbers out of their ass. They look at graphs describing the past trend of what number they want to predict, they do regression analysis, and if r^2 is high enough, they extrapolate.

How can any economist make a good prediction of GDP growth 39 years from now? Predicting even 5 years into the future seems to get a little "fuzzy".

Hence the r^2. Study regression analysis.

[Zachemc2]

Even so, I'm not completely pulling numbers out of my ass. The 2020s I predict an economic boom, so GDP growth will be really high. In the 2030s, the holographic bubble bursts, so GDP growth will be lower. In the 2040s, the robot age gives a boost to GDP growth.

[Unrequited Lust]

Even so, I'm not completely pulling numbers out of my ass. The 2020s I predict an economic boom, so GDP growth will be really high. In the 2030s, the holographic bubble bursts, so GDP growth will be lower. In the 2040s, the robot age gives a boost to GDP growth.

You don't know if there will be an economic boom in the 2020's and you don't know if there will be a 2040's "robot age."

Even more so, you don't know if there will be a holographic bubble. I don't even know what that means. People will invest in holograms only to have the returns match their expectations? What the hell are you on?

You can't base your GDP growth predictions off of numbers you pull out of your ass based on highly improbably hypothetical events.

[Zachemc2]

39 years ago people didn't know about the dot-com bubble or the Great Recession.

[Unrequited Lust]

39 years ago people didn't know about the dot-com bubble or the Great Recession.

No, you're shifting the burden of proof. The burden of proof is on you to show that hologram technology will exist, people will invest in hologram technology, and even more so to show that there won't be sufficient profit returns.

The fact that 40 years ago people didn't know about the dot-com bubble or of the 2007 financial crisis is completely irrelevant. Their ignorance is not proof of your assertions. This is such a large argument from ignorance that I'm surprised your common sense didn't pick up on it.

If I were to tell you that in 20 years millions of people will spend thousands of dollars in order to buy a sex tape of Rush Limbaugh and Donald Trump and my proof of this was "20 years ago people didn't know Halo: Reach was going to be such a big hit," would you then find this to be a logical argument? Would you then believe my assertion?

[Roh234]

I know that some of you will want to move this to the fictional future section. Please remember that these predictions assume the following:

• The budget will be balanced through a constitutional amendment or congress
  
• The 2020s will see an economic boom through holographic technologies
  
• Taxes are reduced to a more sustainable rate
  
• The late 2040s will see another economic boom through the Robot Age

Okay? Let's begin. The US GDP is predicted to be $15.227 trillion this year. I'm predicting it will grow by 3.3% averaged until 2020, giving us a 2020 GDP of $20.394 trillion. As seen above, the 2020s will bring an economic boom - larger than the 1940s one. My prediction is 10.6% (yes, I know, but remember that the Great Recession was very horrible), which will bring us to a 2030 GDP of $55.855 trillion. The 2030s will see GDP growth of 4.2%, an extra one percent due to technology, bringing us to a 2040 total of $84.284 trillion. The 2040s will see the robot age, so GDP growth of 4.8%. This brings us to a 2050 GDP of....

$134,697,000,000,000.

-What makes you think congress would EVER pass a balanced budget amendment with Neo-cons, progressives, and UN cronies with corporate lobby.
-What makes you think holograms would be in every aspects of our lives?
-Good luck taking up taxes with the spend-n-taxers
- What make you think that we are going to get artifical intelligence that will revolutionize our life.

We should do it the good old fashioned way. Base growth on current events not future predictions!

[Zachemc2]

39 years ago people didn't know about the dot-com bubble or the Great Recession.

No, you're shifting the burden of proof. The burden of proof is on you to show that hologram technology will exist, people will invest in hologram technology, and even more so to show that there won't be sufficient profit returns.

The fact that 40 years ago people didn't know about the dot-com bubble or of the 2007 financial crisis is completely irrelevant. Their ignorance is not proof of your assertions. This is such a large argument from ignorance that I'm surprised your common sense didn't pick up on it.

If I were to tell you that in 20 years millions of people will spend thousands of dollars in order to buy a sex tape of Rush Limbaugh and Donald Trump and my proof of this was "20 years ago people didn't know Halo: Reach was going to be such a big hit," would you then find this to be a logical argument? Would you then believe my assertion?

I'm saying that when predicting this far into the future, anything can happen with growth like this.

[wjfox]

What if economic growth is no longer possible?

[truthiness]

Then we'll still have a GDP of $134 trillion, on account of the hyper-inflation, but you'll be able to buy approximately one shit sandwich with it.

[Zachemc2]

What if economic growth is no longer possible?

The video attributes a future of no economic growth to no fossil fuels. The truth is we do have fossil fuels left - and lots of it. By the time it does actually run out, no one will care because pretty much all energy resources will be renewable.

[Nick1984]

No they won't, they didn't learn in the late 70s and they're not learning now.

[Zachemc2]

No they won't, they didn't learn in the late 70s and they're not learning now.

There wasn't much development in renewable energy in the 70s. Now it's booming.

[Nick1984]

Wouldn't say booming, apart from some subsidized production and the odd vanity project (see UK offshore) it's pretty much non-existent compared to where it should be at this stage.

[Zachemc2]

Wouldn't say booming, apart from some subsidized production and the odd vanity project (see UK offshore) it's pretty much non-existent compared to where it should be at this stage.

It is much more prominent than in the 1970s. I think that by 2060 most people will have electric cars.

[Nick1984]

Edit: Just wondering, how will holographic technologies save the economy?