Has things gotten better or worse in this world after 2000? (Bush, 9/11)

[wclac]

Now I know I'm going to get some haters on here who's going to think that I'm trolling, but this is a serious topic. And don't think that I'm complaining either.

After 2000, has things gotten better for the world, or has it turn for the worse? Let me point of some good facts: more diversity, somewhat a decrease of racism, and more video games... That's all I can think of that's good, can somebody help me out?.

To me, what has gotten worse is high gas prices, high crime, more gang violence, an awful president, lack of education for a majority of the younger generation, teen pregnancy is on the rise, and a war's going on (I think).

Does anyone think things have gotten better or worse for this world after the year 2000? Do you have any opinions on what this world would be like in th enext 20 years?

[NewToCA]

I'd vote mixed, some stuff better some stuff worse.

I think the human genome stuff is rather incredible:

Findings Challenge Basic Views on Human Genome | Science Blog

Also, City-Data didn't exist in 2000.

Decent Supreme Court ruling on 2nd amendment.

[wclac]

Originally Posted by NewToCA

I'd vote mixed, some stuff better some stuff worse.

I think the human genome stuff is rather incredible:

Findings Challenge Basic Views on Human Genome | Science Blog

Also, City-Data didn't exist in 2000.

I forgot to add that after 2000, more free internet access.

[NewToCA]

All of the improvements via Google...

[SocialDem]

Originally Posted by LAFan

Now I know I'm going to get some haters on here who's going to think that I'm trolling, but this is a serious topic. And don't think that I'm complaining either.

After 2000, has things gotten better for the world, or has it turn for the worse? Let me point of some good facts: more diversity, somewhat a decrease of racism, and more video games... That's all I can think of that's good, can somebody help me out?.

To me, what has gotten worse is high gas prices, high crime, more gang violence, an awful president, lack of education for a majority of the younger generation, teen pregnancy is on the rise, and a war's going on (I think).

Does anyone think things have gotten better or worse for this world after the year 2000? Do you have any opinions on what this world would be like in th enext 20 years?

You offer a false choice; given the complexity of the world it's impossible to say if it is 'better' or 'worse.' More likely it's a mix of both. Also, you are asking if things are better for the world as a whole, but your examplesof things that are better and worse seem awfully USA-specific. You say it's good that the world has gotten more 'diverse' but how does the world as a whole get more diverse? You also list 'more videogames' as a positive; how does that benefit the world? Certainly, I don't have anything against videogames (I've been known to play them myself) but to consider them as having a major moral impact on the planet is a bit ridiculous.

Now, to answer your question... In terms of things that have gotten better, the overall quality of life experienced by the average citizen of the world has improved. There are fewer people living in absolute poverty (taking the UN definition, a person living on less than a dollar a day) and extreme poverty (less than two dollars a day) and there are fewer people suffering from malnutrition globally today than were suffering from these in 2000. Unfortunately, 2 billion people still live in absolute or extreme poverty and approximately 900 million suffer from malnutrition. Globalization has continued since 2000, for better and for worse. It does bring more goods, better healthcare, better communication, better transportation, etc. to billions, but it also degrades local culture, further weakens the poorest in society and widens the gap between the wealthiest and the poorest. Overall, violent conflicts are somewhat on the decline, which is certainly good, but the existing conflicts are terrible. Genocide has occured in the Sudan, war continues in the Congo, Somalia remains a failed state, terrorism has grown as an important problem, Russia has begun to rise in power (which may or may not be bad)... North Korea has tested nuclear weapons, Iraq has spiralled into an unfixable disaster... Nuclear proliferation was dealt a terrible blow by the discovery of the AQ Khan network... All in all, it's hard to say if the world is worse or better off. Substantial improvements have been made in some areas while other areas have seen worsening trends...

[wclac]

Originally Posted by SocialDem

You offer a false choice; given the complexity of the world it's impossible to say if it is 'better' or 'worse.' More likely it's a mix of both. Also, you are asking if things are better for the world as a whole, but your examplesof things that are better and worse seem awfully USA-specific. You say it's good that the world has gotten more 'diverse' but how does the world as a whole get more diverse? You also list 'more videogames' as a positive; how does that benefit the world? Certainly, I don't have anything against videogames (I've been known to play them myself) but to consider them as having a major moral impact on the planet is a bit ridiculous.

Now, to answer your question... In terms of things that have gotten better, the overall quality of life experienced by the average citizen of the world has improved. There are fewer people living in absolute poverty (taking the UN definition, a person living on less than a dollar a day) and extreme poverty (less than two dollars a day) and there are fewer people suffering from malnutrition globally today than were suffering from these in 2000. Unfortunately, 2 billion people still live in absolute or extreme poverty and approximately 900 million suffer from malnutrition. Globalization has continued since 2000, for better and for worse. It does bring more goods, better healthcare, better communication, better transportation, etc. to billions, but it also degrades local culture, further weakens the poorest in society and widens the gap between the wealthiest and the poorest. Overall, violent conflicts are somewhat on the decline, which is certainly good, but the existing conflicts are terrible. Genocide has occured in the Sudan, war continues in the Congo, Somalia remains a failed state, terrorism has grown as an important problem, Russia has begun to rise in power (which may or may not be bad)... North Korea has tested nuclear weapons, Iraq has spiralled into an unfixable disaster... Nuclear proliferation was dealt a terrible blow by the discovery of the AQ Khan network... All in all, it's hard to say if the world is worse or better off. Substantial improvements have been made in some areas while other areas have seen worsening trends...

Not to mention that, and I forgot to add, gentrication is flooding in some parts of the world, esp. in southwestern USA. As an American, I can honestly say that the USA is becoming the most hated by other countries.

And whats wrong with video games? It helps bring an impact on people's lives and can boost up people's self-esteem and joy.

[SocialDem]

Originally Posted by LAFan

Not to mention that, and I forgot to add, gentrication is flooding in some parts of the world, esp. in southwestern USA. As an American, I can honestly say that the USA is becoming the most hated by other countries.

And whats wrong with video games? It helps bring an impact on people's lives and can boost up people's self-esteem and joy.

Again, and not to berate you on the subject, but you are being very USA-specific for a globally oriented question by saying 'gentrification' is bad and then using the southwest USA as an example. What, precisely, do you mean by gentrification, how does it effect other countries and what are it's impacts?

As for the US being hated by other countries, in some ways that is true. The opinion had about they USA by average citizens in many countries has drastically declined since the invasion of Iraq, and not for illegitimate reasons. Yet, to say we are the 'most hated' is certainly an exaggeration (and, perhaps, not all that meaningful). Fortunately, much of the US' declining reputation can be attributed to the Bush Administration which only has a few months left in office. A new president could do a great deal to repair damage that has been done to the US. And I'm also curious as to your reasoning for considering the declining reputation of USA to be a majorly bad thing for the world as a whole? Certainly, it's bad for the USA itself, but it's not necessarily a horrible thing (nor a good thing) for the globe as a whole.

As for the whole videogames thing, I'm not trying to disparage them at all, I'm simply saying it's rather silly to include videogames with declining absolute poverty and malnourishment as one of the great things to happen to the world in the last eight years. Sure, videogames are fun but in the grander scheme of things they are rather insignificant. Improvements in education and healthcare, improvements in global distribution networks, developments in trade law and accomplishments in conflict management, discoveries in science and new and more affordable alternative energy sources are all important benefits for global society. Videogames are nowhere near the same level as these improvements. Furthermore, videogames are still only available to a very, very small subset of the world population. 6 billion or so of the world's population probably couldn't care less about new videogames, let alone afford something like the PS3. A single videogame for the XBox 360 or PS3 costs more than the average family makes in a month in many countries!

[wclac]

Originally Posted by SocialDem

Again, and not to berate you on the subject, but you are being very USA-specific for a globally oriented question by saying 'gentrification' is bad and then using the southwest USA as an example. What, precisely, do you mean by gentrification, how does it effect other countries and what are it's impacts?

As for the US being hated by other countries, in some ways that is true. The opinion had about they USA by average citizens in many countries has drastically declined since the invasion of Iraq, and not for illegitimate reasons. Yet, to say we are the 'most hated' is certainly an exaggeration (and, perhaps, not all that meaningful). Fortunately, much of the US' declining reputation can be attributed to the Bush Administration which only has a few months left in office. A new president could do a great deal to repair damage that has been done to the US. And I'm also curious as to your reasoning for considering the declining reputation of USA to be a majorly bad thing for the world as a whole? Certainly, it's bad for the USA itself, but it's not necessarily a horrible thing (nor a good thing) for the globe as a whole.

As for the whole videogames thing, I'm not trying to disparage them at all, I'm simply saying it's rather silly to include videogames with declining absolute poverty and malnourishment as one of the great things to happen to the world in the last eight years. Sure, videogames are fun but in the grander scheme of things they are rather insignificant. Improvements in education and healthcare, improvements in global distribution networks, developments in trade law and accomplishments in conflict management, discoveries in science and new and more affordable alternative energy sources are all important benefits for global society. Videogames are nowhere near the same level as these improvements. Furthermore, videogames are still only available to a very, very small subset of the world population. 6 billion or so of the world's population probably couldn't care less about new videogames, let alone afford something like the PS3. A single videogame for the XBox 360 or PS3 costs more than the average family makes in a month in many countries!

Well, what I mean by that is high prices on homes in a majority of neighborhoods, thanks to the rise of gang violence.

But, I think the reason why gas prices are high is because of Bush. He help only the rich people who were making bets, and not helping the people who were struggling.

People want to blame the violence of the younger generation on the video games, but its the people themselves to take action in their own hands. Parents aren't being responsible enough.

Speaking of 6 billion, we are slightly dealing with overpopulation. The reason why I consider that the US is declining their reputation is because of the Bush Administration. Let me think, we had the 9/11, there's a war going on, and there's corruption in politics.

[SocialDem]

Originally Posted by LAFan

Well, what I mean by that is high prices on homes in a majority of neighborhoods, thanks to the rise of gang violence.

But, I think the reason why gas prices are high is because of Bush. He help only the rich people who were making bets, and not helping the people who were struggling.

Concerning the first of your two points which I've quoted above, that isn't a global problem but one that specifically deals with the United States and therefore doesn't really directly deal with your original question which asked if things are better for the world since 2000. Perhaps you should of asked if things are better for the US since 2000, instead of the world, as that seems to be your concern. Also, while the rising prices of homes and gang violence are both real and substantial problems, they are actually largely unrelated. House prises are rising for a variety of reasons, but gang violence is not one of them.

As for gas prices, this is a bit more complex. While I agree with you that he Bush Administration has been absolutely horrible for many, many reasons, I actually disagree with you on this matter. While it would be nice to be able to blame Bush for oil prices, it would also be unfair. You see, there really isn't much the President, or even Congress, can do about rising oil/gas prices, at least in the short term. Oil prices are on the rise not because of the actions of any particular government, but because of the forces of supply and demand. On the supply side, we are fast approaching what is known as 'peak oil' which is, essentially, the point at which global petroleum production levels peak and then begin to decline. Now, energy experts from oil companies, governments, major international governmental organizations, major international non-governmental organizations and research groups disagree as to when peak oil will occur, but the consensus is that it will be reached sometime between 2010 and 2050.

The problem of peak oil is compounded by skyrocketing global demand. Not only is demand rising slowly in developed countries, like the US and Japan, but it is skyrocketing in many developing countries. Most significant is the rise of oil demand in China. China and India are both adding millions of cars to their roads each year, meaning millions of new individuals are in need of oil. Additionally, many other developing countries are seeing substantial growth in oil demand (South Africa, Brazil, Russia, Nigeria, etc). Furthermore, vast increases in global trade in recent years further increases demand for oil for transportation and industry. Thus, demand is rising exponentially while overall production is slowing and will eventually begin declining. Of couse, basic economics dictates that this inevitably leads to rising prices.

[wclac]

Originally Posted by SocialDem

Concerning the first of your two points which I've quoted above, that isn't a global problem but one that specifically deals with the United States and therefore doesn't really directly deal with your original question which asked if things are better for the world since 2000. Perhaps you should of asked if things are better for the US since 2000, instead of the world, as that seems to be your concern. Also, while the rising prices of homes and gang violence are both real and substantial problems, they are actually largely unrelated. House prises are rising for a variety of reasons, but gang violence is not one of them.

I was going to title this thread America, not the world. But I didn't know people were going to complain about me sticking only to the USA. After 2000, I noticed things were going to change.

Originally Posted by SocialDem

As for gas prices, this is a bit more complex. While I agree with you that he Bush Administration has been absolutely horrible for many, many reasons, I actually disagree with you on this matter. While it would be nice to be able to blame Bush for oil prices, it would also be unfair. You see, there really isn't much the President, or even Congress, can do about rising oil/gas prices, at least in the short term. Oil prices are on the rise not because of the actions of any particular government, but because of the forces of supply and demand. On the supply side, we are fast approaching what is known as 'peak oil' which is, essentially, the point at which global petroleum production levels peak and then begin to decline. Now, energy experts from oil companies, governments, major international governmental organizations, major international non-governmental organizations and research groups disagree as to when peak oil will occur, but the consensus is that it will be reached sometime between 2010 and 2050.

Of course not. Its the greedy wealthy people around the world.

Originally Posted by SocialDem

The problem of peak oil is compounded by skyrocketing global demand. Not only is demand rising slowly in developed countries, like the US and Japan, but it is skyrocketing in many developing countries. Most significant is the rise of oil demand in China. China and India are both adding millions of cars to their roads each year, meaning millions of new individuals are in need of oil. Additionally, many other developing countries are seeing substantial growth in oil demand (South Africa, Brazil, Russia, Nigeria, etc). Furthermore, vast increases in global trade in recent years further increases demand for oil for transportation and industry. Thus, demand is rising exponentially while overall production is slowing and will eventually begin declining. Of couse, basic economics dictates that this inevitably leads to rising prices.

Of course, its just the wealthy people who's just greedy for more "quick paper".