I agree with your point on the word “doomerism” and I should have quoted it. Later in my comment I said “prophecy of economic or climactic doom,” which is more reflective of how I see it. Go back through history and you will see time and time again that the world was due to end, but did not. Bayesian probability says we’re probably not headed for a world-ending outcome.

But I suppose I also take issue with your claim that “things aren't as good as they were a few years ago.” On what metric are you measuring this?

Finally — your point about the dodo just reinforces what I’m saying all the more! What I’m saying is: let’s not go extinct!

We needn't jump to the end of the world or human extinction, hence why I didn't understand the need for finalistic terms like doom. What many people believe is that life simply isn't going to be as good for the next generation(s).

You can already see the downward trend from our parents generation to ours, the downward trend (economically, politically and socially) within our own lifetimes and project that to the next generation. Keep in mind, our parents received an unlikely to be repeated boost in their fortunes (which was paved with the largest war we've ever had and good luck for us to be on the receiving end of most of the spoils of that war, rightly or wrongly). There's a huge list of issues making life worse for people right now, and many more being kicked down the road for the next generation.

I live in the UK, so I speak mostly with the context of my own country. That's the life I live and what I know. I read quite a bit about affairs in other countries, as I said, once a week, and the picture doesn't seem to be too unique country-to-country.

I don't want to list everything that would fall under the metric of measurement, because while I know it looks like a cop-out, it's honestly a huge list filled with points that we all know about (war, inequality, political shifts, cost of living crisis, climate change, changing cultural landscape). I could pick one and discuss it at length, but I don't know what that would do besides allow for venting.

The advance of science, medicine, and technology can be used as a reliable metric for improvement, but these alone can't balance out the negative socio-economic and political changes, especially when they're all so intertwined. It's great that science can provide GLP drugs for people to lose weight, but the counter-balance is that socially people are less inclined to do without. New technology is always getting better, but if it's just being used to revolutionise serving ads and selling subscriptions, that's counterintuitive. Antibiotics are becoming redundant faster than we can create new types.

Fair points, I wasn’t trying to be condescending. You’re right about the UK. That is a different context than the US and the trends you mention are perhaps more economically “real” there than here.

But I still think the core question matters: what do we do about it? History shows decline isn’t always permanent. Rome fell and the Black Death killed a third of Europe. But we still ended up with the fruits of the Renaissance and Enlightenment because people kept making people and working for the betterment of the world.

You mention antibiotics becoming redundant. This is true. But we’re also developing phage therapy, CRISPR antimicrobials, and new drug classes. We’re figuring out protein folding at scale for the first time. Every one of these problems eventually leads to some kind of solution so long as there are smart people paying attention to what needs to be done.

The dodo couldn’t adapt but, as humans, we can. I’m not saying ignore the problems. I’m saying don’t let them paralyze you. To solve problems, we need more smart people — someone has to keep making them!

I think, as an outsider, the US faces most of the same problems, but I believe you do have a better starting position and extra cards in your hand than we do.

Personally I cannot see how the UK is going to steady declining living standards. I see the same from my reading in a lot of Europe, and many countries have a much lower starting point (Africa, Asia exc. China), or are accelerating their decline even faster by their actions (Russia). I don't envy any political party that comes to power because truthfully I doubt any of them can solve any of the problems we're facing, even with deeply unpopular changes and the stubbornness to see them through.

We don't have globalised tech companies, any real production basis, or energy/mineral wealth. We largely provide services which are going to be hit hardest by even basic LLM, and domestic services which are gradually being priced out of business by rent and energy price hikes. It's a small island with too many people living on it, fighting for scraps while whatever is left of the economy is sold off for the benefit of very few people (who will eventually emigrate when the fan is hit).

I strongly believe within my lifetime (early 30s) I will be living in a third-world country, and that global problems and events will be piled on top of that. Slow but steady social breakdown is very clear on a day-to-day basis (theft up to £200 is basically legalised, insufficient employment, large amounts of people out of work due to mental health issues).

Many of my friends in late 20s and 30s have a similar view, hence the no kids. At the minimum, I would only have children if the pretext was emigrating from the UK first.

When Rome fell, it was bad news for the citizens of the Western Roman Empire. We're gradually going through the same thing. If you have the ability to control birth and are acutely aware of these issues and the negative trends, it's many peoples opinion that its better to save the next generation the trouble of potentially being the ones to be holding the bomb when it goes off.