Links to Consider, 3/31

Sotonye on life extension; Russ Roberts and Kevin Kelly; The Housing Market is for Boomers; Brett Anderson on existential risk and social cohesion

Sotonye writes,

One of the most interesting claims I’ve seen longevity scientists make, and which inspired me to do some further reading, is that the big political fight of the near future is going to be over whether we want to maintain population and resource equilibrium by having a society of immortal adults who essentially do not have children, or if we want to keep our current lifespans and the same ability to form families—

Very soon, longevity scientists say, death will be optional, and for the sake of sustainability (or until sufficient alternatives to industrial resources arrive), the global population will have to be circumscribed either by continuing on with the business of death, or by putting a halt to the business of birth.

So perhaps the worry about population collapse is not the right panic to have. Note that near-infinite life extension and no new births would eliminate one source of evolution. You get the same result if you switch from sexual reproduction to cloning.

Russ Roberts talks with Kevin Kelly. I find it interesting that the latest books of each are in the vein of “life advice” books.

Jacob Siegel and Sean Cooper write,

Baby Boomers account for 39% of all new homes being purchased—a major jump from their 29% slice of the pie last year—surpassing millennials, who now account for just 28% of new home acquisitions. The 2023 Home Buyers and Sellers reports reflects Baby Boomers’ growing buying power—only 26% of all buyers were first-time homeowners, the lowest ever, just as Boomers have seen repeat purchases made all the easier thanks to the strength of their home equity boosted by surging home prices during the pandemic. Gen Z, meanwhile, only accounts for 4% of all home purchases, with roughly 1 in every 3 Gen Zer moving on from living with their parents or family members into their new dwelling.

I asked Google’s chatbot Bard about trends in intergenerational wealth in the U.S., and it replied

According to a 2021 Federal Reserve Survey, baby boomers own 52.2% of the country's wealth, followed by Generation X at 27.6% and millennials at 5%. The silent generation owns 15.2%.

The gap in wealth between older and younger generations has been growing in recent years. In 1989, baby boomers owned 21% of the nation's wealth, while millennials owned 4.6% in 2020.

There are a number of factors that contribute to the generational wealth gap, including:

• The fact that older generations have had more time to accumulate wealth.

• The fact that older generations were more likely to own homes and businesses before the housing crisis and the Great Recession.

• The fact that older generations are more likely to have received inheritances from their parents or grandparents.

The generational wealth gap has a number of consequences, including:

• It makes it more difficult for younger generations to afford to buy homes and start businesses.

• It makes it more difficult for younger generations to save for retirement.

• It contributes to inequality in the United States.

There are a number of things that can be done to address the generational wealth gap, including:

• Increasing the minimum wage.

• Providing more affordable housing.

• Expanding access to education and training.

• Providing more support for small businesses.

• Providing more support for retirement savings.

• Reducing inequality.

Bard was being pretty helpful until the end,.The last set of bullets tells me that Bard has ideological blinders. I would cite the huge, regressive transfer from young to old that is the Social Security system. Instead of “providing more affordable housing” I would say make it easier to build housing. And so on.

I am guilty of buying a house two years ago that is much bigger than any of my children have. And one of my daughters has a husband, two children, and cannot afford to buy a house at all. So the statistics on intergenerational wealth are consistent with my anecdotal observation.

Possibly related: The WSJ reports,

Some 38% of respondents said patriotism was very important to them, and 39% said religion was very important. That was down sharply from when the Journal first asked the question in 1998, when 70% deemed patriotism to be very important, and 62% said so of religion.

The share of Americans who say that having children, involvement in their community and hard work are very important values has also fallen. Tolerance for others, deemed very important by 80% of Americans as recently as four years ago, has fallen to 58% since then.

…The only priority the Journal tested that has grown in importance in the past quarter-century is money, which was cited as very important by 43% in the new survey, up from 31% in 1998.

Aside from money, all age groups, including seniors, attached far less importance to these priorities and values than when pollsters asked about them in 1998 and 2019. But younger Americans in particular place low importance on these values, many of which were central to the lives of their parents.

Channeling

Nonzero

, Brett Anderson writes,

Modern technological advances have created intrinsic existential risks. This is a relatively recent phenomenon and one that humanity has never encountered before. Nuclear war, artificial intelligence, manmade pandemics, authoritarian techno-states, and runaway climate change are all potential existential risks created by recent technological advances (whether or not all of these are actual X-risks is uncertain). Presumably, technological advances in the future will continue to create more existential risks (one could imagine, as Nick Bostrom has, a self-replicating nano-technology that eats up the biosphere). Because these are manmade X-risks, they are all intrinsic. At least in theory, humanity has the power to reduce the risk associated with each of them. 

The advent of intrinsic existential risks puts our species in a novel situation: We are now engaged in a non-zero-sum game with every other human being on the planet. We will either make it through this period of technological advancement without wiping ourselves out, or we won’t. If we make it through, we all benefit. If we don’t make it through, we all lose. Either way, we are all in this together now.

Substacks referenced above:

@

Avoiding Existential Threats as a Non-Zero-Sum Game

@

What Happened Today: March 28, 2023

@

You’re Going To Live Forever