Strange that they are projecting 38 years ahead and assuming there are no large paradigm shifts that change the figures. Even though one of the biggest game changers ever (China's 1 child policy) directly influenced what they are talking about.<p>They are not considering possible global wars or plagues, new energy or food sources, AI, robotics or dramatic changes to global national boundaries.<p>I guess this kind of report is accurate given it's assumptions but I think it's only interesting as a "this is what might might happen if nothing interesting happens for the next 38 years".
Key takeaway from article: Working age population vs. dependents has a huge bearing on the national economies in the following decades.<p>* Education & quality of it will have a huge bearing on each of these nations.
- In my view this is where India has the biggest risk. Quality of education, not just in schools but what we are teaching the kids (what they learn by observing this generation as well).
- The thing I wish & yearn to teach (show) my kid & several others who grow up with him is to put the interests of "whole" before "self". This I believe is something seriously lacking in our society and could hurt us badly.<p>The more I think of it the more I am convinced that every other societal problem starts from the individual and the nation begets the leaders it deserves (in a democracy!).<p>And at a macro level decision making there are few issues that will drive it.
- Self-sufficiency in energy sector will be the key driver on which way these nations go. In India there is HUGE dependency on energy outside India and yet there is not much being done (compared to others there is not even much awareness).<p>It is wishful thinking to believe the numbers alone could help the nations move forward and as the OP summarized it is for these developing nations to gain or lose the most while for US to protect and defend and (hopefully) not at each other's expense.<p>In my opinion it will be measured by how much progress is there in standard of living for each of these nations from the current standards.
I'm surprised at the fertility rate figures for the US, as I expected to see a downward trend there.<p>Among lower middle class and immigrants (especially those that are Hispanic), I expect fertility rates to remain higher. However, with the current anti-immigration climate in Washington, I suspect a steep drop off as these groups start to shrink with the decline in immigration to the US.<p>As you get into upper middle class and higher class families, fertility rates appear low. Two kid families are the norm that I'm seeing in people in my age group (30 years+) and I see a lot of one kid and no kid families too.
This article reminds us that you can't just look at historic growth rates and extrapolate economic prospects. Environmental sustainability, the effectiveness of political institutions, and demographics start to matter more and more once you get to a certain level of prosperity.<p>Also interesting is the effect of demographics on technological development. For example, one of the factors driving robotics technology in Japan is probably the size of their aging population and the need to take care of them. Another case of 'necessity is the mother of invention'?