What kind of world will our children inherit?

New York Magazine published an article earlier this year featuring the conjectures of some economists about the kind of world our children will inherit. According to those who favor the "end-of-growth" model, the robust economic boom which has taken place since the industrial revolution--and as a result, nearly guaranteed a higher quality of life for each successive generation since the mid-18th c--is now past it's tail end (which in fact actually began petering out in the 60's-70's). It is likely, the end-of-growth economists portend, that we will soon enter a time when the inheriting generation will no longer be virtually guaranteed to be better off than their parents. The educational attainment and material wealth of one's progeny will be at similar levels to the generation before it, and will more closely resemble the growth patterns of the middle ages: stagnant. One can no longer hope that their child's quality of life will outshine theirs by a certain measure.

Although optimists on this issue argue that other technological advances could easy create new periods of growth in the future, for the sake of interest I'm going to bet my nickle on the end-of-growth folks. Let's say that the fantastic economic growth spurred on by the industrial revolution is over, done with, finito. Our children will inherit a dark-ages pattern of stagnation.

We're still better off than the Rockefeller dude.

Well, I'd be pretty happy for them anyway. I would rather my children and any future descendants I may have live in this time of "stagnation" than any period of explosive growth before it. Sure, during the early to mid 1800's, there was a greater mathematical chance for my children to become fabulously wealthy in the way of Rockefeller or Carnegie due to the opportunities presented by the industrial age, chances which may never present themselves again (or for quite a while). But in the same breath, my children would have also been more likely to be working in factories before they hit their teens. In any successive generation from now, no matter how stagnant the growth, I'd say it will likely be "good times" in the greater scope of living standards. I'm sure these generation-stagnation kids will be keeping more of their teeth in old age and dancing their way to being super-centenarians than Rockefeller or Carnegie themselves.


So based on current predictions conveyed by both the end-of-growthers and the optimists, my children will live a comfortable, well-educated life, as I did. Whether their material wealth or station in life eclipses mine is neither here nor there. I'm content that we have come this far.


If you've read the article in New York Magazine or are following this topic in general, what are your thoughts? Are you an optimist, end-of-growther, or an optimistic end-of-growther like I am?