Pessimist or Realist?

In “What happens next?”, I found the tone of certain “crucibles” to be overwhelmingly negative, particularly in crucibles 3, 4 and 5. The authors speak about the imminent financial collapse of OECD nations, an unstoppable depletion of natural resources, and a weakening middle class due to the increased success of emerging markets. Each of these issues must be balanced against the other. How do we allow for increased wealth in emerging economies while still keeping jobs in the United States? How do we get less people to drive when their bus route to get to work is eliminated? Resolving one issue will always have an adverse effect on resolving another. It is finding the balance in how these issues are presented and solved that will ultimately give people hope. This hope will also inspire innovation.

Although I do not disagree that these issues may not be resolved in as timely a manner as one would hope, the authors contradict themselves in the conclusion of the article by encouraging the readers that “the optimists have it”. The authors effectively make the reader aware of the changes that the world will experience in the upcoming years and successfully highlight where innovative ideas will matter the most. Perhaps these authors are using reverse psychology to convince readers that if they do not come up with a solution soon, the world will undoubtedly collapse around us?