So what you are saying is life is possible; but, the quality of life is unacceptable, is this not correct? Vil has made this observation before. The limitation we face is not sustaining life; but, the sustenance of the quality of life. This takes us all back to a discussion of your current quality of life versus 30 years ago, better or worse? Would the current societal issues we face be more the result of changes in population or technology, energy and land rights?
It is the mixture of the two, and I feel, world-wide this will become very evident during the next few months or years.
Quality of life is all relative, and is what the individual is used to. A starving vagrant living rough on the street of some third world slum will probably feel like a Lord if he is relocated to a bunkhouse with beds above a soup kitchen. However, if he can scrape together enough to eat on the streets he will live. A true Lord, defaulting on his country mansion would probably feel like he had been to hell and back, if he had to move into a 5 bed en-suite town house, the shock of downsizing would probably kill him.
As for current social issues, the real crux during the near future, is that many who have seen living standards rise, often in an apparent sence, due to credit abuse, will see their living standards fall, and fall significantly. This will be compounded by the fact that here in the UK anyway, there have now been two generations or so, who have never had anything taken away. Take away from large sections of the population, and there will be unrest, the August riots last year perhaps a precursor of things to come. If this happens on a global scale, then who knows. We have had WW1 and WW2, and things tend to happen in threes.