Generational Dynamics Forum - New Site

Higgenbotham wrote: Thu Mar 05, 2026 11:33 pm Related to the above, over at my daughter's school there is a professor who picks his granddaughter up every day. I don't know his age, but some of the dates he mentioned recently would give someone a clue. His hair and beard are snow white and decades of stress shows on his face. He mentioned some months ago that he is a professor at Texas State.

This week I began having more detailed conversations with him. He said the quality of University level education has been declining since 1989 when he started teaching, as well as the quality of the students. He is a business professor. Then he brought up something that only fully got my attention later. He said that in the late 1990s he had been a professor at Rice University. There was a student there from a wealthy and politically connected family in Argentina who he had failed in his class. After posting the failed grade, he was called into the office of the Chancellor (I think I have the term right as he told it to me). The Chancellor told the professor that he was going to change this student's grade and pass him. He told the Chancellor that he would not do it. The Chancellor then told him that if he didn't change the grade, his contract wouldn't be renewed. He told him again that he would not change the grade.

It took me a day or so to realize the full impact of what he told me. Rice University is a very elite private institution. It's not on the level of, say, Yale or Stanford, but probably close. On the other hand, in Texas public universities, there is the University of Texas system, Texas A&M, and at the bottom of the list, Texas State.

So today I said to him, "You know, I was thinking more about what you told me. You were at Rice University. When you wouldn't change the grade for that student, that really hurt your career, didn't it?" He said, "Torpedoed it." Then he went on to say something to the effect that the most important thing is to do the right thing regardless of the consequences. The only thing I have to say about that is that as a new dark age gets ready to take hold and everything gets turned upside down in preparation, the consequences for doing the right thing can be very high indeed.

Higgenbotham wrote: Fri Dec 13, 2024 1:17 pm

James Woods
@RealJamesWoods
When the world is upside down, shit floats to the top…

https://x.com/RealJamesWoods/status/180 ... 55?lang=en

Fullmoonn wrote: Sat Feb 28, 2026 11:59 pm

Higgenbotham wrote: Sat Feb 28, 2026 5:26 am The US and Israel have attacked Iran, just as a Puetz crash window is opening up early next week.

aeden wrote: Sun Jul 28, 2019 6:07 am As we know H we cover it all, well we try, and really this is simply a gut check to what others could care less about or basically cannot.
Several years back, a cycle watcher named Steve Puetz attempted to see if eclipses and market crashes were somehow related.
He studied eight of the greatest crashes in financial history, from the Holland Tulip Mania of 1637 to the Nikkei of 1990. He found that market crashes tend to occur near full moons, and that the greatest number of crashes start after the first full moon after a solar eclipse, when that full moon is also a lunar eclipse. Puetz found that all eight crashes occurred six days before to three days after a full moon that occurred within six weeks of a solar eclipse. The odds of that being a coincidence, Puetz calculated, are less than 1 in 127,000. Puetz was not saying that so-called "Puetz windows" always lead to crashes, but that if a crash is going to occur, a Puetz window would be the likely time frame in which it would happen.

The brunt of the crash happens after the lunar eclipse passes. The coming lunar eclipse is March 3.

It's almost as though some people already know about this and are timing/front running/trying to control it. As they pretty obviously are. Haha

Higgenbotham wrote: Sat Dec 31, 2016 10:24 pm https://www.arthurdemarest.com/collapse ... s-today-2/

So, you know, we're collapsing. But I'm not just a grumpy old man, we're collapsing. Although it sounds like it. I'm an expert on the collapse of 18 civilizations and we're collapsing. We've got everything. We've got every single fucking cause of collapse you could want except radical climate change and that's beginning. So, but as I've told you, don't worry about global warming. We won't make it far enough for that to be a problem. I think the wars are going to be the end of everything but only because the infrastructure's so vulnerable because of hypercoherence and technology it's also fragile.

Do some think AI is being used as an excuse to reduce the size of unaffordable and excessive corporate, nonprofit and government bureaucracy?

Yes, many analysts, business leaders, and critics believe that Artificial Intelligence (AI) is being used as a convenient justification—or "excuse"—to reduce the size of, and cut costs within, large corporate, nonprofit, and government bureaucracies.

While AI holds the potential to genuinely improve efficiency by automating routine tasks, it is frequently cited as the reason for layoffs and restructuring, allowing organizations to trim staff under the guise of technological advancement.

Here is a breakdown of how AI is being used to address bureaucratic bloat across different sectors:

1. Corporate Sector: "Efficiency" as a Cover for Downsizing

Layoffs and Restructuring: Companies are utilizing AI as a rationale for restructuring, often aimed at reducing payroll and increasing margins.

"AI Excuse": Some argue that AI is used as a cover for cutting costs after years of overspending on infrastructure or overhiring. Data indicates that while AI is cited in many job cuts, it accounts for a smaller percentage of total layoffs compared to general economic conditions, suggesting it is a "convenient" justification for cost-cutting.

Flattening Hierarchies: AI is being used to automate middle-management tasks, leading to flatter organizational structures where fewer managers are needed.

2. Government Bureaucracy: The "Demand Machine" vs. Cost Cutting

The "DOGE" Effect: Internal, anecdotal reports suggest that in some government contexts, particularly those influenced by initiatives like the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), AI is being deployed with the specific aim of reducing staff in administrative roles.

Streamlining Processes: AI is being used to tackle massive bureaucratic tasks, such as analyzing millions of lines of regulations, identifying outdated, redundant, or inefficient reporting requirements, and accelerating permit processing (e.g., in San Francisco and Honolulu).

The Counter-Argument: Some researchers argue that AI is more of a "demand machine" in government—it makes it easier for residents to request services, which increases workload rather than reducing it, despite the promise of smaller bureaucracy.

3. Nonprofit Sector: Doing More with Less

Mitigating Resource Scarcity: Nonprofits are increasingly using AI to handle mundane tasks, allowing them to maintain, or reduce, staffing levels while still meeting the demands of their missions.

Efficiency vs. Capability: There is a debate about whether AI truly helps nonprofits, as it can, in some cases, shift the focus from genuine impact to increasing the speed of output, which can lead to a "hollowed-out" organization that is faster but less effective.

Perspectives on the Trend

Proponents: Argue that AI allows for the elimination of tedious, routine, and bureaucratic work, ultimately making institutions more agile and productive.

Critics: Argue that it is a "scam" by private equity and leadership to "torchy" employee populations, leaving organizations "a shadow of themselves". Others argue that AI does not actually reduce bureaucracy, but rather makes it more "persecuting" by increasing surveillance and reducing human accountability.

In summary, AI is being used as a tool to justify reducing the size of bureaucracy. Whether this leads to necessary "right-sizing" or, as some fear, to the dismantling of necessary, human-centered services, remains a subject of intense debate.

Higgenbotham wrote: Fri Jan 02, 2026 4:33 pm

Chemical production outpacing world’s ability to understand the risk, study warns
Feb 16, 2022

With global chemical production increasing 50-fold since 1950 — and projected to triple again by 2050 compared to 2010 — its aggressive pace may outstrip society’s ability to adequately assess and monitor the risk, pushing the planet to the brink, a new study suggests.

There are an estimated 350,000 chemicals or mixtures on the global market, with nearly 70,000 registered in the past decade, and another 30,000 that have only been registered in emerging economies where chemical production has jumped beyond adequate disposal capacity, warns a team of 14 international researchers in the study published by the American Chemical Society.

The emergence of more and more new chemicals that aren’t fully understood puts humanity out of a “safe operating space,” the authors say.

“Chemical pollution has the potential to cause severe ecosystem and human health problems at different scales, (but also to alter vital Earth system processes on which human life depends),” begins the study’s introduction in the scientific journal Environmental Science and Technology.

Plastic production alone increased 79% between 2000 and 2015, the team found.

The range of manufactured chemicals, from plastics to pesticides, industrial chemicals, antibiotics and other pharmaceuticals, has pushed Earth beyond one of what scientists interpret as nine planetary boundaries that act as markers for the Earth’s health. These boundaries include greenhouse gas emissions, the ozone layer, forests, freshwater and biodiversity. However, chemical pollution may have breached the boundary referred to as “novel entities,” or things made by humans and introduced into the environment.

The new study, in part, reviews the evolution of the scientific discussion related to the planetary boundary for novel entities. The scientists acknowledged the data was sparse in many areas, but said the weight of evidence indicated a breach of the planetary boundary.

https://esemag.com/hazardous-materials/ ... boundaries

Novel entities: Technological developments introduce novel synthetic chemicals into the environment, mobilize materials in wholly new ways, modify the genetics of living organisms, and otherwise intervene in evolutionary processes and change the functioning of the Earth system. The amount of synthetic substances released into the environment without adequate safety testing places novel entities in the high-risk zone.

Is a decline in societal standards and lack of accountability characteristic of a society on the cusp of a new dark age?

AI Overview

Yes, a decline in societal standards, particularly regarding ethical behavior, and a widespread lack of accountability are frequently identified as hallmarks of a society on the verge of significant, if not "dark," transformation. Historically and in contemporary analysis, these trends are often linked to institutional decay, the breakdown of social cohesion, and a crisis of leadership.

Key Indicators of Societal Decline & "Dark Age" Conditions

Based on historical precedents (like the fall of Rome) and current analysis, the following characteristics suggest a society at risk:

Accountability Crisis: A 2025 study highlighted an epidemic-level crisis of accountability, where 82% of people find it difficult to hold others responsible, often mirroring a lack of accountability among leadership.

Erosion of Standards: A rise in "decadence," described as cultural exhaustion and institutional decay despite high material prosperity, is a common indicator.

Knowledge & Truth Undermined: A "Digital Dark Age" is cited as a threat due to the degradation of information quality, attacks on science/journalism, and the replacement of knowledge with performative outrage.

Institutional Decay: When institutions (like government, academia, and libraries) fail to produce reliable knowledge or services, societal bonds rupture.

Loss of Trust & Social Bonds: A, often perceived, decline in morality and kindness can weaken the trust required for a functional society.

Contextual Nuances

The "Illusion" of Decline: While many believe moral decline is happening (54% of Americans in a recent poll), studies suggest this feeling may be a persistent, psychological illusion. People tend to focus on negative information in the present while forgetting the negative aspects of the past.

Dark Ages Are Not Always Total Collapse: Historically, "Dark Ages" are characterized by a loss of centralization (like in Rome) rather than total human eradication. They often involve a shift to smaller, more localized, and sometimes more egalitarian communities.

Opportunity for Renewal: Some research suggests that the collapse of a complex, top-heavy society can actually lead to a better quality of life for the majority of people, as systems become more localized and sustainable.

Conclusion

While a decline in standards and accountability is a strong indicator of a societal "rocky patch," it is not a guaranteed, one-way ticket to a "new dark age." It is, however, a critical warning sign that institutions and cultural norms are failing to adapt to new challenges.

Higgenbotham wrote: Thu May 11, 2023 12:17 pm These are my top 3 general characteristics of a civilization that is on the cusp of entering a dark age/has just entered a dark age (in other words, where I think we are right now):

1. Decline in societal standards
2. Functional failure of government
3. Lack of accountability

Pediatric Nephrologist
Updated Dec 20

Why did my top performing employee quit after write up?


I quit after a write-up.

Their concern wasn’t that I was impolite or harsh to junior co-workers. The concern was that these juniors feared that I was about to do so. I was a 63-year-old male veteran (retired Colonel). The co-workers are 20–30 year-old women. I give direct answers, where others sometimes say, “it seems…” or “I feel….” While I’m careful to adhere to expectations for tone of voice, vulgarity (etc), my face will (wordlessly) tell you when I think you’re right or wrong. The differences that caused tension with the younger staff always concerned attention to the patient’s needs. When I trained, my own inconvenience matters less than that of the patients. That seems to be a less common point of view, lately. Lest you assume I’m socially inept, I’ll mention that this organization (like two prior) named me “Teacher of the Year”.

I realized that it’s an issue of culture. I’m not going to get younger, nor distance myself from the meritocracy in which I thrived. They’re not going to become less socially sensitive. In other words, they’re not going to tolerate the differences connected with being male, 63, or coming from the military. It was my time to go.

Because I practice a medical specialty that’s in short supply, my departure left them with one. She didn’t want to work solo so she left, leaving them with none. They now pay me twice my prior income, to remain ‘on call’ and answer questions from other doctors over the phone. I have no further contact with the 20–30 year-olds, and it has cost the organization about $1M over the last 3 years. That’s a ‘per diem’ salary, not to include the cost of losing their transplant program and sharply cutting back a dialysis service. Folks say it’s expensive for an organization to ignore cultural differences. I can tell you exactly how expensive.