Talk:Timeline (Joe's World)

openly or closed?
Hi, can I or other people edit in this TL or it world have a one and unique owner?, interesting aniway.--Fero 04:29, December 29, 2012 (UTC)

Yes it's an open timeline. My aim here has not been to craft a particular storyline but to try to predict the actual future using current trends. No World war III in 2014, supernovas or dinosaur invasions please. :) Jakeepping (talk) 18:58, December 29, 2012 (UTC)jakeepping

Editing Note
Editing of 2013 is closed. Let's see how much of an idiot I (and everyone else who contributed) look like. Jakeepping (talk) 21:01, January 23, 2013 (UTC)jakeepping

reformed UNSC 2018
The issue is big enough to discussion

Original text: Geopolitics

The United Nations reforms the security council adding 6 more permanent members: India, Japan, Germany, Brazil, South Africa and Turkey. My version: UK kick out after scotland independency; and Germany (is real european), Brazil, Nigeria(african muslin and christian, populous), India, Japan and Indonesia (to limit China) get in. --Fero (talk) 19:52, January 25, 2013 (UTC)

I see where you're coming from. Tough subject this, I included it as an afterthought. I think SC reform as early as 2018 is a fever-dream, the entire thing is improbable... if not impossible. The SC could have new permanent members (but the P5 don't want to give the veto to more nations), or scrap permanent members altogether (but the P5 aren't going to vote themselves out of power). A Scotland-less UK will not resign its power and, if losing permanent status has to be a unanimous vote from the other members, I doubt the USA, France or any other western state would vote against the UK as they are all strong military and political allies (also they have their own separatists to worry about). (If they did though I think replacement likely to be India. India is only new country supported by entire P5).

But... what I originally had here was the G4 proposal (6 new permanent members: India, Brazil, Germany, Japan plus two African nations.) which is effectively dead (China opposes Japan, all the neighbors of the other countries don't support them and have put up the "Uniting for Consensus" counter proposal). Germany however supports an EU seat if France and the UK would agree to give up their seats. But of course they won't. SO perhaps, if in four years or so, the EU instead requests to have a permanent observer seat in the SC with the condition that other world regions could also be allowed to join the SC as observers. Eventually ASEAN, USAN, the AU, the Arab league etc join as well. Once there are sufficient regions in the world represented then they try real reform. The SC reorganized with all members replaced by world regions instead of individual countries (apart from the big countries: US, China and Russia; who don't really align themselves with regional groups anyway) It would make the SC smaller and there would be less quibbling about who was getting too much power. Hopefully the US, China and Russia would also give up their veto. But they may only accept the change on the condition they keep their veto. This would compund the issue of the EU splitting into North and South. Don't know how the UN would deal with that. Jakeepping (talk) 22:39, January 27, 2013 (UTC)jakeepping

Also, in this scenario, UK is leaving the EU.

Anonymous173.57.37.111 23:09, January 27, 2013 (UTC)

Haha that too! I imagine if the UNSC would transfrom into a regional conference, the UK (without Scotland, not in EU) would be shit out of luck. They will complicate everything and need some kind of comprimise. Jakeepping (talk) 12:53, January 28, 2013 (UTC)jakeepping

Belgium == Belgium split on 3 in 2017, but the king of Belgium die in 2022, please explain because I feel it contradictory.--Fero (talk) 01:20, March 7, 2013 (UTC) ==

When Belgium splits I don't think the monarchy will be dissolved (perhaps that happens later). I think all of the succesor nations would still view him as their King (like Scotland would still keep Elizabeth as head of state). Albert II is styled as King of the Belgians and would remain head of the royal house "of Belgium" even though the nation would no longer exist (such like Anhalt, Prussia or Dalmatia). The alternative is "King of Flanders and Wallonia" but I do not believe they would agree to that. Jakeepping (talk) 09:28, March 7, 2013 (UTC)

Papal Conclave
Shouldn't the papal conclave be mentioned?

Anonymous173.74.57.205 03:27, March 11, 2013 (UTC)

To make this timeline more entertaining (in an introspective fashion) I have a self-imposed rule that the current year should not be edited. Events in this timeline should not be updated contemprary to them taking place, otherwise it wouldn't really be a Future wiki anymore. Instead the evidence of erronous predicitions should remain. ie. I never thought a papal conclave would occur this year so that mistake should remain to be seen. However events in 2014 and later can be edited to correct for the mistake (ie. mention Pope Francis or future conclaves). Towards the end of the year, 2013 too will be retconned to reflect reality.

If anyone has a differing opinon towards this approach I'm welcome to hear it.Jakeepping (talk) 20:23, March 13, 2013 (UTC)

UN Prime Minister
quote: 2016 Former New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark is elected the first female Secretary General of the United Nations.

I guess that: Former Chile President Michelle Bachelet (1951) is elected the first female Secretary General of the United Nations, and the second american, beating former New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark.

Continent beat isles, "big" country beat "tiny" country, also 4 years lived in Europe --Fero (talk) 04:17, March 14, 2013 (UTC)

Good bet. The only reason I think it won't happen is that I believe Bachelet will be re-elected in November and will be president again until 2018. Jakeepping (talk) 09:26, March 14, 2013 (UTC)

and maybe you are right http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2013/03/15/world/americas/ap-un-un-bachelet-chile.html?ref=americas --Fero (talk) 03:30, March 16, 2013 (UTC)

Sea levels
I live in the Midwest, and I can say that right now we are experiencing snow in May. I think the weather is getting colder and wetter, not warmer and drier.Walt27 (talk) 02:41, May 12, 2013 (UTC)

Noted. You don't believe in climate change.Jakeepping (talk) 08:27, May 12, 2013 (UTC)

Anyway, the North East and Midwest do not see like optimal relocation points to escape flooding when the North and South West are underpopulated and at a higher altitude, unless there is another rational.Jakeepping (talk) 10:07, May 12, 2013 (UTC)

SSM
Cambodia: What is the motivation behind removing Cambodia from the list? The king and prime minister both support it. And some provinces in Cambodia are now recognizing lesbian couples - at least 15 lesbian couples have been legally married already.Jakeepping (talk) 10:07, May 12, 2013 (UTC)

Mexico: What is the motivation behind removing Mexico from the list? SSM is recognized nationwide, though only performed in one state plus Mexico city. However the Mexican Supreme Court has already overruled the ban three times and is two overturns away from making it legal (five rulings = legal precedent). Jakeepping (talk) 10:07, May 12, 2013 (UTC)

Germany: Germany has had civil unions for a long time. However there is currently no national movement or real effort to get full marriage status. Popular support is 74% so it would probably happen very fast but right now there is no motivation. That is why I have delayed it by two years.Jakeepping (talk) 10:07, May 12, 2013 (UTC)

Vietnam: I see the subject is being debated and action may be expected in 2014. I concede that.Jakeepping (talk) 10:07, May 12, 2013 (UTC)

Austria: It was a surprise when the government legalized Registered Partnerships in 2009 because it is quite conservative. No one expects it to go further than that any time soon as only two national parties support SSM (SPO & Green). At least 2016.Jakeepping (talk) 10:07, May 12, 2013 (UTC)

USA: West Virginia? Haha no. Jakeepping (talk) 10:07, May 12, 2013 (UTC)

Recreational Marijuana
Alaska has a libertarian bent and I am certain that a state bill/proposition would pass during the midterms.Jakeepping (talk) 10:07, May 12, 2013 (UTC)

Azawad
You don't think this nation will EVER be granted independence? It's in French interests (colonial reparations PR & combating terrorism) to assist in recognizing the sovereign rights of a much maligned people. Jakeepping (talk) 10:07, May 12, 2013 (UTC)

Recognizing Israel
What is the motivation for Cuba not recognizing Israel for another 30 years instead of say, Iran? Cuba's motivation does not run deep. Only its current government does not recognize Israel. With Cuba re-establishing closer ties with the US, I expect them to be politically allied within 15 years.Jakeepping (talk) 10:07, May 12, 2013 (UTC)

Eurasian Union
Including Abkhazia and South Ossetia is very provocative and irresponsible. That's not a good start to a union where it may prompt a war with Georgia and NATO allies. More importantly, there are no plans to do this. As it is (if it ever happens - the whole union formation will most likely be indefinitely delayed because there does not seem to be much enthusiasm in the whole project) it will stick to its proposed plans.Jakeepping (talk) 10:07, May 12, 2013 (UTC)

Meganation
the timeline is "too long" to search in it; did or not the European Union become 1 country to the end of the century? is there a country that thread India, China and USA as the most populous or Russia and Canada as the bigger area? in whit year that happened?--Fero (talk) 00:59, May 29, 2013 (UTC)

In the current timeline, the European Union (Northern EU & Mediterranean Union) becomes a federation in 2051. So I guess that is when they are recognized as a single "country". India has the biggest population since 2030. USA, China and India all get more land but does not change the order.Jakeepping (talk) 17:47, May 29, 2013 (UTC)

"Final" World Population
2082: The world population now exceeds 10 billion, 2300 in Africa, 1500M in The Americas, 5400 in Asia, 750 in Europe and 50M in Oceania.

Hi, I build this line to limit a base of the others population data around the timeline, do you agree? is good to avoid contradictions--Fero (talk) 03:01, May 29, 2013 (UTC)

ThanksJakeepping (talk) 17:47, May 29, 2013 (UTC)

WTF in the Moon?
seach the word "moon" in this timeline and you will find a lot of paragraft that contradict each others, which country or company come first (again)? when? which country or company build a base there? when? --Fero (talk) 01:52, June 2, 2013 (UTC)

Yeah it is the 2025 edit that is causing contradictions. This is how I have it:

2013: Chinese rover


 * 2015: Private rovers


 * 2023: Private man on moon


 * 2025: Japanese robot base


 * 2027: Chinese man on moon


 * 2030: Russian man on moon


 * 2056: Human dome on moon


 * 2067: Permanent humans on moonJakeepping (talk) 10:13, June 2, 2013 (UTC)

Iran
Iran has a different president from the one you have as President in the timeline. Instead, it is Hassan Rouhani.

Anonymous71.164.209.8 15:11, July 31, 2013 (UTC)

Well, as far as I've understood, editing of the current year is not allowed, as the information will be updated to fit real life after each year. So in 2014, the 2013-section will be updated. DaneOf Scandinavy (talk) 16:04, July 31, 2013 (UTC)

Exactly. :) Jakeepping (talk) 18:23, July 31, 2013 (UTC)

Seeing that section, I am pretty sure that the creator is the only one who edits it.

Anonymous71.164.209.8 20:16, July 31, 2013 (UTC)

Muslims
Muslims are not an ethnic group, but a religious group. Everyone are becoming less and less religious, and the fertility rate is falling, so I don't think an increase in the number of Muslims can continue. DaneOf Scandinavy (talk) 11:16, October 13, 2013 (UTC)