The New York Times featured a penetrating op-ed last Sunday (8/14/2011) by Neal Gabler of USC, who auggests the answer is yes.

The “Big Bang Theory” is now a popular American television sitcom, but in 1927 it was a Big Idea based on the work of Albert Einstein (below) and Edwin Hubble.
Click

Gabler perused the so-called “14 Biggest Ideas of the Year,” (e.g., “The Players Own the Game”) in The Atlantic (July/August, 2011) and came away forlorn that they were only “observations” not really Big Ideas. Big ideas not only connect the dots but they “change the ways we look at and think about the world.”

Examples of Big ideas include “the end of history,” “the Big Bang theory, and “the medium is the message.”

Gabler frets that we are in the “Post-Idea World”…

a world in which big, thought-provoking ideas that can’t instantly be monetized are of so little intrinsic value that fewer people are generating them and fewer outlets are disseminating them, the Internet notwithstanding. Bold ideas are almost passé.

It appears that the “Age of Information” is part of the problem.

Courtesy of the Internet, we seem to have immediate access to anything that anyone could ever want to know … It may seem counterintuitive that at a time when we know more than we have ever known, we think about it less.

One Big Idea not mentioned by Gabler is “the colonization of space,” including human settlement and utilization of the solar system. If we apply Gabler’s point, is it possible that endless trivial information — especially via social media — stifles thought and serves as a distraction from the next step in human expansion?

A similar idea was advanced in 2003 by Marina Benjamin.

Since the death of the space program (!), frustrated would-be space travelers have taken refuge in cyberspace – another form of pop culture — where they now focus most of their “cosmic” energies.

Perhaps Gabler’s most serious concern is that America, in particular, lives in a “post-Enlightenment age,”

in which rationality, science, evidence, logical argument and debate have lost the battle in many sectors, and perhaps even in society generally, to superstition, faith, opinion and orthodoxy.

We often see this prominently displayed in the political arena where some advocate policies that run counter to decades of historical experience and scientific evidence, especially in areas like economics, business, and climate change.

Therefore, space colonization — excruciatingly dependent on high technology and science — might seem threatened by our post-Idea/post-Enlightenment world.

As we struggle to recover from the Great Recession that began in 2008, many are unaware that we also live within only a few years of the next stunning, 1960s-style Maslow Window, complete with unprecedented commercial and scientific adventures in space and an ebullient, Camelot-style zeitgeist.

Fortunately for us, patterns over the last 200+ years indicate these “golden ages” are not triggered by a widespead intellectual reawakening — but by major economic booms, such as the JFK Boom during the 1960s. Affluence-induced ebullience elevates many in society to higher levels of Maslow’s hierarchy where their expanded worldviews make great explorations and large technology projects seem not only intriguing, but almost irresistible.

Gabler laments that, “our current style of thinking no longer deploys the techniques of rational thought.” But, as in the 1960s, this will rapidly change as we strive to compete globally in the new Space Age. New energy sources will be developed, new worlds will be glimpsed, and genuine education reforms will transform newly motivated students.

In reality, the Maslow Window is the natural antidote to our current condition.

With the recent announcement (Wall Street Journal, 8/3/11; S. Said) of their new super tower, the Saudis reenforce a key global trend that 21stCenturyWaves.com noticed a few years ago: The increasing momentum of “early ebullience.”

The planned Saudi kilometer-high super tower will become the world’s tallest building (and tallest man-made structure) and dwarf the Burj Khalifa in Dubai by 564 feet (20%).
Click

The lesson of the last 200 years is that widespread societal ebullience — usually triggered by a major economic boom (e.g., the 1960s JFK Boom) — is the fundamental driver of twice-per-century, transformative decades known as “Maslow Windows.”

Here at 21stCentuyWaves.com, ebullience is a technical term that indicates a very positive, somewhat irrational emotional state characterized by unusual confidence in the future.

In the 1960s Apollo program and Peace Corps of John F. Kennedy it was the ebullient feeling that we could do almost anything; … and about 200 years ago it began auspiciously with Jefferson, Napoleon, and Lewis & Clark.

The last Maslow Window featured the first man on the Moon, the Peace Corps, and the still-famous Camelot zeitgeist associated with JFK. The next one is anticipated by mid-decade, based on long-term indicators (multi-century GDP trajectories) and current global trends (e.g., the Panic of 2008 and great recession of 2008-).

Saudi Arabia’s planned super-tower is an impressive example of early ebullience because it looks beyond the recession to the completion of the world’s tallest building for a lot of money.

The planned tower will soar to 3,281 feet (1,000 meters) and will include a hotel, luxury condominiums and offices. It would dwarf the Burj Khalifa, which is 2,717 feet (828 meters), and would also be the world’s tallest man-made structure.

Prince Alwaleed bin Talal announced the $ 1.23 B (USD) project that will be completed in 2016, shortly after the next Maslow Window is expected to open.

Is this really a lot of money in today’s world? Well if it were constructed in New York City, where building costs are higher, its price tag would exceed $ 5 B, which would make it comparable to the Panama Canal Expansion Project (another example of early ebullience) — just short of the cost of the original canal.

Although the world’s tallest buildings are usually not known for exceptional ROI — e.g., when it was #1, New York’s Empire State Building used to be known as the “Empty State Building” — the Saudi Prince sees ebullient global symbolism associated with his project:

Building this tower in Jeddah sends a financial and economic message that should not be ignored, It has a political depth to it to tell the world that we Saudis invest in our country.

And nobody has to hit Antony Wood, executive director of the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat, with a Mack truck; he gets it:

The world’s tallest building has never been about making the maximum financial return. It’s about ego. It’s about attention. It’s about making a statement.

Just so no one is misled about the scale of early ebullience on display in Saudi Arabia today, consider their plans for the super tower. According to WSJ …

The Saudi project is designed to be the showpiece of Kingdom City, a 57-million-square-foot megadevelopment north of Jeddah. Overlooking the Red Sea, it is slated to cost $20 billion.

Twenty billion … Now you’re talking! That’s ebullience befitting the next Maslow Window!

That was the week that was: Gallup reported that President Obama’s job approval rating fell to a record low of 40%. And the crisis of confidence in Obama was bluntly verbalized by billionaire Democrat Steve Wynn:

This administration if the greatest wet blanket to business, and progress and job creation in my lifetime…

The Huffington Post cited first quarter GDP growth of only 1.3% and a Q1 number that was revised downward to only 0.4% (from the previous estimate of 1.9%) as evidence that U.S. economic recovery will “remain slow through 2011.”

As if this weren’t enough bad news, some normally attentive readers of 21stCenturyWaves.com apparently became afflicted by negative “animal spirits” and questioned in emails to me whether a 2015 boom is in the cards!

Yes it is, and you can see more here:
“The Maslow Window — Summary.”

Nobel economist Robert Lucas believes that this chart is the secret to the coming prosperity.
Click

In his Milliman Lecture at the University of Washington in May, the Nobel economist Robert Lucas expllained that the U.S. (and other modern economies) growth trend since 1870 is 3% (2% per person), and

this ongoing miracle is mainly due to free-market capitalism.

In plots (see above) of per capita GDP growth since 1870 of 8 large, successful economies (e.g., UK, U.S., France, Germany, Japan), the “catch-up” in growth occurred after WW II but stalled in the 1970s; a 20-40% gap in income levels has appeared relative to the U.S.. According to Lucas, “European tax and regulatory structures discourage savings and work effort relative to the U.S…”

The 20-40% gap represents cost of larger welfare state.

In Lucas’ chart below, the long-term real U.S. growth rate of 3% is plotted against the U.S. recession of 2006 to 2011. It’s clear that current growth — except for the last 6 months (see above) — recovered to nearly 3%, but the rapid post-recession growth chatacteristic of most recoveries is not seen. Instead, GDP remains down by about 10% from the long-term trend.

How long will the U.S. growth gap continue?
Click

Lucas asks:

Recently, Stanford economist John B. Taylor (Wall Street Journal, 7/21/11) reminded us again that government economic policies really do have effects, and an empirical (rather than a political) approach to understanding them is invaluable.

For example, with lessons learned from the 1930s’ Great Depression and the 1970s’ Great Inflation, the 80s and 90s were a time of extraordinary job creation: 44 million new jobs. With lower tax rates and limited government spending, the result was economic growth, and

the federal budget moved into balance.

As the 21st century opened, ambitious politicians from both parties wanted to “tame the business cycle, increase homeownership, or provide the elderly with better drug coverage.” The avalanche of unintended consequences is well-known and includes:

a financial crisis, a great recession, ballooning debt and today’s nonexistent recovery.

Despite the U.S.’ current weak recovery, the road to near-term, JFK-style prosperity is clearly visible based on empirical, long-term studies of international economic growth by Lucas, Taylor, and others.

The only question is which U.S. political party will best manifest prosperity in 2012; the candidates who do it best will win.

Happy Birthday America !

Independence Day fireworks NASA-style as the Discovery launches on July 4, 2006
Click

It’s wonderful to celebrate the Declaration of Independence issued on July 4 in 1776. In particular we celebrate its most famous clause:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness

Today we believe that Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness will be inceasingly experienced around the globe as humans expand into the cosmos.

And, although the U.S. continues to experience significant economic uncertainty as well as the bittersweet last launch of the Space Shuttle this Friday, it’s clear that — on Earth and in Space –

“The Future Still Belongs to America,” according to Walter Russell Mead (WSJ, 7/2/11).

According to Professor Mead:

The geopolitics are favorable and the ideological climate is warming. But on a still-deeper level this is shaping up to be an even more American century than the last …

The is because the mega-trend of the 21st century is a “wave of change.”

Scientific and technological revolutions trigger economic, social, and political upheavals … In a century of accelerating change, the United States is better positioned to adapt than China, Europe, or the Arab world.

Wall Street’s Robert Doll (WSJ, 6/4/11) concurs that America’s edge is its “faster population growth, companies that are global in scope, and a culture of innovation and entrepreneurship.”

We are still the source of technological innovation and home to the greatest universities and the most creative businesses.

These assessments are consistent with long-term macroeconomic data and global trends that point to an approaching global economic boom which should trigger a new international Space Age by 2015.

Enjoy the fireworks!!

The American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) in their Daily Launch for 6/28/11 comments that:

In an op-ed for Space News (6/28, Subscription Publication), Bruce Cordell, co-founder of 21stCenturyWaves.com, writes that examining long-term trends, the cancelation of the Constellation program is “merely a speed bump on the road to near-term international commercial and scientific development of Earth-Moon space and even humans to Mars.” Cordell argues it is not just the availability of money that drives programs like Apollo to fruition but also by a confluence with an “exuberant” public whose “expanded worldviews made the Apollo program seem not only intriguing but almost irresistible – as reflected in 1960s opinion polls.” By looking at trends over the past 200 years with other big exploration projects, Cordell predicts that “a new international Space Age…should gain momentum by 2015.”

Thanks to AIAA for their note.
The full Space News op-ed is available HERE.

This forecast for a near-term, New Space Age is unusual because it’s based on a long-term, empirical approach that has major implications for business, technology, and education:

This glimpse of the future is not based on hope or optimism, but on long-term trends in the economy, technology and geopolitics that point to a near-term reignition of President John F. Kennedy’s 50-year-old vision of human exploration of the Moon and planets.

The “Maslow Window” model provides:
1) a framework for long- and near-term planning, including specific forecast models,
2) a marketing theme — space exploration is the most recent manifestation of the great explorations back to Lewis and Clark; and they are always linked with major economic booms and transformative technology development,
and
3) a morale boost — timing is based on patterns observed over the last 200+ years.

For more information see:
The Concept Page … Click HERE
and
The Maslow Window Summary Page … Click HERE

My Commentary, “Looking to the Past To Predict Next Space Age” appears in Space News this week (6/27/11).

This piece follows-up on my 2011 annual space forecast of 6 months ago.

Over the last 200+ years, each ebullient, twice-per-century cluster — i.e., a Maslow Window — of great explorations (e.g., Lewis and Clark) and macro engineering projects (MEPs: e.g., the Panama Canal) was triggered by a major economic boom like the 1960s Kennedy Boom; and another is expected by 2015.

Widespread affluence-induced “ebullience” fundamentally drives great explorations and huge technology projects like Apollo by rocketing many in society to elevated psychological levels in Maslow’s hierarchy where their worldviews are momentarily expanded.

Our current economic trajectory continues to look more like the 1893 to 1913 Panama Maslow Window timeframe (featuring the Panic of 1893) rather than the 1949 to 1969 Apollo Maslow Window (with no financial panic). Three years after the Panic of 1893 — about where we are now in June, 2011 relative to the Panic of 2008 — the second contraction of the 1890s Great double-dip Recession occurred. This may mean we’re either luckier or smarter than folks one century ago.

However, it’s important to realize that no Maslow Window of the last 200+ years has ever been delayed or significantly diminished in any observable way by a finncial panic or great recession in the decade prior to the Maslow Window.

Thanks to Warren Ferster, Editor in Chief of Space News, for his interest in the Commentary, and also to Todd Windsor, Copy Chief of SN, for his attention to it.

Amid what the U.S. Federal Reserve recently called a “disappointingly weak recovery,” it’s easy to become engulfed in what Akerloff and Shiller (2009) dsscribe as “Animal Spirits” — i.e., when negative psychology produces self-fulfilling prophecies. At times like this, historical perspectives are especially useful in reconnecting with reality.

For example, the presidency of John F. Kennedy is associated with one of the greatest periods of economic growth (the 1960s Apollo Maslow Window) in history. JFK’s ebullient mindset and actions set the tone for the most transformative decade of the last 100 years.

JFK, Vice President Johnson (left), and Jackie Kennedy watch the launch of the first American in space, Alan Shepard, in 1961.
Click

JFK, himself, saw his approval of manned spaceflight to the Moon in 1961 as

among the most important decisions that will be made during my incumbency in the Office of the Presidency.

JFK’s approach to Apollo provides insights into the coming decade, when a major economic boom is likely to trigger 1960s-style ebullience that historically causes civilization-altering technological spectaculars like Apollo to emerge.

Fortunately, John Logsdon’s excellent new book John F. Kennedy and the Race to the Moon (2010) offers a plethora of historical hints that suggest…

10 Lessons JFK and Apollo teach us about ebullience and the coming boom:

10. Apollo was an extraordinary decision by JFK that reflected the ebullience of the early 1960s.
The quintessential media figure of the time, Walter Cronkite, typified this mindset when he predicted that after Apollo 11, “everything else that has happened in our time is going to be an asterisk.”
Despite current conditions, do not be surprised to encounter — and even share — this exuberant mindset after 2015.

9. In 1961 the Soviets were ahead in space and there were significant technical issues facing NASA, yet JFK chose the Moon.
The Soviets launched 2 successful manned missions into orbit — including the first human into space (Yuri Gargarin) on April 12, 1961 — before the U.S. sent John Glenn into orbit on February 20, 1962. (Alan Shepard had become the 2nd human — and 1st American — in space with his suborbital flight on May 5, 1961.) And the Soviets added another first in June, 1963 when they launched the first woman (Valentina Tereshkova) into space. But in 1961 JFK was very concerned about the Soviet’s lead in rocket thrust. It was not until 2 1/2 years later (shortly after JFK’s death) that the U.S. Saturn 1 launch vehicle finally took the lead in that key category.
Despite great uncertainties, JFK’s ebullience provided an especially positive view of the future and the U.S.’s ability to prevail.

8. The future cost of Apollo was uncertain when JFK made his decision in 1961, but the 1960s boom initially made it nonessential.
Americans were so ebullient about space and Apollo that NASA’s first 5 years were characterized by “seemingly unlimited growth.” Amazingly, it wasn’t until January, 1963 that the New York Times initially suggested that:

Whether the $ 20 B (or $ 40 B) race to the Moon is justified …we do not think the matter has been sufficiently explained or sufficiently debated.

Notice that the Times didn’t know the cost either, even in 1963!
You’re immersed in peak ebullience when cost is not a central issue.

7. Ebullience is not limited to space; 1963 to 1966 was “The Perfect Storm” for social programs.
During this period President Lyndon B. Johnson was the author of many ebullient statements, including:

End poverty, conquer bigotry, heal the sick, teach all the young … We can do it all…

By 1966 “Even in the White House that kind of talk had begun to ring hollow…” when 385,000 Americans were fighting in Vietnam (Mackenzie and Weisbrot, 2008).
Ebullience is always a heady experience, but not always positive. And it usually ends sooner than expected. (It cost LBJ his presidency.)

6. Although by 1963 Congress had second thoughts, the American public supported Apollo through 1969.
Click

Roger Launius (2003) documents public support for Apollo in the 1960s. The top curve is ebullient; notice those who “approve of Apollo” fluctuate between 60% and 80%. In the middle, those who think “Apollo is worth the cost” are below 40% except for only 2 years: 1965 (45%) and 1969 (53%), the year of Apollo 11. Bringing cost into the question always confuses ebullient people, however the middle curve may appear more negative than it is. Other polls show that Americans traditionally wildly overestimate the cost of NASA; many think it consumes ~20% of the entire federal budget. Given a more realistic picture of NASA budgets, it’s likely the cost curve would ascend.
The ebullience driving 1960s space and social spending was strong for a total of 8 years, but it collapsed due to the war and costs.

5. In 1961 when he made the big decision, JFK was not certain the Soviets were racing to the Moon.
The U.S. had endured “the shock of the century” in 1957 when the Soviets launched Sputnik. This triggered the Space Age and the formation of NASA one year later. However, when JFK as president experienced the launch of the first human into space (Cosmonaut Yuri Gargarin) on April 12, 1961, he knew it was serious geopolitcal business. (Less than one week after Gargarin, the U.S. launched the unsuccessful Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba.) Given the Soviet threat and the ebullient reception for NASA, JFK concluded that the U.S. could not tolerate being #2 in space. In reality, Khrushchev didn’t approve a Soviet race to the Moon until August, 1964, and he lost power later that year.
The 1960s were the most recent example of an international “Critical State,” where ebullience is high, and positive things (e.g., Peace Corps, Apollo) and negative things (e.g., Bay of Pigs, Cuban Missile Crisis) can happen rapidly, seemingly without warning.

4. JFK considered several options, but ultimately believed that the Soviet space challenge required an ebullient response.
JFK was not particularly interested in space when he became president, and he initially considered a variety of alternatives to a Moon race. However, his idealism and ebullience were triggered by the Space Science Board report, chaired by Lloyd Berkner (McDougall, 1985),

Man’s exploration of the Moon and planets is potentially the greatest inspirational venture of this century and one in which the whole world can share; inherent here are great and fundamental philosophical and spiritual values which find a response in man’s questing spirit and his intellectual self-realization.

Indeed, as JFK told his science advisor Jerome Wiesner,

If you had a scientific spectacular on this earth that would be more useful — say desalting the ocean –or something that is just as dramatic and convincing as space, then we would do it.

Ultimately space won out because it was more ebullient, dramatic, convincing. Being #1 in space strongly reinforced America’s national power.

3. JFK saw the Moon as potentially an opportunity to collaborate with the Soviets.
JFK proposed that the U.S. and Soviet Union go to the Moon together. The first time was privately during his June, 1961 Vienna summit meeting, shortly after JFK’s announcement of the U.S. Moon program. Khrushchev declined because of military security relating to their ICBMs. The second time was a very public speech to the General Assembly of the United Nations on September 20, 1963. JFK was assassinated 2 months later.
Over the last 200 years, the twice-per-century “critical states” have always featured major booms and peak ebullience, but there’s been more international competition than cooperation, including during Apollo. Given the success of the International Space Station, this is likely to change during the 2015 Maslow Window.

2. “If we can put a man on the Moon …”
The Apollo Program gave birth to an ebullient, famous cliche and set a standard of excellence against which all other challenging endeavors continue to be measured. JFK made the Moon commitment openly in front of a joint session of Congress on May 25, 1961, more than eight years before the first astronauts landed on the Moon in 1969. All things considered, Apollo was one of the most ebullient, amazingly successful, peacetime projects in the history of the U.S..
As we approach the 2015 Maslow Window, we expect a new JFK-style leader to emerge and encourage the next quantum leap in human expansion.

1. Camelot-style ebullience — the driver of the Apollo Moon program — was triggered by the 1960s Kennedy economic boom.
The last 200+ years of economic and technology history are supportive of JFK’s experience: A major boom triggers widespread affluence-induced ebullience. However, it’s the ebullience that actually drives the “golden age” by catapulting many in society to higher levels in Maslow’s hierarchy. Elevated Maslow states, and their momentraily expanded worldviews, make great explorations and huge technology projects seem not only intriguing, but almost irresistible. However, when the Vietnam War eroded ebullience by 1966, the 1960s “Maslow Window” began to close.
When the next JFK-style boom occurs (expected by 2015), a transformative pulse of Apollo-style exploration will follow.

Harvard’s Martin Feldstein (Wall Street Journal, 6/8/11) asserts that “the economy is worse than you think.”

Growth during the coming year will be subpar at best, leaving high or rising levels of unemployment and underemployment.

Feldstein’s scrutiny of the numbers reveals that, because most of the anemic 1.8% first quarter growth for 2011 went into business inventories, “the actual quarterly increase was just 0.15%.” And the Obama administration’s “stimulus” package created a “bigger deficit without economic growth.” The situation will continue,

until someone enacts a plan to bring deficits under control without raising taxes.

What’s the solution to an increasingly imperiled recovery?
Click

Allan Meltzer of Carnegie Mellon emphasizes the generational implications of low growth.

After one generation, a one percentage point difference in growth rate becomes a 25% difference in per-capita income.

In contrast to the booming global ecnomy, Federal Reserve officials today (WSJ, 6/23/11) admitted that…

The U.S. economy is settling into a disappointingly weak recovery this year and next, and … they have done all they are prepared to do to spur growth for now.

Plus, the Congressional Budget Office today added to concerns about sinking home prices, falling comsumer confidence, and a “misery idex” at a 28-year high, by warning that if growth in the $ 14.2 T national debt is left unchecked, the U.S. could face a European-style “sudden fiscal crisis.”

Despite deepening concerns about our imperiled recovery, there is a growing recognition from diverse sources that rapid economic growth in the U.S. is possible just around the corner.

Prominent examples include:
1) Standard Chartered Bank documents that we’ve entered a new growth “super-cycle” of the type that culminated in the 1960s Boom associated with President John F. Kennedy,

2) Stanford economist John B. Taylor recently indicated that a 5% national economic growth goal is not some “pie-in-thesky number” and makes a “great deal of sense”,
and
3) William Halal, president of TechCast — an online think tank of 100 global experts — forecasts a “new economic boom in 2015“.

TechCast data show emerging technology frontiers are likely to lead the world out of global recession. Green Business, Climate Control, Alternative Energy, E-Commerce, and other sectors are likely to start the next economic upcycle about 2015.

Plus, based on long-term GDP growth trends since the 19th century, 21stCenturyWaves.com recently projected that a major, JFK-style economic boom — featuring 5% annual growth — is likely by 2015.

How will this transition occur?

It appears the U.S. is reliving key elements of its economic history of one century ago. The financial Panic of 1893 triggered the great 1890s recession, which featured 10+% unemployment and a double-dip. It’s reminiscent of our current trajectory — minus the double-dip, at least for now — since 2008.

The deep 1890s contraction soon resulted in a political realignment that ignited a major JFK-style boom. This spectacular 5% expansion surged through the first decade of the 20th century and triggered the stunning Peary/Panama/T. Roosevelt Maslow Window.

The importance of a growing, healthy economy will become the defining issue of 2012. As happened a century ago, the party that can best model prosperity will win.

For thousands of years, spectacular planetary alignments in the sky have been used to foretell disasters on Earth. After all, the Latin roots for “dis” and “aster”, mean literally “bad star”. Although today’s astronomers dismiss cosmic calamities due to alignments and emphasize their beauty, new science suggests the planets may indeed be influencing human affairs.

Years ago some claimed that the famous alignment of May 5, 2000 was a harbinger of cataclysms on Earth.
Click

Recently, it’s become clear that there is a major, multi-decade climate cycle on Earth about 60 years long with a temperature variation of 0.25 degrees C. Power spectra also identify weaker climate cycles of about 30, 20, 15, and 10 years.

In addition to direct T measurements, this is evidenced by climate data from ice cores, sea sediments, and a large variety of other records that extend back from decades to centuries. Even the traditional Chinese and Tibetan calendars are structured in 60 year cycles.

What’s equally intriguing is that ~60 is the magic number for the Kondratieff Wave (55-60 yr), the Stewart Energy Wave (56 yr), the Gaus Anxiety Wave (55-60 yr), and the time between transformative Maslow Windows (55-60 yr) that are well-documented and associated with long economic and business cycles since the 19th century.

Long business cycles have traditionally been linked with “creative destruction” caused by innovations in technology (e.g., railroads, electricity) that cluster in time, according to Harvard economist Joseph Schumpter (1942).

Others have suggested long waves are closely linked with — and possibly triggered by — generational cycles of Strauss and Howe (1991), major wars (Goldstein, 1988), and even sunspots (Modis, 1992).

After noting that the numbers of sunspots occur in relative peaks every ~55 years and that this rhythm is mirrored in tree rings, Modis makes the intriguing suggestion:

If the environment is modulated by such a pulsation, it is not unreasonable to suppose that human affairs follow suit.

In his recent game-changing article in the Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics, Duke University physicist Nicola Scafetta notes that the ~60-year climate cycle, and several others, are apparently

synchronized to the natural oscillations of the solar system, which are driven by the movement of the planets around the Sun.

For example, Jupiter and Saturn take about 12 and 30 years, respectively, to go around the Sun. Plus the time needed for Jupiter and Saturn to line up relative to the Sun is 20 years, while 60 years are required for the combined orbits of Jupiter and Saturn to repeat. All are factors of 60 and contribute to that super-cycle.

Based on his model, Scafetta confidently estimates that “at least 60% of the observed (global) warming since 1970 has been naturally induced” by the 60-year planetary cycle; i.e., not due to human-related emissions of CO2.

You may be aware of the National Solar Observatory’s stunning forecast this week. Based on “highly unusual and unexpected” behavior of the Sun, “the sunspot cycle may be going into hibernation.”

According to the National Solar Observatory’s Associate Director, Frank Hill,

Today via email Dr. Scafetta confirmed to me that his independent model is consistent with the NSO forecast. Indeed, his model

predicts reduced solar activity because of a 60-year cycle that was in its maximum in 2000-2002 and now is going down.

He also wisely cautioned us to wait for publication of his new results.

Imagine my surprise when Republican presidential candidate Governor Tim Pawlenty proposed a 5% national economic growth target the day after (Tuesday, June 7) my GDP post appeared — “Multi-Century GDP Trends Point to a Near-Term 1960s-Style Boom” — in which I showed that long-term GDP trends point to a JFK-style, 5% economic boom by 2015.

Are we headed for a new Camelot-style golden age of prosperity, exploration, and technology, or just a “new normal”?
Click

Of course I was unaware of Govenor Pawlenty’s economic plan, but a 5% goal is historically realistic as we approach the long-awaited, transformative Maslow Window.

This weekend, in his blog “Economics One”, Stanford economics professor John B. Taylor expressed support for Pawlenty’s proposal.

I think the goal makes a great deal of sense. It would focus policymakers like a laser beam on the great benefits that come from higher growth and on the pro-growth policies needed to achieve it. As with any goal, if you take it seriously, you’ll choose policies that work toward that goal and reject those that don’t.

In fact, according to Harvard economics professor Benjamin Friedman, rapid economic growth is a moral imperative.

Periods of economic expansion in America and elsewhere, during which most citizens had reason to be optimistic, have also witnessed greater openness, tolerance, and democracy. To repeat: such advances occur for many reasons. But the effect of economic growth versus stagnation is an important and often central part of the story.

But not everyone gets it.

For example, the Washington Post (6/9/11; R. Marcus) suffers from a short-term perspective.

Yes — very occasionally. Once in the past 30 years, with GDP growth of 7.2 percent in 1984. Pawlenty conveniently cherry-picks years (1983 to 1987, 1996 to 1999) that come close to his 5 percent target — but those periods followed stretches of economic slowdown. It’s certainly never grown at a 5 percent clip for 10 years straight …

Wrong twice. We are recovering from an “economic slowdown” so, as the Post implies, we should expect a burst in growth relatively soon. And we’ve previously had decade-long stretches at or above 5% — they’re called Maslow Windows.

For example, during the 1960s Apollo Maslow Window the U.S. grew at 5% for nearly the entire decade, stimulated by JFK’s famous tax cuts. And for 9 years during the Peary/Panama/T. Roosevelt Maslow Window — following the financial Panic of 1893 — growth was 5%. Plus for 12 years (1844 to 1856) during the mid-19th century Maslow Window — following the financial Panic of 1837 — mean annual growth was 5.8%.

A sustained, 1960s-style ~5% boom is the hallmark of Maslow Windows over the last 200 years. That’s one key reason a near-term, JFK-style boom is expected.

Looking at recent trends in productivity, employment, and demographics, Taylor’s back-of-the-envelope calculation projects about 2% employment growth and 2.7% productivity growth. Their sum suggests 5% annual growth sustained over a near-term decade is very doable.