07-21-2019, 11:12 AM
For the first point, the imprinting model already accounts for the phenomenon of elders staying active longer. Note the space between the predicted end of this turning (2022) and the last 2T (1980) is 42 years, whereas that between the previous 4T (1945) and 1980 is only 35 years. The 7 year increase in half-saecula length (14 years for a full saecula) is a direct effect of the older people still playing active roles. This fact does not account for how the current turning, although clearly a social moment, does not seem to be either a 4T or a 2T but has some characteristics of each.
For the second point all of your examples are coming from the recent saecula. The period when the 22 phase of life predicts new generations showing up too early refers to the ten turnings from 1435 to 1704.
As for the last point. Quite correct. This still could be a 4T its not over yet. But if a decade from now we still have the same situation, extreme polarization, ten more years of climate change with no action, perhaps another financial panic and continue lack of wage growth, it will not look like we had a 4T.
For the second point all of your examples are coming from the recent saecula. The period when the 22 phase of life predicts new generations showing up too early refers to the ten turnings from 1435 to 1704.
As for the last point. Quite correct. This still could be a 4T its not over yet. But if a decade from now we still have the same situation, extreme polarization, ten more years of climate change with no action, perhaps another financial panic and continue lack of wage growth, it will not look like we had a 4T.