Anticipating the future is difficult to do. For one thing, doing so implies that we can predict what's coming down the road, a tricky proposition at best. For another, we humans are inclined toward satisfaction today. It has taken us some time to recognize that putting off certain pleasures today can secure a better tomorrow. Yet despite the inherent challenges, we must anticipate the future and act in accordance with what we see.

“In our every deliberation, we must consider the impact of our decisions on the next seven generations.”

- from the bylaws of the Iroquois Confederacy

Among the reasons we should consider the future in our deliberations and debates is this: It's the unselfish thing to do. If we as a society are not looking several generations out when making decisions, we are likely acting selfishly. We have reached a point in history where the resources required for acting with the distant future in mind are at our immediate disposal. Our predecessors worked diligently to bring us this far. If we fail to use the luxuries we've been given to anticipate and improve the future, we're letting down generations of both the future and the past.

Even if we're focused solely upon the future of America, we must look further out. We humans are often very short-sighted, and we don't anticipate that our own children and grandchildren will suffer if we make too many "easy" fixes today. Our ancestors made sacrifices - many of them gave their lives - to ensure a better future for generations that followed. We in modern-day America must sacrifice as well. Generally, giving up our lives is not required. Instead, perhaps by giving up a percentage of corporate profits, we take measures that preserve the environment. Perhaps by paying a bit more for groceries, we help working families escape the cycle of poverty. America is a country born of sacrifice and dreams. If our country fails, it may well be because of our unwillingness to sacrifice and the myopic nature of our modern dreams.

I shudder when I hear people claim we don't really have the resources necessary to prepare for the distant future. We do. Perhaps more than anything else, the time I've spent in developing countries in recent years has opened my eyes to the excesses of the developed world. We're always lamenting what people in poor countries do not have. Do we ever lament that we don't do more with the many things we do have? I'm not suggesting we'd have to sacrifice every creature comfort either. We absolutely could live comfortably and still make sacrifices today that would improve the lives of people living seven generations from now.

The future being unpredictable, of course, mistakes will be made. Maybe we will discover another inhabitable planet with room for billions of Earthlings. We'll alter the Camry so it can safely whisk us all away to this distant land. If so, then perhaps our efforts today to reduce population growth and fossil fuel consumption will have been for naught. But isn't it better if we do what is right knowing what we do today? Isn't it better to take the responsible, unselfish approach and then turn out to be wrong?

Even if burning oil has little to do with global warming, it is absolute fact that we're depleting a resource that will be gone in some not-so-distant tomorrow. If we're going to have to do it anyway - and it's possible that by delaying we're contributing to global warming - why not break the habit now? It's a drug. Our supply will be gone. We can savor the fix now and wait for the back-breaking effects of withdrawal to hit somewhere down the road, or wean ourselves gradually beginning today. I'm not an energy expert, nor am I a scientist. It's pure speculation for me to say so, but I find it hard to believe that with all the brain power, technology, and resources at our disposal, we couldn't make it happen. (Of course, we'd have to make a commitment to do so. Consider this: The United States federal budget for fiscal year 2006 included a 2% decrease in funding for the Department of Energy, responsible for energy research and environmental cleanup. The Defense Department budget increased by 4.8%. In absolute dollars, the $419 billion allocated for Defense was nearly 18 times the $23.4 billion set aside for the Department of Energy. The National Science Foundation, incidentally, was awarded just 7/10 of 1% of discretionary dollars budgeted in 2006.)

In the midst of writing this text, I read with some chagrin an article in the Times of India headlined, "Thank God Population Control Has Failed." The suggestion was made that India's huge population is the reason the country is an economic powerhouse today. Jobs will move to India because there are people willing to work for less money in less comfortable positions than those with similar skills in other nations. Is this a good thing? There are many great things about India, but its population is a tremendous burden. With more than 1 billion people to feed (17% of the world's population - occupying just 4% of its land), the sheer number of human beings contributes to challenges of economics, health care, environment, and quality of life. How any reasonable person can look at India and not acknowledge population growth as a problem is a mystery to me. And India certainly isn't the only place facing the problem. One can wander the outskirts of Buenos Aires or get caught up in the crowds of Istanbul and reach the same conclusion: Portions of our planet are overflowing with people.

I have heard some suggest that the problem isn't "ours" to deal with, that natural catastrophes will keep regional populations in check. But how can we look on and just allow people to starve to death in Bangladesh? People in Dhaka may be forced to live like animals at times, but they're still every bit as human as anyone else. Look out 100, 200, 500 years. It is "our" problem. As an American, I am proud that ours is a nation of immigrants. Yet burgeoning populations in the developing world put pressure on our systems. ("Human osmosis" - people will go where conditions allow them to live better lives.) We can choose to close off our country to immigrants (we're on our way already) or work to help others improve conditions in their own lands and stabilize their growing populations. I'm afraid we fail to anticipate how the rest of the world will respond if we attempt to close our doors much further. What's more, one can examine problems in cities as disparate as Los Angeles and Darby, Montana, and recognize that population growth is an issue even in America.

I digress. I'll conclude with a few bullets highlighting areas where anticipation of the future is particularly important as we go about making decisions in business and politics:

• Environmental preservation
• Alternative fuels; dependence upon fossil fuels to keep our economy functioning
• Stabilization of human population growth
• International relations; "fighting the war on terror"
• Employment; public policy involving issues of globalization and offshore outsourcing

Anticipate the future. Act accordingly and act responsibly. You may conclude that 200 years from now our world will be better off if we continue burning fossil fuels or fighting terror with weapons instead of ideas - but think critically. Don't make the mistake of being short-sighted. This doesn't mean we ignore the problems of today but instead that we carefully consider the long-term effects as we debate and implement solutions.