Lol, OK. Says LibertyStudent who proclaims from above who is worth of the attention of the users of the fora and who is a credible source. Who also happens to be one of the more dogmatic members (behind nirgrahamUK of course, he really takes first place in this competition).
You’re conflating uncertainty with certainty about a somewhat bleak future. Look, in your situation people know what will happen in the future, they know resources will be scarcer and as such readjust their value scales so as to prepare for the future. As for your growing economy example, to begin with as wealth increases there is a shift down a given time preference schedule. Meaning, time preferences fall. As for the shift upwards of the actually schedule itself, this is an exogenous variable and can’t be determined a priori. Although, you do seem to be relying on something like Garrison’s exposition of secular growth, which Salerno correctly pointed out to be faulty. An economy grows as the result of purposive actions of individuals in an attempt to increase future consumption. The notion that they first decrease their time preference and then increase it when growth occurs is somewhat silly.
That’s somewhat tangential to the issue at hand though. The point is that if you imagine an individual to plan for X years, if out of the blue it becomes possible to adequately plan for X - 5 years, what you’re saying is that the individual will somehow respond by planning for X + 5 years.
There is no increased uncertainty in your scenario, people are still fairly confident of the future.