The future, by the Strib

http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle/15872952.html

Once again, the Star Tribune tries to look into the future, and once again, they confirm for me that they have a vision of the future that smacks against reality. This paragraph bugs me:

"Cars would be smaller, too, seating only one or two people. "Think of it as a Personal Transportation Vehicle, not a car," Barker said. Every home would have at least one such vehicle, he said. If additional space were needed for cargo or passengers, you could add a power-assisted module that you might rent for such a purpose. Markus took the idea a step further by conjecturing that homeowners could all have small cars but belong to a co-op where they share the use of larger vehicles for recreational trips or when they need to carry more passengers or cargo."

I seem to recall an article awhile back in the Strib where housing of the future was discussed, and they talked about having a co-op for cars. My question is, why on Earth does anyone think these sorts of co-ops will ever happen? In the future we will be sharing cars, or at least sharing "modules" when we have to cart the kids around? Are you kidding?!! I sure am glad the hippie ethos hasn't completely died yet. It's such an easy thing to rip on, mostly because it goes against self-interest. My belief, one which I will be talking about a lot on this blog, is that people and entities act in their own self-interest. Even charitable acts can be construed in this manner. And, people voluntarily giving up full-size vehicles goes against their own self-interest, especially if they have families. Oh, one other thing:

"Those are some of the ideas put forth by St. Paul futurist Joel Barker..."

So here's my question. How does one become a "futurist?" Is there a degree program for that? Did I miss out on this when I was at the U? I mean, if I say that in 25 years, most of the things presented in this article will not happen, does that make me a futurist? Or, am I not qualified to be a futurist, and therefore cannot challenge the assertions made in this article?