I'm interested in both your list and the reasons why. Submitting your list before reading other's contributions would be preferred.
Optionally: who is (or isn't) successfully addressing them. Individuals, organizations, companies, governments, other. How and/or why not?
1. Water - Access to clean, safe water is an increasing concern in some highly populated areas. We will see a serious water issue in the US plains in 30 years, jeopardizing agriculture in that area.
2. Food - Currently we produce enough food but it's not evenly distributed. We also have some concerns over sustainability and environmental impact. Estimates say we can feed 8-12 billion people depending on advances in technology.
3. Waste Management - Feces and trash are a major concern. Gates is sponsoring research on toilets that don't require much water and don't require expensive treatment plants. Composting toilets could save a lot of water and possibly allow for cheaper, more water efficient greywater systems. This tech can also allow you to build in areas that skeptics were not traditionally possible. Compostable materials like cellophane, mycelium, or plastic substitute made from cassava or corn would help with the trash issue.
4. Housing/Land Management - I'm too dumb to explain this. Maybe Mark Twain said it best with his statement about buying land since they don't make it anymore. This especially plays into agricultural with the shrinking amount of land suitable for agriculture.
5. Education - No, I'm not talking about college. Basic logic/philosophy, personal finance, and civics need to be prioritized in school. To overcome the other issues we need a cohesive effort to make a meaningful impact.
Also, this is perhaps the more eloquent version of my answer.
Nuclear waste has been piling up since the first reactors went online and are stored onsite. The US designated Yucca mountain in Nevada as the long term storage site but due to NIMBY it has been in limbo meanwhile nuclear waste keeps growing.
Rising sea levels are estimated to displace many millions of people which will lead to refugee exodus with many eyeing Europe and the USA.
Increasing bitterness and division in US politics make it easier for demagogues who promise quick fixes to gain power. These charlatans may lead us to a path of self destruction.
He made the point if you had a Hollywood production team and a subject matter expert, you could make amazing online educational videos that people would actually like to watch.
The closest thing I could find now is a high school history teacher making animations on YouTube called MrBettsClass.
There is so much potential here to expand this.
Then there is the other angle. Are there best practices we could do as a nation? Not common standards that lump everyone into one category, but actual things tailored for different types of children that could maximize their learning?
I adopted this notion that every child has the potential for genius after reading the book How to Teach your Baby to Read. Its been around since the 60s. I think it comes down to a lot of one on one time with the child. You try teaching something and adapt to how they respond. Technology can only help so much in this regard. You have to be a parent that is invested in helping your child.
Going a bit farther, people dehumanize other people, and then feel all right about treating them inhumanely. They do so based on race, gender, cis/trans status, politics, religion, sometimes even sports teams.
1. It's wealth inequality / extreme weath / the wealthy nations (say: OECD, G-8, G-20) which are the bulk of the impact problem.
2. Technology will transcend any inherent global limits.
3. Limits may exist, but Earth could sustain far more people, possibly trillions.
4. Attempts to limit reproduction are authoritarian, eugenicist, and/or nationalistic.
The reason is well human decency for a start. And it is hypocritical to look down on people that harm other people if we are doing it systematically.
I'm old enough to have seen 14% per year inflation in the 1970s, so 2% doesn't impress me as inflation igniting. More to the point... where's the inflation from QE in 2008? It, um, never really showed up. We continued creeping along at 2% a year, sometimes less. So I'd regard that as experimental refutation of the "Fed printing money, so inflation is going to ignite" thesis.
More precisely, I think the Fed printing money can ignite inflation, if they print more than the economy grows. In 2008, they didn't do that with QE. They created $4 trillion, which almost exactly offset the $4 trillion that vaporized in the crash, and the result was that we avoided another Great Depression without igniting inflation. The Covid crisis... well, it's too early to tell, but they might pull off the same feat.
2% inflation per year since 2000 is evidence of great stability, not of out-of-control Fed money printing.
Inflation is the hidden tax. Instead of loudly imposing new or higher taxes, government is quietly printing money. Same result for citizens - their buying power is less.