Central banks will be forced to do whatever they can to drive a constant rate of growth, which includes infinite QE and NIRP. They will do this until the music inevitably stops.

Monetary policy can only paper over the real issues. Central banks have been screaming for the past decade that governments need to reform fiscal policy to drive meaningful economic growth. Wishing something does not make it so. Representative democracy, as is universal within the American Empire, is susceptible to populism and thus is systemically inclined towards ever-increasing budgets. People are generally resistant to change, and they want free things, so they'll vote for whoever will deliver that. Moreover, companies benefit from slanting the system in their favor without long-term consideration of the wider effects, e.g. the military-industrial complex.

This isn't a libertarian/liberalist tirade; I'm just making the observation that our system of government is fundamentally unable to deliver meaningful fiscal reform. In other words, to achieve fiscal reform we would have to reform government -- which ain't gonna happen without economic failure anyway.

There's another obvious way to drive growth however -- it's the way we've gotten here since 1900 -- but for whatever reason, we continue to ignore it.

Ultimately, economic growth is stalling (and will continue to stall) because our economically-productive populations are shrinking. We're experiencing diminishing returns on productivity via technology, and we're deluding ourselves that Europeans can simply be replaced with Arabs or Africans (putting aside the genocidal nature of such belief, it's wrong and the data show that). To their credit, East Asians don't fall for such ridiculousness, but their birth rates have collapsed all the same. At least they'll still have a society when the economy fails.

The solution is clear: we need to devote monumental effort to social engineering to get Europeans and East Asians to have more children. Bring the birth rate back up to 4 or 5 per woman, and we'll resume a stable rate of economic growth. With another 100 years of runway, we can eliminate scarcity in food, shelter and transport, and from there we have more flexibility.

The alternative is systemic collapse.

I don't know why this isn't being recognized, least of all by the transnational elite who have the most to lose.