That may be, but the western world is then abnormal. US population is projected to peak at 2030, and a number of countries already have negative population growth. Exponential growth assumptions should not be made for long periods ahead.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population...
We have never before experienced a reduction in the human population for any extended period of time.
I wouldn't count the US out yet, it can easily augment its population with immigration. So can all the other developed countries.
Anyway, regardless, making a currency with a fixed supply doesn't work under any scenario. With a constant or increasing population, you want to increase the money supply. With a decreasing population, you want to decrease it.
Various operations by the Treasury and Fed affect the banks. Then you get a shiny new credit card in the mail. I wouldn't call that wealth redistribution.
Inflation is by definition a rise in price levels, usually measured by the CPI (whose definition is sometimes subject to debate, but no measure of price levels is perfect; the important thing is to choose one that's reasonable and then stick to it).
Inflation, i.e. a rise in price levels, can then cause an increase of money supply measures, as producing firms take on larger amounts of credit to finance their operations, and this leads to a (rather weak, and only valid over the long run) correlation of inflation and growth of money supply. There are also tertiary effects that can cause both inflation and growth of money supply (such as excessive government deficits). But it's important not to confuse those things.
I don't think we'll reach a peak of technological progress in the 2030s.
Unless, of course, economic stagnation is encouraged by discouraging the inherently risky process of investment by making the average return zero.