> Given that there would be no growth in such an economy, there would also be no wealth creation. No, because people still need to eat, consume electricity, co

> Given that there would be no growth in such an economy, there would also be no wealth creation. No, because people still need to eat, consume electricity, consume entertainment, etc. So wealth is still created. If it's a no-growth economy, that wealth is consumed at the same rate it's created. > So over time, the value of the money would deflate. No, it would be constant (assuming no money creation by the central bank). > If the Gini coefficient went to zero (ie equal wealth distribution), the need for money would effectively disappear. No, you need money as a means of exchange and a store of wealth, just like now. > So would banks. No, because you need to store and transfer money.