The most insightful comment I have seen in this thread. It assumes a single investment context, the global (read: western) financial system, right? Is the lat

The most insightful comment I have seen in this thread. It assumes a single investment context, the global (read: western) financial system, right? Is the latter more firmly wedded to the idea of growth than the rest of the world, or is that an illusion? Consider the (unsuccessful but suggestive) attempts to establish a commodities-backed currency by BRICS. Is this an attempt to sustain growth by alternative means, or to preempt and manage its end? My impression is a system in which the national interest takes a backseat to investor interests can't contemplate reform in which the number might cease to go up, because growth is a load-bearing feature of governance (read: those in and with a hotline to government want growth for their own benefit, and need it to secure the support of a population which has also come to expect it). Some nations, while heavily dependent on the global financial system, have maintained at least the semblance of sovereignty, on the other hand, and may be able to consider the situation in (slightly) more realistic terms. Of course, decline is nearly as ripe for exploitation as growth, while perhaps requiring more expenditure in narrative construction, so I hazard no guess on which system prefaces a more humane future. Is this a reasonable interpretation?