> No. Post-WWII America experienced a period of economic tailwinds that will likely never exist again. The UK didn't get bombed nearly to the extent of contine

> No. Post-WWII America experienced a period of economic tailwinds that will likely never exist again. The UK didn't get bombed nearly to the extent of continental Europe, and it was a mature industrialized society - the first one in fact - yet it also experienced the post WW2 growth. Same for the the bombed-out countries like Germany and France. > As we reached the 70's - 90's, we started to outsource. Our labor had become more expensive, but we offset this with cheap imported goods. We were still extremely and unilaterally wealthy. The US GDP didn't stop growing then, but wealth inequality vastly increased up to the present. The growth in inequality is the change, not the growing GDP. > Post China WTO, the wealth of America has been spent and "averaged out" over dozens of post-industrial economies Again, US GDP has effectively increased super-linearly since the 90s, even with China in the WTO. The problem is the benefits - even after the cheap consumer goods - have largely been realized by the wealthiest while the working class have been left out to dry. If the US hadn't gutted the working/middle class's jobs, assets and the public infrastructure they depend on during this period, perhaps we wouldn't have the instability we face now. > So the wealth of the Baby Boomers and their incredible economic tailwinds will not be felt again unless there's some wildly new disruption to the economic order. (AGI and automated manufacturing, maybe?) Wealth will continue to explode as technology allows ever greater efficiency and exploitation of resources. > The reality is that the American middle class will shrink and people will have to work harder. The American market doesn't have magical superiority anymore. Not if they stop fighting each other and instead fight for their piece of the productivity growth.