We are living through a period of profound misallocation. Enormous amounts of money, energy and material are still being poured into activities that only make sense in a growing economy. In a post-growth world, many of these investments cannot deliver what they promise. When financial bubbles burst, they do not so much destroy value as reveal that the value was never there in the first place. The damage was done earlier, during the period of optimism, when malinvestment was mistaken for progress.

This problem is sharpened by the growing divide between two economies. The real economy, grounded in energy, materials, food and labour, is already contracting. The financial economy, by contrast, continues to expand through debt, speculation and asset inflation. These two trajectories cannot coexist indefinitely. When money grows faster than the physical systems that support it, trust in money itself begins to fail. A fracture in the financial system is not a distant possibility. It is a structural outcome.

When that fracture occurs, even basic questions become difficult. How will trade function if trust in money collapses? How will essentials be exchanged? Modern economies depend heavily on imports, not only of discretionary goods but of energy, food, minerals and components. No country is truly self-sufficient. A breakdown in financial systems therefore becomes a breakdown in physical supply chains.

At the same time, consumerism continues to place excessive demands on the planet. Energy use remains high. Resource extraction continues. Environmental damage accumulates. Yet the ending of consumerism is rarely discussed in practical terms. How do societies adapt when consumption must fall, not by choice but by necessity? This is not simply an economic question. It is a social one.

Inequality adds another layer of instability. Wealth and power have become increasingly concentrated. These inequalities are not accidental, and they will be fiercely defended by those who benefit from them. As pressures increase, the gap between what systems can provide and what elites seek to preserve is likely to widen, not narrow.

Competition for scarce resources is already reshaping global relationships. The old assumptions of stability, cooperation and rules-based order are weakening. This is not an aberration. It is a predictable response to scarcity. Managing this process peacefully will be one of the hardest challenges of the coming years.

Climate change intensifies all of these pressures. Rising temperatures, disrupted food systems and extreme weather are already driving migration. These movements will grow. Attempts to manage them through borders alone will fail, because the underlying causes are structural.

Taken together, these trends point to a future defined less by growth and more by adaptation. The central task is no longer how to expand the system, but how to manage contraction without collapse. That requires honesty about limits, a rethinking of trade and money, and a shift towards more local, materially grounded forms of economic life. The alternative is not stability, but unmanaged breakdown.

What to do? I will sit back and watch. Apart from ridding ourselves of debts, there’s nothing we can do until the powers-that-be recognise that growth has ended. Then we will be able manage our own moves into localism.