This is obvious. And, again, the point is that the relationship between GDP and social outcomes after some point breaks down or becomes irrelevant.
Many things can lead to degrowth, and some could be necesary. What I point out is that degrowth is allwayws a negative side consequence. You do not plan for it, you suffer it (the less, the better).
It seems strange to argue in favour of not planning for a negative consequence of something that may be necessary.
This is obvious. And, again, the point is that the relationship between GDP and social outcomes after some point breaks down or becomes irrelevant.
It seems strange to argue in favour of not planning for a negative consequence of something that may be necessary.