possible, and has been achieved in various OECD countries over the last few decades, partly due to the move away from domestically based manufacturing. Unfortunately there is, so far, little to no evidence that global economic growth can be 'absolutely' decoupled from global resource use, in the sense that economic growth can increase while overall resource use decreases. Ikonoclast is not wrong, but economic growth is in terms of both services and products. Surely we can have economic growth in services AND promote sustainability in the use of resources to produce products. Employ more people to recycle and reuse, employ people to provide health and social services, develop sustainable energy solutions, provide education on birth control, improve agricultural land use. We can have economic growth and improve the planets sustainability. It's a non issue and independent of the economic paradigm. Anyhow surely MMT does not dictate perpetual growth once full employment is met. Deficit can equal zero, zero inflation, zero interest rates.....perfect! Regarding Ikonoclast: First of all, Earth is NOT a closed system in thermodynamic terms. A closed system does not have inputs and outputs (like the solar radiation your talk about). It may be a system at a "steady state" (or something close to it, if the inflow and outflow is approximately equal), but by definition it is not "closed" in any thermodynamic terms. Furthermore, humans can do a lot to control those inflows and outflows, which is the apparent reason for global warming. But there's nothing saying we