Was the Golden Age sustainable?

There is an obvious answer to the question: It was not. What we are engaging in, is counterfactual
theorising. If we accept any number of reasons, why things should come to an end, the evidence of
an end means the necessity of it.
However, beyond this brute engagement in philosophy of history, the question has obvious political
and theoretical implications that are still relevant today. It is not only the rhetoric of right-wing
populists, but indeed many leftists, unionists and all kinds of conservatives that paint a picture of
the 'Golden Age' as something we should aspire to return to.
Clarification: Golden Age which dimensions does it entail, which can we investigate in this rather
brief essay. What could we want to sustain? What is thankfully part of history?
Destillate: High rates of growth, extraordinary levels of technological progress, reduction of
inequality.
Explanations for the crisis of the 1970s
1) Regulation School
2) Brenner
3)
Were there policy initiatives that would have provided a way out that were not followed upon?