It seems to me the current choices, dictated by culture, capital, and economics, are a) grow or b) decline.
Is a steady state possible? Can a cobbler, independent farmer, carpet cleaning service, or whatever, do their thing for 40+ years?
I don't know.
Certainly not if they accept outside investment capital, where the lender is expecting an ever greater return on their investment.
Certainly not if when there are predators. eg "Your margin is my opportunity" -- Jeff Bezos
Certainly not if your gig is mooted by technological progress.
Examples of successful steady state ventures would help me (us) think through these issues. But I'm struggling to think of some. Residential plumber (and similar trades)? Automobile mechanic?
The closest thing I can think of is small family-owned ventures. Or on a larger scale perhaps the Cuban cigar industry? It remains labor intensive and is locked to a specific region which means growth prospects are limited. It also exists under a socialist regime so there's no incentive for growth.
> Back in 2008, a Bank of Korea report found that of 5,586 companies older than 200 years in 41 countries, 56% of them were in Japan. In 2019, there were over 33,000 businesses in Japan over a century old, according to research firm Teikoku Data Bank. The oldest hotel in the world has been open since 705 in Yamanashi and confectioner Ichimonjiya Wasuke has been selling sweet treats in Kyoto since 1000.
https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20200211-why-are-so-man...
I've often wondered why Japan seems to maintain a culture of high quality artisinal work when the rest of the world is trending toward cheaper, lower quality mass produced goods. Perhaps these are related.
For example there is a video series of workers in Japan-- the titles are usually like "Daily Life of an X in Japan" and workers are often doing things in their downtime like cleaning the office, detailing the delivery trucks, power washing the sidewalks in front of the business, etc. In the US these practices would be seen as wasteful and would either be ignored, contracted out, or have a dedicated employee to do the work.
Unfortunately the Japanese model has its own shortcomings, but maybe there is a hybrid option that could benefit everyone.
Ask yourself, once this inflection point is reached and quality is no longer increasing, does a growth economy make sense? At this terminal stage of economic growth there is an increase in negative externalities in the pursuit of ever-diminishing profits. Much more waste as the shoes are built with worse and worse materials. More exploitation in an attempt to reduce labor costs. Do you think that over the last 30 years, shoes have increased in quality relative to the profit margins of these companies? If the answer is no, then it means we need to figure out a way to deal with terminal-stage industries.
Sure, there are people advocating for everyone to go live like the Amish, but to me degrowth means that if an industry can no longer achieve growth through innovation or increases in productivity, we should acknowledge that that industry has peaked, and not try to squeeze every last dollar out of it through exploitation or waste.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diminishing_returns