I can reasonably see all your points. I still think this “normality” is the surface of a bubble that has been building for decades and the foundations of which go back centuries. Maybe I’m wrong, but there is sufficient evidence to make it worth looking into.

In the geological record of evolution, there emerges Stephen Jay Gould’s “punctuated equilibrium.” Originally known as catastrophism.

The dynamic of the equilibrium stage is to fill out every niche and seek out every resource in doing so. This process selects for complexity and specialization, yet it also creates fragilities, where degrees of disruption can have ripple effects. Setting the stage for the punctuation, where the larger system collapses and the resulting stage selects for adaptability and luck.

Now capitalism is effective at creating anti-fragile features, as it functions as a larger ecosystem, where all the various parts are in some degree of competition. Yet the medium which enables this ecosystem to function is the money. When it becomes the bubble, it does carry the rest of the economy along with it, on the surface of this bubble.

“There will never be a pop where most people lose their money. There will be pops where the riskiest investors get burned. But they will print enough money so that most people don’t get burned. They have the power to prop up the market to an unlimited extent, and they will if it comes to that. That may have long term negative consequences, but that’s not a pop.”

So far, you are right. Yet can it go on forever? What if, to save the majority of investors, the entire monetary system is itself being put at risk? Is the money itself becoming the biggest bubble of all?

Time will tell.