The paper extends the research started with Borsato (2020). I develop an agent-based, stock-flow consistent growth model to analyze the interplay between income distribution, innovation and productivity growth. Results still show that the mounting shrinkage of the labour share impacts negatively upon firm's innovative effort. Additionally, I question the neoclassical belief on the negative interest-elasticity of investments, since decreases in the rate of interest are not associated with increases in capital accumulation. Finally, the panel cointegration analysis based on US manufacturing industries corroborates the theoretical predictions for the period 1958 − 2011.

The paper adds to the debate around Secular Stagnation in four ways. First, considering US historical data since 1870, the use of the term "Secular Stagnation" in the literature is misleading, since it should concern more long runs. Second, the slow growth in real GDP per capita experienced in more recent times represents a return to what US experienced before 1950. Third, we can speak about Secular Stagnation in terms of labour and multifactor productivity growth: their decline since the 1970s is not comparable to any previous period. In this sense, my findings provide views à la Gordon (2015) and Hein (2016) with some support, but less to Summers (2014b) negative natural rate hypothesis, which suffers from theoretical weaknesses. Fourth, despite the several approaches often implemented, we trace out a complementary or even convergence in policy implications.