USA presidential elections 2016

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 24 Aug 2016, 11:48

Most of us are aware that GDP doesn't include what really matters, such as health of the biosphere or quality of life. It does include a shitload of negatives like traffic accidents and cancer.

Anyone presenting GDP as a supposedly positive part of his/her argument doesn't understand the argument.

Automaton · Post by **Automaton** » 24 Aug 2016, 11:51

What's wrong with using gdp?
This is old, but still clear:
http://dieoff.org/page11.htm

And with regard to 'well-being'?

"While the UK does indeed enjoy high economic growth, it currently ranks in the bottom 20 per cent of converting growth to wellbeing."
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/the ... 51051.html

woodburner · Post by **woodburner** » 24 Aug 2016, 12:58

I wonder how many other people in parliament have such a minimal grasp of the significance of the indicators they use as a reference when they are discussing policies, and what will be beneficial for the country. The last few posts here have, once again, highlighted a worrying situation.

Post by **kenneal - lagger** » 24 Aug 2016, 14:11

I've been able to find plenty of stuff relating to the US but I can't find the similar articles relating to the UK which I've seen in the past. Here also. I'll look later as I got some work to finish off now.

PS_RalphW · Post by **PS_RalphW** » 24 Aug 2016, 16:08

My new job is paying only a slightly higher wage than I had back in the 1990s. As it is full time I will be taking home more than I have in the last 6+ years.

But at least it is reasonably well paid (national average household income) and in a good cause (renewable energy) although perks do not extend beyond a desk doubling as a packing station, and a chair that is probably a serious health hazard...

even have to take my own laptop to work on. I have been promised a new (second hand) one soon.

johnhemming2 · Post by **johnhemming2** » 24 Aug 2016, 17:16

Which is all well and good until you work out that tax revenues are linked to the GDP such that the funding of public services faces its challenges with a lower GDP.

Much that I agree with the argument that the GDP does not absolutely measure the human condition. On the other hand it is not an unimportant statistic.

woodburner · Post by **woodburner** » 24 Aug 2016, 19:45

Only important if you are a politician trying to score a point, or an economist needing something to justify talking crap. GDP goes up (suits politicians) in the event of war (not good), natural disaster (not good) runaway inflation, possibly assisted by quantitative easing, (not good), rampant increase in house prices, assisted by Osbourne, indeed this was the mainstay of his efforts to keep GDP going up (not good).

So you can see it's a really rubbish statistic.

johnhemming2 · Post by **johnhemming2** » 24 Aug 2016, 19:51

woodburner wrote: So you can see it's a really rubbish statistic.

Only if you don't depend to some extent on state funding.

vtsnowedin · Post by **vtsnowedin** » 25 Aug 2016, 09:18

Using GDP measured in dollars or some other currency can be deceiving.
For example if oil production dropped by half, measured by barrels delivered the price might well triple so the GDP measured in dollars would increase while in fact the economy had decreased.

johnhemming2 · Post by **johnhemming2** » 25 Aug 2016, 10:12

All systems of measurement can have issues. It is, however, best to start with agreed facts.

If people believe they are "on their knees" now I wonder what people will think when resource depletion kicks in.

woodburner · Post by **woodburner** » 25 Aug 2016, 15:44

Well, I suppose some people are addicted to smoking cigarettes and some are addicted to GDP. Both are bad, but you won't convince an addict.

johnhemming2 · Post by **johnhemming2** » 25 Aug 2016, 17:09

At the moment I am trying to resolve an issue for a destitute person who is bed bound. That person depends upon state support. There are people who do.

woodburner · Post by **woodburner** » 25 Aug 2016, 18:20

I'm sure a graph of GDP will be a great comfort.

johnhemming2 · Post by **johnhemming2** » 25 Aug 2016, 19:42

What it means is that I know what the consequences are of government running out of money.

Automaton · Post by **Automaton** » 26 Aug 2016, 10:03

johnhemming2 wrote:What it means is that I know what the consequences are of government running out of money.

You seem to be saying that you believe a high GDP means, firstly, that the Government has more money, and secondly that your 'bed bound destitute' person would benefit from that. Both of these assumptions are obviously wrong: firstly a high GDP does not necessarily mean the government has more money, as it could be high due to spending rather than income, and secondly the person you are helping could be in exactly the same position even if the government did have more money; they might decide to spend it on pay rises for mp's instead, for example.

But if what you're suggesting were true, then we should clearly be looking to encourage all the war, crime, and natural disasters that we possibly can, for the delightful benefit of a higher GDP...