[Retric]

First do you really think people will get more injured to game GDP?

Anyway the metric is capacity to fulfill peoples wants. If the population has injuries then it will be less productive and therefore have a lower GDP. See the broken window fallacy.

[lmm]

> First do you really think people will get more injured to game GDP?

I think politicians will be incentivized to adopt systems that underfund preventative care in favour of more expensive emergency care, and this has already happened.

> Anyway the metric is capacity to fulfill peoples wants. If the population has injuries then it will be less productive and therefore have a lower GDP.

Only to the extent that those injuries affect economic productivity. Someone at the bottom will "earn" more in one medical bankruptcy than in an entire lifetime of minimum-wage work.

[Nullabillity]

> First do you really think people will get more injured to game GDP?

Death squads going out and punching people to get them into hospitals? Probably not.

Lowering safety/emissions/etc standards in ways that both lead to increased immediate profit and (hopefully unintentionally) causes an increase in injuries over time? Absolutely.

[Retric]

There is a balance between worker safety and productivity. Even the CCP who cares about human rights about as much as a shark is still trying to reduce pollution to some degree because the current level is a net negative on GDP.

As such even your example is really about productivity not simply using healthcare to boost GDP.