[latexr]

> One guy pays the AI to dig a hole, the other guy pays the AI to fill in the hole. Back and forth they go, raising the BNP but otherwise not accomplishing anything.

Not accomplishing anything would be better than what is actually happening. Like with the hole example, once you fill it back up there’s a good chance you can still tell a hole was dug in that place.

What does “BNP” stand for in this context?

[JohnKemeny]

Norwegian, Danish, and Swedish all use BNP (Brutto National Product) for GDP. It could be German, although BIP is more common there (Brutto Inlands Product).

[axlee]

Could be a swede who meant "GDP" (BNP = BruttoNationalProdukten = Gross Domestic Product)

[globular-toast]

More plausible than "British National Party".

Does it raise GDP, though? I would have thought a more accurate thing to say is it raises the global temperature.

[taylorius]

>More plausible than "British National Party".

Maybe they were using Grok :-)

[vidarh]

Two units of work have been carried out, so yes it raises GDP.

[globular-toast]

GDP isn't about units of work, it's about the final product. So using two units of work instead of one to produce the same thing shouldn't affect GDP. But perhaps you are implying GDP is not correctly calculated?

[_heimdall]

That depends on how you're calculating GDP. If you are summing up all expenditures or incomes, the paid work done by each AI would be counted. If you're counting production, meaning the value added, it probably wouldn't count since digging a hole only to fill it back in created no value.

[vidarh]

GDP calculates the market value delivered. In this case of the labour. If someone is paying for the labour, GDP will be affected by the value of that labour. If the net output in terms of a product at the end is zero, then that does not erase the labour.

The only case where digging and filling a hole does not increase GDP is if the labour is not paid for.

EDIT: Basically, the two methods you list are the income or expenditure ways of calculating GDP, but in both cases consumption by employers is a factor, and so the payment for the labour increases the GDP irrespective of whether they also increase the final output.

[vidarh]

GDP is about products or services. If someone is paid for digging a hole, then that a finished, delivered service. Filling it the same. If you dig and fill a hole without anyone paying you for either, sure it won't affect GDP, but if someone pays you, that the net result is no change does not alter the fact that you have been paid to dig a hole and to fill a hole.

The method used to calculate the investment can affect whether the income produced increase the GDP or whether only the consumption generated by that increased income is counted, but in a real-world scenario either alternative will increase the GDP.

> But perhaps you are implying GDP is not correctly calculated?

That GDP doesn't accurately reflect productive, useful effort for this reason has been a core part of the criticism of GDP since it was first formulated.

[dxyms]

Maybe GDP in german or dutch?

[ruune]

It's BIP, Bruttoinlandsprodukt, in german

[wsintra2022]

Business needs profit