[georgeecollins]

>> GDP is a meaningless measure for all but governments and the very elite.

Source?

The top three GDP per capita are: Lichtenstein, Luxembourg, Bermuda. The bottom three are: Afghanistan, Yemen, South Sedan. As an average person I would rather live in the top countries of the list than the bottom but that's just anecdote.

[xdennis]

I don't know why people are being to negative towards GP. (Maybe because he didn't argue his point?) It's well known that GDP is not a good measurement for common people.

You can have a rich elite and a high GDP, but that doesn't mean the common people are doing as well as the GDP suggests.

A good example of this is Ireland. It has a huge GDP. 129,132$ per capita. It's the 3rd richest country in the world if you look at it like that (Liechtenstein and Luxembourg are first and second).

But do you think the average Irishman actually makes 129,132$ per year? No. Ireland is a tax heaven and its artificially inflated by tax shenanigans from foreign multinationals.

There are other reasons why absolute GPD is bullshit. Even PPP GDP is a little bullshit.

[mmooss]

> It's well known that GDP is not a good measurement for common people.

It has many flaws, but can you name a better one?

> that doesn't mean the common people are doing as well as the GDP suggests.

Nobody who understands GDP would say everyone is doing as well (or poorly) as GDP suggests. Some people do better, some worse.

But people in places with higher GDP reliably do better. Visit a poor or middle-income country; the difference is unmistakeable and this debate becomes absurd.

Inequality is a major problem in high-GDP countries; that doesn't mean GDP is meaningless.

[Cold_Miserable]

HDI, electrical generation per capita, energy use per capita.

[christophilus]

Your point is a serious one, and well taken. But “South Sedan” made me smile. Seemed like a reference to rusting sedans on cinder blocks in the low-gdp rural south.

[ttoinou]

Taking maximas and minimas is only saying that the scale of GDP figures is interesting to look at. Like does it have 3 figured or 6 figures ? But that metric is easily done with others measures than GDP.

And yeah, if you study GDP its easy to see it’s a giant scam and the economy cannot be put into numbers. Qualities are better than quantities

[intermerda]

Do you have a historical example when a decrease in GDP in a country was accompanied with generally accepted increase in quality of life?

[ttoinou]

Why would you need that ? GDP does not have good theoretical foundations. We don’t need to pretend it’s a natural science like biology, it’s constructed from bad statistics, it’s worth nothing

[mmooss]

> if you study GDP its easy to see it’s a giant scam and the economy cannot be put into numbers. Qualities are better than quantities

You'll need to have some sources for that!

[ttoinou]

I don’t. It’s people who pretend the economy can be measured that should prove their point (they can’t)

[mmooss]

GDP has been studied and demonstrated for decades. I wonder if there are any economic metrics that are better studied.

[ttoinou]

Its an argument from authority. All those people could be wrong about what the economy is about, it does happen that 90% of people are wrong about something, collectively. And every country measures it differently.

Even if it was really meaningful, by the simple Cobra effect it would be made meaningless

[mmooss]

It's an argument based on research and expert consensus. What is your argument based on?

[ekhaliul]

Well this just tells you that if you play by someone else's rules you get money and investment pouring in and GDP going up. If you don't then its the opposite. The main question is do you prefer to play by your own rules or rules imposed by investment interests.

Edit: For an average person its not always true that an illusion of prosperity is always good. Eventually there might be a payback for all this capital.

[make3]

this is such a bad way to evaluate a metric. we want something that can distinguish small percentage changes in affordability for the people who live there

[Hikikomori]

I steal all your shit, you get reimbursement from insurance, gdp goes up.

[ipaddr]

The average citizen in those places do not reap the rewards. Those places are countries where laws are built for the rich and to shield money. GDP is not a great measure for the average person unless communism is fully realized.

[mmooss]

The average citizen is much better off than in low-GDP places. The issue is how much prosperity they miss out on because it's captured by a few.

The world has never seen an explosion in prosperity, and reduction in poverty, like the post-WWII and post-Cold War years, and it was accomplished via free markets, trade, etc. (not perfectly or exclusively, of course). Look at S Korea, Taiwan, Japan, Brazil, China, India - like nothing the world has ever seen. Billions lifted from poverty.

Look at Western Europe after the absolute destruction of two world wars, and compare their recovery with places that did not follow the path of free markets and trade.

[sltkr]

That's an overly simplistic take. Obviously the absolutely richest nations in the world are better places to live than the absolutely poorest. But that doesn't mean there is a strict ranking based on GDP.

For example, based on GDP/capita:

  - The United States outrank the Netherlands.
  - The United Arab Emirates outrank Italy.
  - Puerto Rico outranks South Korea.
  - Saudi Arabia outranks Japan.

I don't know about you but for all of these pairs I'd rather live in the latter rather than the former.