DISQUS

soundslikeaustin · 1 year ago

I am really skeptical about all of this... GDP growth creates jobs and more of the citizen can have more stuff... but "citizen happiness" is more psychologically and culturally influenced more than based on a certain standard of living. ... also, this is the worst comment ever...

blakeborgeson · 1 year ago

I'm glad you wanted to take the discussion up with me--that's the best thing blog comments are good for. Plus, it gives me an excuse to clean up and qualify my position a bit.

Another point I'd make against my general tone here of gdp not necessarily being a good thing is that gdp _generally_ means more stuff for the citizens. And the government being, in theory at least, here to serve in the best interest of the citizens, and the citizens of this country pretty universally wanting more stuff, it makes sense that the government should try to give it to them, as long as it's heeding the spirit of their desire and not just the letter (ie, not screwing them over by giving them what they ask for without them understanding the consequences).

The reason I emphasized "generally" there is in line with the position of my post--that in many more cases than people are aware of today, because of environmental, social, and other cost allocation being incomplete or incorrect, incrementally higher gdp can indicate people being as a whole worse off. If a city is flattened by an earthquake or a flood and insurance pays for it all to be rebuilt exactly as it was, the gdp goes up. When more criminals in a city destroy more property, the gdp goes up in 3 ways off the top of my head: the property has to be repaired or replaced; more policemen are employed by the city; more prisons are built and prison guards hired. We know that crime in fact isn't good for anyone, but at least in the immediate-tem, it's good for the gdp. What are your thoughts on that?

Dan Graham · 1 year ago

Also, don't forget WWII pulling us out of the Great Depression by providing lots of jobs. Generally war is considered a bad thing as well.

Not really sure what is being argued here. GDP seems to be an economic indicator and the argument about whether an improving economy makes people happy is a much harder question to answer...people dying today or getting robbed today or having their homes destroyed by earthquakes today seems bad. But really, if it ends up stopping starvation or joblessness down the road, is it bad in the long run? Sounds like a utilitarianism question to me.