• Neuromancer
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    9 months ago

    Exactly. You have a lot of funny money being passed around but that doesn’t mean anyone is making a living wage or if people are poor or not. Cost of living and income are more important. In some states it’s cheap to live and you’re paid accordingly. Other states it’s expensive and you’re paid more but not always enough for the living. GDP is fine to track things at a high level or national level but horrible for tracking how workers are doing

    • neanderthal@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      I even question the usefulness at high levels. It doesn’t measure how much wealth is produced. Say our GDP is 10 billion. Let’s say 2 billion is tshirts that suck and get thrown away. Next year we make tshirts that last 5 years and our GDP is 11 billion because they cost more. Year 3, it shrinks to 9 billion because we don’t have to make as many tshirts. We are better off in year 3 than year 1 by a billion, because we actually kept those shirts instead of tossing them.

      I would like to see GDP numbers adjusted for useful production. E.g. since 40% of food is trashed, cut that portion of the GDP by 30% (we need some wiggle room so a bad crop doesn’t cause a famine)

      • Neuromancer
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        I’m not an economist, as such I don’t understand all the nuances for gdp but it seems every time a dollar trades hands, it impacts the gdp.

        The problem is a lot of its funny money.

        We also base our budgets on gdp. As such it’s screwy as we spend like all of its being taxed.

        Military is 3% gdp which doesn’t place us in the top 10 for spending. Yet on dollars we are the highest spender by far but we don’t collect enough to cover our debts.