5 ms·

GDP is not a north star metric. GDP in the US is high and we have more suicides than ever. Many authoritarian (or especially populist) governments KNOW they wi

GDP is not a north star metric. GDP in the US is high and we have more suicides than ever. Many authoritarian (or especially populist) governments KNOW they will lower the GDP because by limiting low-wage labor immigration or focusing on nurturing a native culture or preserving the environment and not buying into a soulless consumerism/globalization they are creating a GDP cap. "growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell" --edward abbey (I don't know anything about what's happening in Turkey, I just don't believe in GDP as a metric to chase)

pergadad 7y ago
It is incredibly hard to shrink the GDP though. That's what Erdogan managed nonetheless - installed a kleptocratic oligarchy under the guise of religious conservatism. All outside investment vanished and national players became beholden to the gov rather than to meaningful investment. Unemployment is high, as are food prices, despite super cheap labour migration from Syria (essentially used as slaves) and massive cash infusions by the EU.
Excel_Wizard 7y ago
Would you say that you agree with GP's point though? It's not as if there are other things that are getting better in Turkey to counterbalance this particular measure.
p1necone 7y ago
I'd like some kind of standard metric that adjusts gdp to spending power on food, housing etc, and weights based on standard deviation amongst the populace (lower being better). Unadjusted gdp seems like an entirely pointless metric when as you point out you can look at places like the USA where despite having high gdp there's still widespread poverty.
- abakker 7y ago
  The metric you are looking for is Purchasing Power Parity - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purchasing_power_parity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purchasing_power_parity
  - sgnelson 7y ago
    And also the Big Mac Index. https://www.economist.com/news/2019/07/10/the-big-mac-index https://www.economist.com/news/2019/07/10/the-big-mac-index https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Mac_Index https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Mac_Index
- ska 7y ago
  Standard deviation of what, wealth? Income? You're on the right track though, at minimum you need to use something like purschasing power parity (PPP) to account for some effects, and wealth distribution to account for others. Doing these comparisons meaningfully isn't easy to get right.
thaumaturgy 7y ago
I think we're in agreement here. I purposely didn't imply that GDP growth was a good indicator of smart social policies, just that GDP shrinkage (especially to that extent) was an inarguable indicator of bad social policies. There may also be GDP growth in a country with bad social policies. I wouldn't expect there to be much GDP shrinkage in a country with smart social policies, though.
capkutay 7y ago
I mean why use any metrics at all of you're going to try to correlate them with something seemingly unrelated with no context like # of suicides?
- devmunchies 7y ago
  I was saying that US has high suicides despite a high GDP. Not that there is a correlation. Actually # of suicides would be a good metric for a country’s health.
  - sgnelson 7y ago
    Only if you take in the affect of geography. And by that I really mean the amount of sunlight available during the different seasons of the year. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_in_Greenland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_in_Greenland
lunchables 7y ago
>GDP in the US is high and we have more suicides than ever. I think this is my favorite new "correlation does not equal causation" example.
- devmunchies 7y ago
  I wanst implying that they were correlated at all. Simply that a high GDP isn’t a useful metric since the people in the US are still unfulfilled in other ways.
Bartweiss 7y ago
This is true, but I think it's significant that Erdogan has been promising (along with many other things) economic growth in a fairly traditional sense. His voter base is largely rural and traditional, but to my knowledge he's been offering continued economic growth with rural areas seeing more benefit and less disruption, and has failed to deliver. Even if GDP is a bad thing to optimize, it's significant any time leadership fails on its own metrics. More broadly, I think lots of nations today could maintain healthy economies with flat or shrinking national GDP, but those are countries which have little reason to expect 'natural' GDP increase without a growth ideology. Most obviously, post-industrial nations which can't rely on growing populations or rapid labor productivity boosts from urbanization and infrastructure investment: Sweden or the UK could plausibly operate at near-constant GDP, and Japan could even grow per capita GDP while shrinking national GDP. More subtly, nations which actively avoid pursuing the common arc of demographic transition, urbanization, and industrialization: Mongolia or Bhutan might try to take an entirely different path. And crucially, any of these nations would need to plan for the outcome: if Sweden 0% GDP growth without intending to, it would point to serious economic problems. Given all of that, Turkey seems like a singularly bad candidate for falling total GDP. The population is still growing at 1.5% and labor productivity at 2%-3%, while experiencing urbanization and major infrastructure expansion. Crudely put, 1.015*1.025 ought to net Turkey 4% GDP growth without considering anything any other factors at all, so a substantial decline points to something going badly wrong.
hyko 7y ago
It’s probably the closest thing we have to a North Star metric when evaluating a country. Everything that people desire is underpinned by GDP, and it isn’t particularly high anywhere on Earth.
- icebraining 7y ago
  > Everything that people desire is underpinned by GDP That's a very extreme position. People desire more than what can be bought at the market. https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/may/24/robert-kennedy-gdp https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/may/24/robert...
  - hyko 7y ago
    True, but they can realise those desires more easily if they’re available at the market. In fact it’s hard to imagine an area of human interest or endeavour that is not supported by the activities measured by GDP in some way. I’m not saying it’s the only metric we should attend to, or even that it’s a perfect economic metric, but rather that it’s a reasonable headline metric to use. It is only one number, so it cannot express the whole reality of life within a country; but it can convey some sense of the relative opportunities for that country. There is a meaningful and quantifiable difference between living in an economy with a GDP of $45 million (GDP per capita $3,566) and $20 trillion (GDP per capita $64,767).

pergadad 7y ago

It is incredibly hard to shrink the GDP though. That's what Erdogan managed nonetheless - installed a kleptocratic oligarchy under the guise of religious conservatism. All outside investment vanished and national players became beholden to the gov rather than to meaningful investment. Unemployment is high, as are food prices, despite super cheap labour migration from Syria (essentially used as slaves) and massive cash infusions by the EU.

Excel_Wizard 7y ago

Would you say that you agree with GP's point though? It's not as if there are other things that are getting better in Turkey to counterbalance this particular measure.

p1necone 7y ago

I'd like some kind of standard metric that adjusts gdp to spending power on food, housing etc, and weights based on standard deviation amongst the populace (lower being better). Unadjusted gdp seems like an entirely pointless metric when as you point out you can look at places like the USA where despite having high gdp there's still widespread poverty.

abakker 7y ago
The metric you are looking for is Purchasing Power Parity - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purchasing_power_parity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purchasing_power_parity
- sgnelson 7y ago
  And also the Big Mac Index. https://www.economist.com/news/2019/07/10/the-big-mac-index https://www.economist.com/news/2019/07/10/the-big-mac-index https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Mac_Index https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Mac_Index
ska 7y ago
Standard deviation of what, wealth? Income? You're on the right track though, at minimum you need to use something like purschasing power parity (PPP) to account for some effects, and wealth distribution to account for others. Doing these comparisons meaningfully isn't easy to get right.

thaumaturgy 7y ago

I think we're in agreement here. I purposely didn't imply that GDP growth was a good indicator of smart social policies, just that GDP shrinkage (especially to that extent) was an inarguable indicator of bad social policies. There may also be GDP growth in a country with bad social policies. I wouldn't expect there to be much GDP shrinkage in a country with smart social policies, though.

capkutay 7y ago

I mean why use any metrics at all of you're going to try to correlate them with something seemingly unrelated with no context like # of suicides?

devmunchies 7y ago
I was saying that US has high suicides despite a high GDP. Not that there is a correlation. Actually # of suicides would be a good metric for a country’s health.
- sgnelson 7y ago
  Only if you take in the affect of geography. And by that I really mean the amount of sunlight available during the different seasons of the year. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_in_Greenland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_in_Greenland

lunchables 7y ago

>GDP in the US is high and we have more suicides than ever. I think this is my favorite new "correlation does not equal causation" example.

devmunchies 7y ago
I wanst implying that they were correlated at all. Simply that a high GDP isn’t a useful metric since the people in the US are still unfulfilled in other ways.

Bartweiss 7y ago

This is true, but I think it's significant that Erdogan has been promising (along with many other things) economic growth in a fairly traditional sense. His voter base is largely rural and traditional, but to my knowledge he's been offering continued economic growth with rural areas seeing more benefit and less disruption, and has failed to deliver. Even if GDP is a bad thing to optimize, it's significant any time leadership fails on its own metrics. More broadly, I think lots of nations today could maintain healthy economies with flat or shrinking national GDP, but those are countries which have little reason to expect 'natural' GDP increase without a growth ideology. Most obviously, post-industrial nations which can't rely on growing populations or rapid labor productivity boosts from urbanization and infrastructure investment: Sweden or the UK could plausibly operate at near-constant GDP, and Japan could even grow per capita GDP while shrinking national GDP. More subtly, nations which actively avoid pursuing the common arc of demographic transition, urbanization, and industrialization: Mongolia or Bhutan might try to take an entirely different path. And crucially, any of these nations would need to plan for the outcome: if Sweden 0% GDP growth without intending to, it would point to serious economic problems. Given all of that, Turkey seems like a singularly bad candidate for falling total GDP. The population is still growing at 1.5% and labor productivity at 2%-3%, while experiencing urbanization and major infrastructure expansion. Crudely put, 1.015*1.025 ought to net Turkey 4% GDP growth without considering anything any other factors at all, so a substantial decline points to something going badly wrong.

hyko 7y ago

It’s probably the closest thing we have to a North Star metric when evaluating a country. Everything that people desire is underpinned by GDP, and it isn’t particularly high anywhere on Earth.

icebraining 7y ago
> Everything that people desire is underpinned by GDP That's a very extreme position. People desire more than what can be bought at the market. https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/may/24/robert-kennedy-gdp https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/may/24/robert...
- hyko 7y ago
  True, but they can realise those desires more easily if they’re available at the market. In fact it’s hard to imagine an area of human interest or endeavour that is not supported by the activities measured by GDP in some way. I’m not saying it’s the only metric we should attend to, or even that it’s a perfect economic metric, but rather that it’s a reasonable headline metric to use. It is only one number, so it cannot express the whole reality of life within a country; but it can convey some sense of the relative opportunities for that country. There is a meaningful and quantifiable difference between living in an economy with a GDP of $45 million (GDP per capita $3,566) and $20 trillion (GDP per capita $64,767).