2 ms·

People aren't buying much of anything in my scenario. The robot does everything you need. No transactions required. GDP only counts transactions. Maybe conside

People aren't buying much of anything in my scenario. The robot does everything you need. No transactions required. GDP only counts transactions. Maybe consider this, sort of the opposite of my fantasy robot - GDP may well rise if the air got so polluted we had to buy fresh oxygen. An entire industry would exist, transactions would occur. Drugs might exist to cure sickness from the dirty air. Or consider cigarettes - a nice addition to GDP numbers.

epistasis 4y ago
If you are saying there are weaknesses to measuring GDP, sure, it's kind of a crappy measure. A terrible one. But still a useful one. All models are wrong, etc etc etc. I certainly don't fetishize GDP or assume that people only spend money on positive things for themselves or others. But in your second scenario, the pollution of the air would have been a big drop in GDP, a ton of negative externalities that were not counted. And improving the air would be of value. The most convincing flaw about GDP and trade, to me, is about real labor, productive value to society, that has or has not been captured by GDP. For example, child care. Child care by a stay at home parent is not captured by GDP, but child care that is paid for is a massive expense, one that many families can not afford at all. So that is uncompensated labor that should probably be included as part of our GDP. Child care is being produced, but not in exchange with others. But if we invented magic robots that did everything an individual needed, I don't think that would reduce trade much. We would still be interacting with each other, buying each others' art, trading living locations, etc.
- danielmarkbruce 4y ago
  How would the air pollution cause a drop in GDP?? GDP measures all end user sales of goods & services. It isn't some general idea of good and bad. Fresh air currently adds zero to GDP, there is no market. Dirty air would create a market.

epistasis 4y ago

If you are saying there are weaknesses to measuring GDP, sure, it's kind of a crappy measure. A terrible one. But still a useful one. All models are wrong, etc etc etc. I certainly don't fetishize GDP or assume that people only spend money on positive things for themselves or others. But in your second scenario, the pollution of the air would have been a big drop in GDP, a ton of negative externalities that were not counted. And improving the air would be of value. The most convincing flaw about GDP and trade, to me, is about real labor, productive value to society, that has or has not been captured by GDP. For example, child care. Child care by a stay at home parent is not captured by GDP, but child care that is paid for is a massive expense, one that many families can not afford at all. So that is uncompensated labor that should probably be included as part of our GDP. Child care is being produced, but not in exchange with others. But if we invented magic robots that did everything an individual needed, I don't think that would reduce trade much. We would still be interacting with each other, buying each others' art, trading living locations, etc.

danielmarkbruce 4y ago
How would the air pollution cause a drop in GDP?? GDP measures all end user sales of goods & services. It isn't some general idea of good and bad. Fresh air currently adds zero to GDP, there is no market. Dirty air would create a market.