4 ms·

> If you calculate GDP per worker, and call that productivity, then productivity is declining. "Productivity" is output (generally economic) per operation. Fo

by gumby 3y ago

> If you calculate GDP per worker, and call that productivity, then productivity is declining. "Productivity" is output (generally economic) per operation. For workers, it's typically economic value (to the employer) of an hour's or day's labor. For machinery it's typically economic value of operating it for a period. GDP per worker doesn't make sense and is not what anybody uses. BTW, WFH can increase productivity from the worker's PoV since they no longer have to divide their salary (the economic value of their work) by the commute time, just the time when they are working. So same numerator, smaller denominator.

than3 3y ago
GDP was never really an accurate calculation and interest rates greatly affect whatever the natural baseline is at any time. Calling productivity down with greater Remote Work is a red herring because there's less overall economic output because the cost of money has risen so steeply and will continue to do so at least two more times. Unfortunately, they've printed about as much as they've offset in interest rates so it looks more like its engineered to kill off any normal to mid-size business. The only people getting the easy money are the people on the gravy train.
- gumby 3y ago
  > GDP was never really an accurate calculation and interest rates greatly affect whatever the natural baseline is at any time. GDP (GNP back then) was just a simple, interim suggestion of Simon Kuznets' while walking with FDR and talking about the depression back in the early 1930s. It wasn't meant to be an authoritative or be-all-and-end-all for the state of the economy. Like the Charles Dow's indexes, GNP was something that could relatively easily be calculated (Dow could do it with a pencil and paper; GNP needed the simple statistical bureaucracy of the time to collect the raw data). Also like the Dow, once reported you didn't want to stop because it was the longest time series data available. Also like the Dow it was readjusted via judgement from time to time.

by gumby 3y ago

than3 3y ago

GDP was never really an accurate calculation and interest rates greatly affect whatever the natural baseline is at any time. Calling productivity down with greater Remote Work is a red herring because there's less overall economic output because the cost of money has risen so steeply and will continue to do so at least two more times. Unfortunately, they've printed about as much as they've offset in interest rates so it looks more like its engineered to kill off any normal to mid-size business. The only people getting the easy money are the people on the gravy train.

gumby 3y ago
> GDP was never really an accurate calculation and interest rates greatly affect whatever the natural baseline is at any time. GDP (GNP back then) was just a simple, interim suggestion of Simon Kuznets' while walking with FDR and talking about the depression back in the early 1930s. It wasn't meant to be an authoritative or be-all-and-end-all for the state of the economy. Like the Charles Dow's indexes, GNP was something that could relatively easily be calculated (Dow could do it with a pencil and paper; GNP needed the simple statistical bureaucracy of the time to collect the raw data). Also like the Dow, once reported you didn't want to stop because it was the longest time series data available. Also like the Dow it was readjusted via judgement from time to time.