I haven't liked any of the alternative measure papers I've read (although it has been a while). They all are basically of the form "we don't like the result we

I haven't liked any of the alternative measure papers I've read (although it has been a while). They all are basically of the form "we don't like the result we get when we maximize some variable based on economic output so we are going to generate some new variable, that is harder to measure and is usually based on claimed preferences rather than revealed preferences (cuz you know, people never lie and those two things are always equal....) that lets us claim what we like is the right course, even though it's objectively worse when measured in money." Say what you will about money, it's a lot less biased a measuring stick than most people give it credit for and since people are already bartering with it, our data is based on revealed preferences already, which is much less prone to lieing. Also, why do you think the environment isn't accounted for in the system? It is not in economic growth but economic growth is measured after we have already applied quite a lot of environmental restrictions to the economy. We pursue environmental regulations we want politically and then growth happens within that constraint (and higher growth given a set of environmental regulations is still better than lower growth given said environmental regulations).