4 ms·

We have to ask ourselves what we want. Because it's not GDP, you can't eat GDP or sleep under it, you can't even withdraw it from the bank. So more directly, ho

We have to ask ourselves what we want. Because it's not GDP, you can't eat GDP or sleep under it, you can't even withdraw it from the bank. So more directly, how does it influence our life? (Of course GDP influences our life to some extent.)

heresie-dabord 2y ago
It is generally understood that GDP is a poor measure of what matters to people. The OP should know this. https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/quality-of-life-by-state https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/quality-of-...
- pc86 2y ago
  It may be generally understood to you, but not to me, and the link you provided says absolutely nothing about GDP.
  - forgetfreeman 2y ago
    Not a problem, let's educate you a little. When graphed together GDP growth and real wages in the US show a disparity that clearly indicates that increases in GDP go somewhere other than working Americans. This being the case GDP metrics don't communicate meaningful information about quality of life. https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/ https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/
    - AlexandrB 2y ago
      While increases in GDP don't all go to working class Americans, the two are not completely decoupled either. If you look at the small-scale variations in both they match each other pretty closely. I also suspect that it's the working class that would eat any dramatic GDP decrease.
      - forgetfreeman 2y ago
        We can at least agree that the working class would be on the receiving end of the worst of the consequences for any flavor of economic downsizing, just like they have been during every other recession, market crash, etc. to date. I would however like to suggest not letting yourself get distracted by the fact that the two lines kinda wiggle similarly. That massive and growing pie slice where the two decoupled is absolutely the larger issue.
throwawayffffas 2y ago
I mean you can eat GDP and sleep under it. That's what it measures production.
- bognition 2y ago
  Estimated GDP in 2024 28.9 T vs 2025 of 13.3 T That’s a huge gain in 20 years. Where is the commensurate equivalent growth in housing, education, healthcare, cheap food, etc… There is a huge disconnect between GDP increase and the economic pressure the majority of Americans feel.
  - TheSpiceIsLife 2y ago
    Looks like that should be 13 T 2005?
  - throwawayffffas 2y ago
    The richest man in the world in 2008 was Warren Buffett with a net worth of 62 billion dollars. Now with 62 billion you are not even in the top 20. So the growth went into wealth inequality.
    - pbhjpbhj 2y ago
      You see the contradiction between this and your previous post? Here you say we can't eat/shelter better with GDP increases because they aren't distributed; there you said that [spending on] ability to eat/shelter was what they measured.
bko 2y ago
Take pretty much any quality of life thing. Just as one example Mississippi: The average home size 2,065 square feet United Kingdom: The average home size is 818 square feet No, you cannot "eat GDP", but its a useful proxy as it correlates very highly to a lot of things we do care about
- ropejumper 2y ago
  This requires a justification for why home size is a good indicator of quality of life, or for why it's more important than other indicators.
  - AmVess 2y ago
    Small homes just plain suck. No room to do anything, stuffy, cramped. GF and I moved, rented a house for a month. 1400 square feet. 700 up, 700 down. Tiny and cramped, and it only had one very small bathroom. We had to sleep on different floors. Master bedroom was barely larger than the queen bed, and no way 2 people could sleep in there because it would get blazing hot in minutes. Garage was similarly minuscule. GF had a tiny suv and still couldn't open both doors. I figure 1000 square feet per adult is just about right.
    - tjridesbikes 2y ago
      What are you on about? My wife and I live in a total of 1000 square feet in a Boston triple-decker and get along totally fine. We have a basement for storage and a parking space for our car. Somehow, we're both able to work from home without getting in each other's way, have space to do our own things, and temperature regulation is a non-issue with mini-splits. We even have a shared yard! Maybe the space wasn't laid out well. I would imagine, with only 700 sq ft per floor, a good portion of that is taken up by the stairs. My condo is a flat in a 100-year-old building, built before the "open concept" plans came into vogue. It means out rooms are separated and lets my wife and I do different things in different parts of the house. People used to raise families in these old buildings with 1000 square feet. Their third-spaces weren't taken over by profit-seeking companies and their interests took them outside the home. 2000 square feet for 2 people seems utterly ridiculous!
tguinot 2y ago
You also have to ask yourself why so many europeans try to move to the US for a better life (especially talented ones) and why almost no american does it the other way around. (The number is ridiculously low in comparison) People move east to west across the pond, because they want the life offered by the US economy.
- hollerith 2y ago
  >The number is ridiculously low in comparison Where are you getting your confidence that that is so?
  - tguinot 2y ago
    Numbers of H1B applicants per country are available. The equivalent for the UK and France is also available. If you believe there's nearly as many people trying to get out than there is trying to get in, you will be surprised. The difference (per capita) is a factor of at least 10x
- sebazzz 2y ago
  > You also have to ask yourself why so many europeans try to move to the US for a better life I can guarantee you that number is now not growing so much.

heresie-dabord 2y ago

It is generally understood that GDP is a poor measure of what matters to people. The OP should know this. https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/quality-of-life-by-state https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/quality-of-...

pc86 2y ago
It may be generally understood to you, but not to me, and the link you provided says absolutely nothing about GDP.
- forgetfreeman 2y ago
  Not a problem, let's educate you a little. When graphed together GDP growth and real wages in the US show a disparity that clearly indicates that increases in GDP go somewhere other than working Americans. This being the case GDP metrics don't communicate meaningful information about quality of life. https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/ https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/
  - AlexandrB 2y ago
    While increases in GDP don't all go to working class Americans, the two are not completely decoupled either. If you look at the small-scale variations in both they match each other pretty closely. I also suspect that it's the working class that would eat any dramatic GDP decrease.
    - forgetfreeman 2y ago
      We can at least agree that the working class would be on the receiving end of the worst of the consequences for any flavor of economic downsizing, just like they have been during every other recession, market crash, etc. to date. I would however like to suggest not letting yourself get distracted by the fact that the two lines kinda wiggle similarly. That massive and growing pie slice where the two decoupled is absolutely the larger issue.

throwawayffffas 2y ago

I mean you can eat GDP and sleep under it. That's what it measures production.

bognition 2y ago
Estimated GDP in 2024 28.9 T vs 2025 of 13.3 T That’s a huge gain in 20 years. Where is the commensurate equivalent growth in housing, education, healthcare, cheap food, etc… There is a huge disconnect between GDP increase and the economic pressure the majority of Americans feel.
- TheSpiceIsLife 2y ago
  Looks like that should be 13 T 2005?
- throwawayffffas 2y ago
  The richest man in the world in 2008 was Warren Buffett with a net worth of 62 billion dollars. Now with 62 billion you are not even in the top 20. So the growth went into wealth inequality.
  - pbhjpbhj 2y ago
    You see the contradiction between this and your previous post? Here you say we can't eat/shelter better with GDP increases because they aren't distributed; there you said that [spending on] ability to eat/shelter was what they measured.

bko 2y ago

Take pretty much any quality of life thing. Just as one example Mississippi: The average home size 2,065 square feet United Kingdom: The average home size is 818 square feet No, you cannot "eat GDP", but its a useful proxy as it correlates very highly to a lot of things we do care about

ropejumper 2y ago
This requires a justification for why home size is a good indicator of quality of life, or for why it's more important than other indicators.
- AmVess 2y ago
  Small homes just plain suck. No room to do anything, stuffy, cramped. GF and I moved, rented a house for a month. 1400 square feet. 700 up, 700 down. Tiny and cramped, and it only had one very small bathroom. We had to sleep on different floors. Master bedroom was barely larger than the queen bed, and no way 2 people could sleep in there because it would get blazing hot in minutes. Garage was similarly minuscule. GF had a tiny suv and still couldn't open both doors. I figure 1000 square feet per adult is just about right.
  - tjridesbikes 2y ago
    What are you on about? My wife and I live in a total of 1000 square feet in a Boston triple-decker and get along totally fine. We have a basement for storage and a parking space for our car. Somehow, we're both able to work from home without getting in each other's way, have space to do our own things, and temperature regulation is a non-issue with mini-splits. We even have a shared yard! Maybe the space wasn't laid out well. I would imagine, with only 700 sq ft per floor, a good portion of that is taken up by the stairs. My condo is a flat in a 100-year-old building, built before the "open concept" plans came into vogue. It means out rooms are separated and lets my wife and I do different things in different parts of the house. People used to raise families in these old buildings with 1000 square feet. Their third-spaces weren't taken over by profit-seeking companies and their interests took them outside the home. 2000 square feet for 2 people seems utterly ridiculous!

tguinot 2y ago

You also have to ask yourself why so many europeans try to move to the US for a better life (especially talented ones) and why almost no american does it the other way around. (The number is ridiculously low in comparison) People move east to west across the pond, because they want the life offered by the US economy.

hollerith 2y ago
>The number is ridiculously low in comparison Where are you getting your confidence that that is so?
- tguinot 2y ago
  Numbers of H1B applicants per country are available. The equivalent for the UK and France is also available. If you believe there's nearly as many people trying to get out than there is trying to get in, you will be surprised. The difference (per capita) is a factor of at least 10x
sebazzz 2y ago
> You also have to ask yourself why so many europeans try to move to the US for a better life I can guarantee you that number is now not growing so much.