Subject:
|
Re: IP ( was Re: LP POINT 1
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 30 Nov 2000 23:09:25 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3153 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> It appears I have dug myself a hole. GDP is not a measure of happiness – it
> is only a measure of the domestic output of a nation. If wealth were
> uniformly distributed, then it could be used as a measure of happiness – but
> it is not in the UK, or the US. (This is taken from my copy of Begg)
Happiness is hard to measure, especially in the aggregate. GDP is at best a
wildly imperfect stand in, but I'm not sure there are better ones. (c.f.
economic theory of law that you turned me on to)
> From (I have not read it all):
> http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ecbig/gdp.htm
>
> "As a result the GDP not only masks the breakdown of the social structure
> and the natural habitat upon which the economy--and life itself--ultimately
> depend; worse, it actually portrays such breakdown as economic gain."
Not sure what to make of that, not even sure what he's trying to say. I'll
try to follow the cite.
> I was a little surprised at the difference myself – but your economy has
> been in “boom” (under “liberal” control) for some time, while the focus in
> the UK has been on low inflation (~2% right now).
We managed to get that as well, though!
> But I do understand your
> economy may be cooling
And yours will as well, unfortunately, you're yoked to us, like it or not,
when we go down, you do too (more, or less, usually more) when we go up,
yours can go up too (more, or less, usually less). We're both mixed
economies, thus there are some linkages that cannot be avoided, unfortunately.
The point is that in terms of material goods (a poor standin for spiritual
happiness, etc.) we can get more of them if we want them, working less hard,
than you can. Even those at the lowest rungs. Money ain't happiness. But it
buys a neato simulation! :-)
> Despite the difference in GDP etc, I’d still rather live in a society where
> education is based on the ability to learn – not the ability to pay.
Fair enough. I just think such a society (in which good things happen,
charity happens, only the unjust suffer) is possible in a market based
system with less tax and less government intrusion. No utopia of course, but
massively better than here, for the haves and the current have nots.
That's the topic of a different point.
++Lar
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: IP ( was Re: LP POINT 1
|
| (...) Yes, but your economy may be cooling - we have been at about that for a few years now. (...) Yep... and there are those in the UK who want us to join NAFTA and leave the EU :-/ (...) Yes, but in the UK/EU we are far less materialistic (I am (...) (24 years ago, 1-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: IP ( was Re: LP POINT 1
|
| (...) It appears I have dug myself a hole. GDP is not a measure of happiness – it is only a measure of the domestic output of a nation. If wealth were uniformly distributed, then it could be used as a measure of happiness – but it is not in the UK, (...) (24 years ago, 30-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
78 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
