GDP is bullshit.
GDP growth literally only measures inflation. Its utter and total bullshit and everyone defending GDP has no fucken idea how these numbers are calculated in reality or understands it.
Every GDP defender is a clueless moron who only trust magical man who post magical numbers these magical men calculate from what essentially is the measurement of inflation.
Other urls found in this thread:
thebalance.com
quora.com
twitter.com
the GDP isn't al dente af desu
What did you mean by this?
Comment on this?
What is GDP(PPP)?
Still, you’re mostly right. GDP in bullshit metric
>>Still, you’re mostly right. GDP in bullshit metric
Any redpills on GDP out there? No search engine will give you criticism of GDP.
In domestic politics I agree GDP (PPP) per capita or GDP per capita growth rates are superior.
In foreign, I disagree e.g. if you're comparing Russia vs. Germany in terms of FDI capacity: GDP is important.
GDP girls are the hottest in porn
>GDP (PPP)
Is even more insane and wrong then normal GDP or do you want to explain how every your country getting every investor in since the cost of operating there is low is a bad thing?
>In foreign, I disagree e.g. if you're comparing Russia vs. Germany in terms of FDI capacity: GDP is important.
Explain how GDP is calculated and what it exactly means.
I bet you have no idea what you are even talking about.
Classic economic magical thinking.
How about you just fucking adjust for inflation to calculate rGDP or rGDP/capita. There's no need for this thread, everyone knows GDP is an elementary metric
Any high school economics teacher will criticize GDP this isn't rocket science or some redpill
>How about you just fucking adjust for inflation to calculate rGDP
Because that's impossible! If you eliminate all inflation (keep in mind that not all inflation hits all metrics at the same time and in the same way) GDP growth will be ZERO because this is not how any of the parts of how GDP is calculated work.
Name some criticisms
Your dumbass calculation gets you zero because you have to use a base year relative to the current year. It's about seeing the value relative to a time point in the past
crticisms:
1) it doesn't account for inflation as OP pointed out. Country A in 2020 may have a higher GDP while also being less wealthy than Country A in 1999. You can't think in nominal values.
2) per capita aspect is also needed. For example, Country A has a population of 100 Million and Country B has a population of 5 million. They have the same GDP, but this doesnt mean the average person has equal financial means. People in Country B are much better off despite the same GDP
>Your dumbass calculation gets you zero because you
No you have no idea what GDP even is. Tell me how its calculated. Tell me what I input to calculate GDP then try to defend this crazy notion.
Total values of private consumption + gross investment + government investment + govt spending + (exports - imports) gives you nominal. Previous link shows conversion to real GDP.
>Total values of private consumption + gross investment + government investment + govt spending + (exports - imports) gives you nominal.
Great! Do you know what these words mean?
Its literally people spending money. Its all there is its just people spending money nothing more.
The only growth in the nominal GDP was because the prices of everything increase so people buying shit gave you a bigger number.
Here is the key question how the fuck can there be something like rGDP growth if its just people spending money on shit? Correct for inflation and you get zero.
Since no one can (hold this thought since macro speaking it will be true) spend more then 100% of the money he has its literally impossible to have rGDP growth.
>muh credit cards
So someone else lets you spend his money this can not be made for the entire economy however and is only a diversion in the long run.
rGDP growth is impossible GDP was a bullshit measurement form the start and a trick.
To harem this home all GDP growth is correlated and a result of M0 growth. And no one has time to wait with bullshit games where the government calculates inflation differently to make its magical GDP numbers go up.
Because wealth is not a zero sum game in the modern era (and no the creation is not due to inflation)
Here:
quora.com
Your logic applies to a 1600s economy
I see where your brain short circuits:
>Herp derp these facts assembled in this way demonstrate how my religious dogma is bullshit
>CAN NOT QUESTION RELIGIOUS DOGMA!
>Herp derp you are wrong! Because I can not question my religious dogma.
>wealth
Doesn't exist. Keep posting more nonsense from your religion.
>Your logic applies to a 1600s economy
Nice assertion and discarded. Prove any of that or how about you actually do what I asked you and answer how people spending money on shit can result in any growth.
>1600s economy
Can you spend more then 100% of the money you have? Do you have some IRL glitch where spending money will not decrees the number in your bank account or something?
This dude is bonkers - but, at least it's relatively on topic. Sorry OP, your thread died for this.
>This dude is bonkers
Say where I made a mistake.
And reconsider your life if you know that all you have is
1) Be ignorant idiot
2) Funny economist man says smart sounding words
3) Belive everything economist man says
4) never question what the economist programmed into you
5) Thin you are smart for repeating smart sounding words that you have no idea what they are about.
You quite literally have nothing outside of this.
Ok let me make this extremely simple for you, and we'll use gold instead of dollars to eliminate the variable of inflation.
Let's say the amount of gold on earth is completely constant for 100 years. During that 100 years, the number of assets in different classes INCREASES. I start with 10 oz of gold. I pay 1 oz of gold for a hammer. I use hammer to create something worth 20 oz of gold. My net worth is now 29 oz gold. Money supply has not increased, yet wealth was created. As long as their is a market for the asset, wealth creation can be realized, even with a constant money supply
Over time, gold supply is constant, but the amount of total assets increases.
>muh everyone is wrong but me
you know inflation is more than just money printing right
more economic activity = more borrowing = inflation
this is the brut source of inflation which is why even now with the massive stimulus injection nothing is happening to inflation because economic activity is basically dead
Horrible analogy. A Pile of shit obviously doesn't provide value to anyone. Meanwhile a house can. If someone builds a house it has monetary value and demand.
>Can you spend more then 100% of the money you have?
Imagine two people trading $100 for labour back and forth 5 times. Even though there is only $100 in circulation $500 worth of labour was generated. GDP might not be a good measure of productivity if their labour consisted of jerking each other off but it's an ok indicator of the size of a market. It's more a measure of financial opportunity. If you want to measure productivity it would make more sense to analyze each industry on it's own but GDP gives an ok overview "at a glance".
yeah, if someone does it with stuff that provide value it's ALSO measured.
but the point is that all the worthless stuff that just passes money back and forth is measured with the exact same weight. the more middle-man an economy has that provide no value, the higher its gdp output will be.
also the house is wealth. it doesn't matter if it changes hands 5 times over a period of 10 years, or only once, those additional exchanges generate no value, but they generate 5 times more gpd.
>Let's say the amount of gold on earth is completely constant for 100 years
I disagree here. Personally I use the fictional adamentium that there are only 100 KG EVER in the entire simulation
>the amount of gold on earth is completely constant
This says nothing are we talking in circulation or in the ground? Because people diging up gold is not different from printing it. Adamentium is given to only exist in circulations and be impossible to dig up anywhere in the universe.
>INCREASES
Yep no problem there.
> I start with 10 oz of gold.
Ok.
>I pay 1 oz of gold for a hammer
Ok.
>I use hammer to create something worth 20 oz of gold
This literally makes zero sense you have gone full insane at this point. What do you mean create? What you create depends only on what others are willing to pay for your garbage.
You extremely quickly realize the nonsense you have written if you track all the gold/adamentium in ownership.
There is only 100 KG of adamentium in existence you have 99KG of adamentium. It will be literally impossible for you to get more then 1KG of adamentium for whatever you make since literally no one has more then 1 KG of adamentium. You can write down that number yet literally no one will be able to pay that much.
>yet wealth was created
Literally insane nonsense word injected here. Its like a computer short circuiting and throwing out random garbage at this point.
Try to simulate what you are talking about because what you posted is insanity/sophistry depending on how desisted your brain is.
Simulate what you are talking about or its nonsense.
You realize inflation only exists because fancy people decide to increase the price just because. Right?
And they do this based on other assumptions that are well known.
>Whats this the fed is printing more money?!
>Time to increase the prices of everything I sell!
If these special people don't decide to do this there can be no inflation. There can be shortages however.
I like this.
Only why do these dudes look so happy even if they say they feel sick?
>Horrible analogy.
Look the neocon speaks!
>doesn't provide value to anyone
Yet the GDP formula will count this under consumption! Do you even know what you are defending here?
Show me where the GDP formula says to remove socially undesirable activity from consumption and what this socially undesirable activity list is?
GDP is great!
