New figures for the UK's gross domestic product (GDP), which is believed to be the best approximation we have to our national income, are out this morning.
As the Office for National Statistics (ONS) says on Twitter:
There will be much celebration, even though Labour can take no credit for this, at all.
But I question whether this is appropriate. Note this follow-up Tweet:
So, we have grown because of scientific research, much of which may be on how to make us even more addicted to ultra-processed food; the advance in artificial intelligence, much of which is intended to put people out of work; and because there are more legal disputes, which are only ever a win for lawyers whilst always reducing the sum of human happiness.
Of course, I may be wrong about the science. Perhaps it is not developing arms, the means to surveil us, and products on which we might become dependent. And maybe it isn't creating patents solely that they can be exploited for tax purposes.
And, maybe the IT is benign; only trends in energy consumption in the sector suggest not.
I am pretty sure I am right on legal services.
In other words, is this increase in GDP really something to celebrate? Should a bigger number always be better than a smaller one? And wouldn't it be good to know enough to be sure?
I'd just remind readers of this video I made recently:
It includes this quote from the late Robert Kennedy, speaking in 1968, shortly before he was assassinated:
Gross national product does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education, or the joy of their play.
It does not include the beauty of poetry, or the strength of our marriages, the intelligence of our public debate, or the integrity of our public officials. It measures neither our wit, nor our courage, nor our wisdom, or our learning. Neither our compassion, nor our devotion to our country. It measures everything in short, except that which makes life worthwhile. And it can tell us everything about America, except why we are proud to be Americans.
If you substitute the UK for American in there, frankly, everything applies. GDP is just as deficient as it was when Robert Kennedy said those words.
Let's not go too wild with our celebration today.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
I think the government is gaslighting us into believing that a higher GDP implies a good economy.
Austerity is still with us (resulting in 300,000 excess deaths, 3 million using foodbank, 800,000 patients admitted to hospital with malnutrition, all in the UK)
Highest rail fares in Europe, highest energy costs in Europe.
Private finance initiatives (PFI).
So GDP may be a good indicator in some areas, but it means bugger all for most people.
…And also, Bridget Phillipson has said this morning (and I’m paraphrasing here): “we highly value international students and their contribution to communities….but we have no plans to change the cap the Tories brought in”.
I despair.
Me too
Merely arbitrary numbers, like inflation, used to define how well your doing / or how poorly your predecessor did depending whether or not your government.
Either way they will be spun as a reason to diminish and punish the public at large through interest rates or austerity.
If we insist on worshiping GDP, we should at least use GDP per capita. GDP growth because the population has grown is not real growth at all.
Every day I become more sympathetic to the goal of de-growth. I wonder if we will ever get a mainstream politician in government willing to make that their platform. We do need decent levels of productivity to make food (healthy) and technology (useful). But I don’t see why this means we need to grow and expand infinitely all for the sake of making a number go up. I have never seen that RFK quote before, thanks for sharing it.
An elderly neighbour was run over recently.
Police and ambulance attended. Air Ambulance was scrambled
He spent over a week in hospital and is now in a Convalescent home
Massive cost and as a result addition to GDP
Clearly however none of it was of any ‘value’
It was to him….
[…] now, the only goal the government has is to increase GDP. That is useless. Suppose a range of key performance indicators was chosen to replace GDP as the goal of government, […]
Richard, high growth rates of GDP imply substantial social changes, too. The UK had high rates post WW2 but much of this was reconstruction, now other countries have also recovered or new developed ones like China, India are making their mark it seems to me these higher gdp growth rates which have helped fund public services will become a thing of the past. So we need to get used to much lower gdp growth and with it constant pressure on our public services especially the welfare part. Politicians in all western countries need to find new ways to pay for Electoral promises or continue to accept the higher levels of inequality we will inevitably experience as wealth becomes entrenched in a few with little upward mobility possible partly as a consequence of far lower gdp growth rates. Isn’t this situation a massive problem for modern Capitalism built on the premise of a rising tide lifts all boats?
Yes, in a word