>>the presupposition you make is that gdp should measure standard of living<<
Whatever gave you this impression? GDP measures spending, pure and simple. In a certain quarter of a certain year, a certain amount of money was spent on personal consumption expenditures, subcategories of which are durable goods, including motor vehicles and parts, furniture and household equipment, other; nondurable goods, including food, clothing and shoes, gasoline, fuel oil and other energy goods, other; services, including housing, household operation (electricity and gas utilities go here), transportation, medical care, recreation, other; then there's gross domestic private investment, imports and exports.
How do I know? Because I'm looking at a table for Gross Domestic Product right here.
Our definitions may be different but mine is the one that's consistent with the data. GDP doesn't measure productivity. GDP doesn't measure standard of living. GDP measures the total dollars spent in the nation as a whole on the categories of goods and services included in the data.
We were discussing whether computers increase productivity, and I said it did but in ways that were difficult to measure. You insist that increases in productivity must show up in the GDP. I don't understand why you say that. |
