Sincerely, Ju-chang He
SHENZHEN, P.R. CHINA Welcome to My Homepage <http://sites.netscape.net/juchang/> -----Original Message----- From: Stephen E Philion <philion at hawaii.edu> To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com> Date: Sunday, August 29, 1999 12:18 PM Subject: Re: GDP is unscientific and unfair for poor people.
>On Sat, 28 Aug 1999, chang wrote:
>
>> Economic theory should not be regarded as a theory of how to increase
>> demand, investment, employment and GDP.
>
>Why shouldn't it be? From whose class perspective shouldn't it be
>considered such, or do you mean in general, as we might wish the world to
>be?
>
> It should be considered as a theory
>> of how to raise the living standards of people, especially poor people, and
>> also a theory of how to increase the world wealth and resource. Although war
>> is generally thought to be able to decrease unemployment and increase GDP and
>> economic growth rate, we should not say that wars are good for the economy.
>> It is because wars destroy wealth and resource and lower the living standards
>> of people.
>>
>
>Well, yes, in the world as it doesn't presently present itself to us,
>perhaps. But, actually, a good argument can be made that wars do benefit
>the economy, at least from a certain class perspective, or are we to
>assume commonality of interests vis 'the people'?
>
>
>> Nowadays, most countries all over the world use Gross Domestic Product to
>> judge the economic growth of a certain country and, according to this GDP,
>> calculate this country's economic growth rate. This method of calculation is
>> really unfair for poor people, for it fails to judge whether the poor
>> people's living standards have been raised. For example, the yearly economic
>> growth rate of some countries has reached 9-10 percent, but their poor
>> people's living standards haven't been raised. There are still a lot of
>> people suffering from cold and hunger. They can't afford to send their
>> children to school, and, as a result, too many children are deprived of
>> education. Therefore, a new economic theory is badly needed to judge a
>> country's economic growth. My article "On The Development of Social Economy
>> <http://sites.netscape.net/juchang/>" has established a set of complete
>> economic theories and also a new model of economic growth, by means of which
>> we will be able to judge a country's economic growth accurately and fairly.
>> And I also argue that we should use the living standards of the poor people
>> and the sufficiency of the first and second grade consumption goods as the
>> criterion to judge the economic situations of one country and the
>> achievements of its government. Only when poverty is eliminated, may we say
>> that the social economy is developed. Only when the living standards of the
>> low-income people is improved, will we be able to take just and accurate
>> measurement of the economic growth of a country. So, the economic growth of a
>> certain country can't be measured by GDP. GDP is unscientific. The
>> measurement of social economic development by means of GDP can only lead to
>> the Military Keynesianism, lead to war.
>
>Yet it *is* the indicator of choice, be it in the US or in China, as you
>are surely aware. The issue at hand is why is that so? Who has determined
>that it be that way and who, aside from wishing or declaring it should be
>that way is doing something about it?
>
>Steve
>
>
>
>