On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 3:17 PM, Jim Devine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > But as Julio points out, economic growth does not have to be the same > as (inflation-corrected) real GDP growth per capita. It can be > measured by something like the Genuine Progress Indicator instead. We > don't have to accept then orthodox definition of economic growth.
And then we can replace the GDP growth mania by the GPI growth mania? I'd argue that the way we measure progress itself needs to be flexible. What was progressive 100 years back (increasing food production for e.g.) is definitely not progressive today. Likewise what we might consider progressive today (to put into a GPI index) may not be so in the future. Why should we expect to be able to measure something as complex as the well-being of a society with a single number? -raghu. -- Today is National Existential Ennui Awareness Day. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
