It looks as if you are commenting on chapter VI (GDP and Beyond) of the LSE Growth Commission 2013 Report:
"A new focus on median household income would, we believe, influence debates about growth policy. Median income growth has lagged behind GDP per capita since the early 1980s, in part because of the growth of income inequality so that average income has grown faster than the median. In the years running up to the crisis, GDP per capita grew much faster than median household income, in part because there was a significant increase in government spending on health and education, which is reflected in GDP but not in income. The median is not perfect of course, because inequality can still widen at other parts of the distribution, but it is better than ignoring distribution entirely and it is easy to communicate to the public. While the key proposals in this report are geared towards raising GDP, monitoring developments in median household income would be a particularly valuable way of gauging the inclusiveness of the growth that is generated. Progress in improving skills towards the lower end of the distribution would, we believe, create an especially important dividend that could be measured using this indicator. But shifting the public debate towards monitoring median household income as well as GDP would allow us to look more widely at inclusive growth and living standards beyond income, including education, health and a sense of community." http://www2.lse.ac.uk/researchAndExpertise/units/growthCommission/documents/home.aspx http://www2.lse.ac.uk/researchAndExpertise/units/growthCommission/documents/pdf/LSEGC-Report.pdf and the referring discussion paper "Beyond GDP": http://www2.lse.ac.uk/researchAndExpertise/units/growthCommission/documents/pdf/SecretariatPapers/BeyondGDP.pdf BUT referring to the question of deciphering the key figures of national accounts and hence the question of deciphering the wealth of those societies in which the capitalist mode of production prevails the following studies could be a good starting point: Projekt Klassenanalyse Gesamtreproduktionsprozess der BRD 1950-1975. Kritik der volkswirtschaftlichen Gesamtrechnung Berlin 1976: VSA ISBN: 3-87975-098-X - http://lccn.loc.gov/77453425 Contents: http://opac.nebis.ch/objects/pdf/z01_3-87975-098-X_01.pdf Joachim Bischoff et al. Jenseits der Klassen? Gesellschaft und Staat im Spätkapitalismus Hamburg 1982: VSA ISBN: 3-87975-201-X - http://lccn.loc.gov/82238751 Contents: http://opac.nebis.ch/objects/pdf/z01_3-87975-201-X_01.pdf hk > Jurriaan Bendien wrote: > > The Left’s furore about GDP is largely a hot-air controversy which echoes > some discussions within the liberal elites. If economic growth is regarded as > the main indicator of human progress, then if there is no economic growth, > there is also no overall progress. But if there is no sign of progress, it > becomes much more difficult to justify policy. People want to see that things > are getting better, and if things are not getting better, they become > skeptical about the authorities. Hence, the search is on for other indicators, > which show that there is progress in society nevertheless, or that a certain > standard of life is attained, even if there is little economic growth. If the > quantities do not support the argument, the focus is shifted to qualities. > > J. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
