On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Jim Devine <[email protected]> wrote:
> me: > >> the key question is whether or not the new measure of GDP is more > >> accurate than the old. > > raghu: > > No, I'd argue that the key question is whether or not the new measure of > GDP > > is more RELEVANT than the old. > > how do you define "relevant"? with either the new or the old GDP > measure, the number presents only production that's sold through the > market, ignoring non-market costs and benefits. > "Relevant" in the sense that there is a reason someone should care that the GDP growth rate is 1% or 2%. The unemployment rate - for all its methodological flaws - is relevant in this sense. As is inflation. I am not so sure about GDP. -raghu.
_______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
