We have to measure the environment and the social impacts too as we need these to survive and these are not quantified in monetary terms. The environment is measured in monetoary terms by how we use/destroy it, not how we prtoect it – economics is about business and nothing else. We cant keep valuing money over and above human relationships and our environment – its just not sustainable and this creates social division and violence.

If China and India follow the narrow GDP measures, the consumerism and resource consumption by those countries in comparison with the US will be like comparing the size of our sun with the planet earth.

So bottom line is we need to use GPI as a measure if we are to sustain ourselves past the 21st century. Our planet can survive and go on and prosper very well without humans, but humans cannot prosper without the planet and without collective positive human relationships.

With all our new technology we just cant seem to learn from past major mistakes that matter most.

Technology has potential to cause sudden irreversable change to humanity and the planet this century and climate change is only one aspect to this – we cannot afford to keep taking a reactive approach to our refusal to learn from past major destructive mistakes, as next time, to react, will will be too late – permanently.

We have to measure the environment and the social impacts too as we need these to survive and these are not quantified in monetary terms. The environment is measured in monetoary terms by how we use/destroy it, not how we prtoect it – economics is about business and nothing else. We cant keep valuing money over and above human relationships and our environment – its just not sustainable and this creates social division and violence.

If China and India follow the narrow GDP measures, the consumerism and resource consumption by those countries in comparison with the US will be like comparing the size of our sun with the planet earth.

So bottom line is we need to use GPI as a measure if we are to sustain ourselves past the 21st century. Our planet can survive and go on and prosper very well without humans, but humans cannot prosper without the planet and without collective positive human relationships.

With all our new technology we just cant seem to learn from past major mistakes that matter most.

Technology has potential to cause sudden irreversable change to humanity and the planet this century and climate change is only one aspect to this – we cannot afford to keep taking a reactive approach to our refusal to learn from past major destructive mistakes, as next time, to react, will will be too late – permanently.

What do you meen when you say “should we measure” the strength of an economy with something else? Who is the “we”. Presumably you mean governments should use better measures than GDP to evaluate progress and design policies to improve the new measure, not just GDP.

When you look at policies that governments propose how many have purely GDP as the goal? I think policy analysis uses many other indicators, depending on the nature of the policy in question. E.g. crime rates for crime policies, health metrics for health policies, … etc.

So I’m not sure how a rolled-up indicator of “overall progress in human welfare” would be used? It might be useful every 4 years at election time to see if on party achieved a net improvement during their term in office.

What do you meen when you say “should we measure” the strength of an economy with something else? Who is the “we”. Presumably you mean governments should use better measures than GDP to evaluate progress and design policies to improve the new measure, not just GDP.

When you look at policies that governments propose how many have purely GDP as the goal? I think policy analysis uses many other indicators, depending on the nature of the policy in question. E.g. crime rates for crime policies, health metrics for health policies, … etc.

So I’m not sure how a rolled-up indicator of “overall progress in human welfare” would be used? It might be useful every 4 years at election time to see if on party achieved a net improvement during their term in office.