It is because if there is no GDP, then the country can't achieve any goals. Withouth goals it can't be a good country. For people to be proud of their country they have to have to have tourism, tourists, exciting parks, zoos, national parks and game reserves so that people could support that country and make it better place
While GDP may not indicate the quality of life of any one person, it is quite obvious that countries with a higher GDP than others have much better quality of life across the board. Countries with first world GDP levels have better medicine, more food, longer lives, better education, more entertainment, etc.
GDP will affect your GDP per capita. GDP per capita is when they divide the total GDP by the number of people in that country. A rise in GDP per capita will also translate into a rise of productivity. The reason for that is that the more that you produce, the more you sell. It gives you an idea of what the people are engaged in. GDP per capita can be used as an indicator of standard of living as well. One can conclude that having a higher GDP per capita will be interpreted as having a higher standard of living. Now what can one conclude about a country with low GDP? You can assume that they don't have the best infrastructure.
From the start of the 18th century GDP has been measured in more and more countries. There is a direct correlation with the trend of the GDP and the development of a country and subsequently living standards. Throughout history this can be seen as countries go through different stages of the Demographic transition model. GDP is a fundamental part of the process which makes up the definitions coming under MEDC's or LEDC's. Overall we can see that due to GDP we can easily see the quality of life of populations and areas, through the development indicated by the GDP!
There is only one small,developing country which actually functions on the basis of GDH (gross domestic happiness) which clearly isn't doing well. So,now I ask you to compare your quality of living irrespective of your nationality to that of a person residing in Bhutan.I conclude my argument by saying that GDP is directly proportional to good standard of living .
When it comes to GDP and GDP per capita you can tell a lot from a nation from these two stats. If a country has a thriving GDP then they are sure to be wealthy and with wealth comes better tech medicine and opportunities to the citizens of the nation. If each person is making a significant amount of money in relation to where they live and cost of living then in theory they should lead a better standard of living. They would not have the financial burden which causes so much stress in today's world. So yes, it can be argues that a higher GDP and GDP per capita will increase the likely hood of living at a good standard
There is a number of things that can affect quality of live, living in a country with a strong economy being quite a key factor. A key factor because it leads to things being cheaper, tax lower, higher paid jobs and so on... . GDP is the value of the services produced and basically is the size of the economy and if there is high GDP we can infer that the economy is relatively strong and that leads to many things that improve the quality of life in that country. (although it can't indicate other factors in the quality of life)
Growth of the country's GDP is an excellent indicator of an improving quality of life, simply because it is a measure of the amount of work being done, and the productivity going into and resulting from that work. The higher the GDP, the better the economy and, therefore, the better the quality of life.
GDP is but one factor in an extremely complex world economy. However in general, even reductionist, terms, GDP growth can indicate a strengthening economy, more jobs and therefore more income for individuals. This does not necessarily improve quality of life, at least not right away. A better job (or any job) is a good thing, but if an individual is thoroughly in debt, that improved quality of life might take some time to achieve.
The GDP measures the gross domestic product of a nation, which is the market value of all final goods and services that is produced during a given time. Because the production of goods and services indicates that people are working, earning money, and making a living, an increasing GDP shows an increased economic activity, meaning more funds for social programs, and more income that people have to increase their own standard of living.
GDP is the total economic output of a nation. But what if a lot of the wealth created ends up being controlled by those on top?
I'm not talking about small business. I'm talking about large corporations who lobby the Government.
Also, you keep hearing how China's GDP will eventually exceed that of the United States. That maybe true on an overall scale, but the GDP per capita will still be much lower.
GDP is not reliable when it comes to calculating the quality of life. Unemployment, worker's rights, a quality public infrastructure, and living wages are among the things that are reliable.
My opinion is that the GDP can actually have the inverse affect on the quality of life. This is because of the way our medical and prison systems are set up. The more people that are sick or incarcerated, the more profit is made. This means that even though the GDP may rise, it may be a result of a decrease in the quality of life of the citizens. I honestly think it's scary that not many people have even thought about this correlation, but what i find scarier are the people who have made this connection and are using it to their own advantage. I.E. Mark Ciavarella Jr. A former judge in Pennsylvania. Look him up if you haven't heard of him.
GDP does not account for any work done outside of the monetary system. These means that much of the work done by women world-wide goes unrecognized in the economy and therefore is unimportant when it comes to making policy about their lives. Any work it takes to raise a family or maintain a healthy home goes unaccounted for. Is this work not productive also? Take a family living off the land in Bangladesh. Because they are not contributing to the economy the land that they use is seen as "improvable". They may be kicked off the land and made homeless in the hopes of improving GDP at the same time contributing to poverty.
War and military spending is also a huge part of GDP. Countries with the biggest militaries are not the happiest countries.
Since GDP does not take into account the working hours, the leisure time available and whether the income is equality distributed across the economy. Hence we do not know how GDP can measure the quality of our lives. GDP only takes the monetary aspect of our life, it does not take into consideration other factors whereas the HDI does take those factors into consideration
Cause it shows the net production but not the entire one. It doesn't include speed money & black money which occupies a larger space in one country's economy. It also doesn't include the amount of debt a country has. Besides people who earns their livelihood by small work like theft, begging, selling things, moving to different places do not participate in increasing GDP. So GDP is a picture of a nation's economy but not it's representative.
GDP is a measure of economic growth, basically, hat's higher when wages are lower, when companies have less regulations to worry about etc. The fallout is that healthcare, leisure time and human well being is thrown under the bus in this statistic, so if anything, a high GDP is the exact opposite of a good indicator.
The appliance of GDP as to measure wealth for a society is undoubtedly misleading and does not serve the purpose of economics as sustaining wealth within its complex surrounding and inherent correlations. The GDP does not recognize the dimension of interrelation, not to say the very dependence of the economic system on its surrounding. The idea of economics being integrated into a subsystem of the “closed biosphere” is not reflected within the appliance of GDP to measure wealth. When increases in GDP happen an unbalanced constellation of the overall factors responsible for wealth occur that has negative influences on the overall wealth regarding environment and culture. Neither does a pursuit of increases in income make us individually and collectively better off.
GDP does not account for costs that don’t contribute to the overall wealth or even interfere with it. The reliance on solely monetary judgments implies that goods produced in one country with a comparative advantage in monetary terms can be shipped around the world and still be worthier than the locally produced equivalents. With such an evaluation negative effects on wealth of the producer and consumer side through unemployment and its associated impact on nonmonetary wealth and respectively the environment are not given. In fact, the more water we pollute and the more pre-bottled water we buy, the greater is wealth measured in GDP.
With the appliance of GDP as a measure of wealth incentives are produced that relocate priorities to allow dynamics of markets to work for the destruction of human necessities. Some people including myself would therefore argue that a change in the incentive structure of the system, as for example through the appliance of GPI would let wealth creation more closely occur according to the purpose of economics. A key would be the correction of defects in a false accounting system on wealth. If the right framework with reasonable incentive structures would be produced, that focuses on the creation of wealth in its holistic understanding, markets will work for the human environment responding to mutual interest of current and future generations and allowing us to pursue “what we really need”.
By viewing the simplicity to organize human interaction through a single leading figure one might question how great a world would be where the cost of goods with all its interrelation of global connection are reflected correctly in its worth; where the apple grown in the north is as much worth as the apple grown in the south just because not solely depicted through a monetary lens; where everyone can lay off as many workers as wanted, because of reasonableness, who in turn would have much available work to create values that are not yet accounted on; where inventions that increase wealth in its holistic sense be put to use not regarding monetary evaluation but regarding their very purpose the improvement of peoples life and its sustainability.
It is in our hands to “control numbers” and design the framework that corresponds to the world’s system we are bounded to so all people can evolve to their upmost potential and contribute the most to increase wealth. It is not the car driver that causes an accident, but the designer that allows cars to crash.
Why GDP isn’t a good measure for the well-being of a nation.
While aggregate GDP isn’t a good measure because more populated countries generally have a higher GDP, per capita GDP (total GDP divided by population) is also not a good measure because of the following reasons.
First, free time, or leisure is not included in GDP analysis. While someone may be happier only working four days a week, that additional day off will reduce the GDP number. While this makes sense because GDP is the measure of the total value of output, it shows us why using GDP as a measure of well-being or happiness doesn’t make sense. It is possible to have a very industrious country have a very high GDP, but all of its people could be overworked and sick which would
translate to a poor well-being measure.
Next, GDP measures total production for a nation, and GDP per capita gives us an average amount of output per person, but it never tells us how GDP is divided among its residents. Think of a corrupt nation, maybe the leaders of the government keep all of the money generated from production, and allow their citizens to live in slums. Well-being could be very low even though GDP is high, because the majority of the products from that nation go to the elite.
Third, some services and products included in the GDP measure actually lower our well-being. Imagine expenditures on the military, police, security and services for drug addiction and lawsuits. Just because these services are being purchased, doesn’t mean that they improve our well-being.
Finally, GDP doesn’t take into account negative effects on the environment or other externalities. When we produce goods and services, we use resources from the earth, and sometimes we pollute the air, water, and soil as well. When trash goes into a landfill, this affects GDP positively because a service was purchased. When oil is taken out of the ground, this counts positively towards GDP, but nowhere in this measure is it taken into account that the oil is now gone, and can never be used again.
If there were real and accurate data charts out there that reflected quality of life as an indicator of GDP growth, then I would believe it. Yet, I am skeptical, just because I fall into the group of Americans living paycheck to paycheck, not because I want to, but because the cost of living doesn't match what we get paid. Sure, there are a lot of great things out there, but I think only the top percent of people in America get to enjoy them.
The quality of life in the United States depends on many different variables and GDP is only a small portion of this. GDP growth does help, however, the quality of life will not start improving until we can significantly lower the unemployment rate and get salaries back in check with the rate of inflation.