Too Simple a Measurement

While I stopped talking much about economics long before my class this summer, the book I'm reading has a compelling point I feel the need to write down.

I think it explains why I've had such an adverse reaction to this class. I hate that all we do is measured in terms of money.

The GDP as a measure of progress emerged during an era when natural resources still seemed unlimited and "quality of life" meant high economic standards of living. But if prosperity is judged only by increased economic activity, then car accidents, hospital visits, illnesses (such as cancer), and toxic spills are all signs of prosperity. Loss of resources, cultural depletion, negative social and environmental effects, reduction of quality of life--these ills can all be taking place, an entire region can be in decline, yet they are negated by a simplistic economic figure that says economic life is good. Countries all over the world are trying to boost their level of economic activity so they, too, can grab a share of the "progress" that measurements like the GDP propound. But in the race for economic progress, social activity, ecological impact, cultural activity, and long-term effects can be overlooked.
- Cradle to Cradle