🇳🇱
@youshouldknowthis@mastodon.social
> My point is we measure too frequently wellbeing with GDP and the stock markets.
GDP should never be used alone for well being. GDP and tons of other indicators all need to be considered to get the complete picture of where we are headed. But the GDP does a good job at giving us one (of a few) clues as to the health of the economy. So it is a major factor in measuring well being, even if not the only one.
> "quantifying things based on economy" What's your point and what do you mean?
That as a metric for the health of the economy, and by extention one important component of the well being of its people, it is a very important measure.
> BTW, Long term neither Harris or Trump are in power. So, attributing direct responsibility to the president for how the economy is doing without further context is misadvised at best.
I generally agree, while presidents do have large effects on economies it still needs to be taken into account as part of the bigger picture. In fact strictly by the numbers congress tends to have more long-term quantifiable effects on markets than presidents do. Though presidents have more of a temporary effect (decisions or statements will cause large temporary swings in response).
