And we worship this insane thing called GDP…. which we want to be strongly growing all the time, and if it isn’t, our silly economists (actually; pseudoeconomists or false economists, or complete anti-economists) and politicians shake their heads and mumble to each other that something is very wrong!

GDP is made up of the good and bad elements of growth, all of which come out on the positive side of the ledger… which is just insane!!

GDP is not just a very bad indicator of our economic wellbeing, it is a fundamentally counterintuitive and terribly WRONG indicator.

It really does need to be completely abandoned in anything like its current form.

Pericles, it seems to me that you do indeed have no problem with economic activity from things like illness and natural disasters contributing to GDP, and that if we had more of these, we would indeed have a larger GDP, and that you would be happy with that!

And you don’t seem to get the supply / demand bit. If you did, you would see the enormous folly in the promotion of ever-increasing demand, for as long as we have major issues with the supply side (of resources [especially water], goods, services and infrastructure). You apparently don't appreciate that at all.

Yes look at the folly with all the CO2 propaganda spin.
What a waste of time and money.

In reality there appears to be evidence of human impact changing the climate but the cause is not CO2.

As I have said before, AGW and Kyoto science has not even measured and assessed photosynthesis linked warmth in unprecedented ocean algae plant matter proliferated by unprecedented sewage nutrient pollution dumped daily into ocean ecosystems.

Empirical evidence indicates need for whole of water ecosystem management and if that was to occur there could be very significant economic and environment growth worldwide.

Engineers are capable but economists appear to be blocking insight to the problem, therefore solutions are being obstructed.
Economists want dollars whereas the ocean needs less nutrients. Economist push aquaculture policy but not ecosystem science policy.

Water has been harness by engineers in the past while at the same time providing much business and employment in plumbing.

Now fresh water starved estuaries need rehabilitation, such as by plumbing environment flows into estuaries via a water harvesting and aqueduct system, southward from Queensland's wet north.

The would be if they could be ETS "scheme" traders hell bent on making millions in commissions from selling nothing of value such as CO2, should think again.

Talk should include potential or not of a water harvesting scheme with commissions from selling new arable land and viable agricultural industry pumping out local and export product, from the Gregory Range NQ to SA - instead of a high speed inter-city 'gravy' train.

I think you may be misinterpreting the situation, Ludwig, just a little.

>>GDP is made up of the good and bad elements of growth<<

As I tried to explain to you, there is no such thing as "good" and "bad" GDP. There is just GDP - nominal GDP that includes inflation, and real GDP that has inflation extracted. If you deny the contribution made by the doctors and nurses who look after sick people, then you need to separate the amount they spend at the corner store from the money spent by the miners etc. Can you see how difficult that would be?

>>Pericles, it seems to me that you do indeed have no problem with economic activity from things like illness and natural disasters contributing to GDP, and that if we had more of these, we would indeed have a larger GDP, and that you would be happy with that!<<

The logic behind "if we had more of these, we would indeed have a larger GDP" is fundamentally and irredeemably wrong. The disasters, illnesses etc. do not themselves "contribute to GDP".

Think of bushfires for a moment. If the entire country (let's take an extreme example, so you can join the dots) were ablaze, and needed 22 million people to fight the fires, what, do you think, would happen to GDP? Would it a) increase because "natural disasters contribute to GDP", b) stay the same or c) decrease?

Same for earthquakes. Same for medical support. The people who perform the tasks of reconstruction, or nursing or whatever, are counted in the GDP figures, because these are services that are provided in exchange for money, and GDP is the totality of goods and services produced within an economy.

Is it becoming clearer now?

If there is any part of the logic above that you find difficult to accept, by all means highlight it so that we can explore it. This idea that earthquakes increase GDP is sadly such a common fallacy, it is best that we try to put it to bed once and for all.

Don't worry Ludwig, it ain't gonna happen.
Growth is dependant on energy, nothing else just energy.
"They" think by changing rules and playing monopoly with real money
that they can change reality.
The energy areas of coal, oil & gas are what will govern our productivity.

Coal will not be a problem for some time, perhaps 20 years but oil &
gas are another matter.
Conventional oil is still declining at about 4% per day per year.
Tight oil is still holding up but there is significant risk that it
will start its decline around 2017. However there is a further risk
that tight oil will start its decline this year if interest rates in
the US rise. That will immediately push the Wall St money men out of
the fracking and horizontal well business. If so decline will be very
rapid and it will be finished totally in five years.
All our refineries will be closed and we will import 100% of fuels,
that is provided we can find someone to sell it to us.

All this means that Australia will be a little better off than a lot
of countries, any GDP we manage to squeeze out in the next couple of
years will be short lived.
Money will be very tight and even the printing press will not be able
to keep up with it. Any thought of building nuclear power stations
will just be a dream. Such dreams as the Very Fast Train will be just that.
We will probably run out of money to finish the NBN by then.

Welcome to the Post Peak Oil Woeld !

Pericles, you sound like Zorg (The Fifth Element) breaking a glass so the makers of cleaning robots can feed their children.
Bad = Good.

Ludwig, I don't think disasters would help the economy at all, as many productive people would be injured or killed, so no longer contributing.

The measure presumably includes much the same degree of good and bad every year, so you can still see if it's going up or down.

What hurts is when something "good" leaves our economy and goes elsewhere (most likely China).

Or we add another million immigrants to the "per capita" equation, during the worst economy since the Great Depression.

JF Aus, We will need a faster interstate and intrastate train service
but the VFT is now out of our financial reach. Likewise nuclear power
we have just left it too late.

A fast enough train service will do the trick and the airlines fares
will be such that there will be little traffic except for the likes of politicians,
I mean you couldn't expect them to go to Canberra by train could you ?