TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Elon Musk is wrong about GDP

57 点作者 simonebrunozzi15 天前

16 条评论

chollida115 天前
I&#x27;ve talked to a few economists about this and non agree with Elon on this.<p>The biggest issue one person raised is how do you separate out government spending form GDP?<p>If a US town has a big military base, does that mean the entire towns&#x27; GDP is just government spending so ignore it?<p>The government essentially pays for everyone&#x27;s salary in the town.<p>Where do you draw the line at what is government spending and private spending?<p>Cause if the base went away tomorrow then so does the town and about 95% of its spending, so it would be hard to include any of the towns economy in the GDP calculations if you only want private spending as the private spending in this case is almost all first or second order based solely on government spending.<p>Or at a more macro level. Boeing is a legitimate company but more than 50% and more than 75% depending on how you account for it, comes from government spending.<p>So do you just not include 75% of Boeings spending in GDP?<p>How much of the Boeing employees spending do you include in GDP then as if 75% of their salary is government spending and you are trying to exclude government spending.<p>If you allow their spending to be part of GDP then you are saying you are including government spending in GDP just as a second order event.<p>I&#x27;m told people still do their Phd in economics on this topic so its clearly a very hard problemm.
评论 #43833265 未加载
评论 #43838357 未加载
评论 #43833710 未加载
评论 #43834438 未加载
评论 #43833051 未加载
axegon_15 天前
&gt; &quot;elon is wrong about {X}&quot;<p>People are (very) slowly waking up. The number of X-es is large to say the least.
评论 #43833281 未加载
评论 #43838717 未加载
评论 #43833829 未加载
评论 #43833611 未加载
评论 #43833269 未加载
heisgone15 天前
There is certainly a usefulness in separating government spending and private spending in our economic health measures. For one, measures like GDP are often used to evaluate the confidence and the general well-being of our economy. High Government spending tend to indicate the opposite, as Keynesian economics would mandate. More so, it invite manupulation of those measures by politicians, who can increase deficits to boost their &quot;success&quot;. When it comes to spending like Education, those should be fairly constant relative to the population, in a developed country. We also have other mechanics to discuss their health status since they are largely public funded and subject to political debate. Perhaps a good measure would be the GDP minus public deficit minus credit card debt increase.
评论 #43835804 未加载
评论 #43834063 未加载
smeeth15 天前
Elon is definitely wrong. The author seems to be advocating running the economy on vibes, however.<p>&gt; The real problem with GDP ... is that it tempts us to view all human progress as an amorphous score, which we can start maximising just as soon as we fix whatever we think is wrong with how that score is calculated.<p>No! The problem with GDP isn&#x27;t that it&#x27;s a score, it&#x27;s that it&#x27;s a BAD score. We know whats wrong with it. It&#x27;s fixable, it doesn&#x27;t ignore very many things! The main issues are totally tractable. In addition to ignoring utility:<p>1) GDP doesn&#x27;t account for changes in net wealth.<p>If I take out a loan to buy candy, GDP goes up. After I eat the candy, the loan remains. I&#x27;m financially worse off. GDP still went up! Economy is doing well!<p>GDP also ignores depreciation. Machinery&#x2F;infrastructure decay doesn&#x27;t affect GDP at all.<p>2) GDP doesn&#x27;t account for externalities or zero-cost innovation&#x2F;value.<p>If I pollute the water supply to make an additional $10, GDP went up.<p>The inverse is also true. If I make Wikipedia freely available, the value provided to humanity does not affect GDP.
评论 #43842781 未加载
评论 #43839469 未加载
评论 #43834898 未加载
评论 #43833633 未加载
hyperpape15 天前
I don&#x27;t have any sympathy for Elon&#x27;s view, but I don&#x27;t think this article really does anything to explain why it&#x27;s wrong. No surprise, it appears to be an op-ed, which is not a format that usually teaches you much.
fuoqi15 天前
While I can&#x27;t say that Musk is right, I also can&#x27;t say he is completely wrong here.<p>The private sector can also spend on dumb and inefficient things and we are fine in counting it in the GDP metric, the difference between private sector and the government is the source of revenue. The private sector has to produce something for the economy before spending (it may be done indirectly through debt, but it&#x27;s not important here), while the latter forces the economy to share it&#x27;s productive capacity (using violence if necessary) while not producing anything itself (well, technically it does, but it&#x27;s usually a tiny amount of the total revenue). It&#x27;s still fine, since it&#x27;s just a form of re-distribution from one private entities to others. It can be grossly inefficient, but so can be the private spending.<p>The problem is when a significant portion of the government revenue is fueled by debt which can not be paid by the future economy growth. The government quickly engineers negative real interest rates either by forcing commercial banks and pension funds to buy it with regulations, or by outright money printing, which is easy to do in a fiat system. Such debt-fueled GDP growth is not a sign of strength, but instead a sign of weakness, and ideally it should be heavily discounted.
评论 #43833418 未加载
AdrianB115 天前
The only valid point of concern is government self-spending. Maybe we can look at GDP and GDP excl govt spending as 2 separate metrics, each has its own merits.<p>A relative of mine is working for my country&#x27;s government for a very long time as a high level economist and leading a government department. One thing that is happening is lots of made-up jobs with made-up work; this is just to keep unemployment low, but most of the money (&gt;60%) return directly to the government as taxes. It artificially increase the GDP. This relative has several hundred of people in the organization that they run, about half are politically appointed (as in &quot;every new minister or state secretary is employing dozens of their friends and relatives&quot;) and about 3&#x2F;4 are not doing any job that results in a positive outcome. Most of the work is paper-pushing &quot;analysis and reporting&quot; that are have no real impact on anything, but are still hired as the number of positions is imposed from very top and hiring is also &quot;influenced&quot; from the top. So what happens with the GDP? It is increasing artificially and it is meaningless in this context.
incomingpain15 天前
GDP = buying&#x2F;selling things and investment. Government spending is almost always buying something. How could you extract this from GDP?<p>Elon is saying government spending should not be included in GDP. In reality GDP is what it is; find a new metric to use.<p>the quality of using GDP as a metric is low because of this. Also why GDP growth matters so much. Recessions are defined as negative GDP growth by 2 quarters. So government can deficit spend to hide a recession, that&#x27;s the problem.<p>What you have to look at isnt GDP at all. find a new metric to use to determine recession. Here&#x27;s mine.<p>Real GDP minus government deficit(all levels of government combined) per capita.<p>When you look at this metric. Canada, Germany, UK, France, Italy, Japan, spain, and estonia are in hidden recessions. Also why they all pretty much need to be negative bank rates and high inflation right now. Obviously this is a WW2 consequences that were put off until now.<p>Other ways to see the problem is 2030 worker shortage or the inverted population pyramids.
topaz015 天前
I&#x27;m not sure about the context of that Kennedy quote, but as presented it doesn&#x27;t read as a case for redefining GD(or N)P, but rather as a reason not to take it as a measure of the success of society. I think that&#x27;s correct, and the present blog post comes to a similar conclusion at the end.
oceansky15 天前
Bolsonaro government in Brazil pulled the same private vs public GDP rethoric to justify smallish growth.<p>Mind you the economy was effectively being lead by Paulo Guedes, U of Chicago PhD
robertlagrant15 天前
I am not an expert, but this was noted elsewhere as being the reason why Russia&#x27;s economy looked to be doing relatively well even after years of sanctions: the government was spending as a wartime economy, and so any loans, any sovereign wealth, and other measures to fund that spending all prop up an economy that might in future have many problems.<p>(Not that they&#x27;re really propping it up, but that GDP is a common proxy for an economy&#x27;s health, it looks better than it is.)<p>I&#x27;d be curious to know if people here with more insight than I would be keen to share.
评论 #43833035 未加载
SilverBirch15 天前
I don&#x27;t think this post really understands what Elon Musk was saying in the context he was saying it. He was responding to a graph showing the Altanta Fed predicting a recession. There was nothing more to his tweet than &quot;I guess this a plausible reason this obviously bad thing is actually good&quot;. It comes from the same vintage as Kathy Wood&#x27;s &quot;Our massive losses are actually a good thing because we can offset our future taxable gains&quot;. Like... obviously this is just self-serving bollocks, why engage with it other than to laugh.
xnx15 天前
&gt; Elon Musk is wrong about GDP<p>Elon Musk is wrong about A-to-Z
josefritzishere15 天前
Elon Musk is wrong about a lot of things. I&#x27;m not sure why people keep asking him questions outside his area of expertise...
评论 #43833233 未加载
评论 #43833094 未加载
评论 #43833304 未加载
lotharcable15 天前
wow, that is kinda dumb.<p>Governments can and do target GDP with their spending, with predictable results. The classic example is &quot;ghost cities&quot; in China. They have ghost cities nobody lives in, ghost roads nobody drives on, and ghost bullet trains that go nowhere useful. All because regional governors are expected, one way or the other, to match GDP targets for their regions.<p>Goodhart&#x27;s law applies here. &quot;Any observed statistical regularity will tend to collapse once pressure is placed upon it for control purposes.&quot; or &quot;When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure.&quot;<p>GDP is subject to manipulation when it becomes a target. So is lots of other things like &quot;Consumer Price Index&quot;, which nowadays doesn&#x27;t index a whole lot other then what the goverment&#x27;s target is for inflation (and yes, the Federal Reserve actually counts as part of the &quot;government&quot; here).<p>Which means that GDP, like the CPI, is not particularly useful measurement anymore.
评论 #43833153 未加载
评论 #43833026 未加载
评论 #43833164 未加载
评论 #43833137 未加载
评论 #43833025 未加载
rahimnathwani15 天前
GDP counts government dollars at face value.<p>But is a government dollar really as productive as a private sector dollar?<p>$1b billion for the local school district. Compare that to $1 billion spent by a private operator?<p>Standard GDP might overstate. Maybe you need a 50% haircut on government spending in the calculation.
评论 #43833183 未加载
评论 #43833292 未加载
评论 #43833241 未加载
评论 #43834040 未加载
评论 #43833417 未加载
评论 #43833290 未加载
评论 #43833474 未加载
评论 #43833572 未加载
评论 #43833196 未加载