The US has some of the highest GDP per capita on earth but that doesn’t mean it (or its economy, if you don’t define economy just as stock market go brrr) is doing well.
As in, doing worse economically. In this context, where that’s clear, it seems like the wording holds up.
(or its economy, if you don’t define economy just as stock market go brrr)
GDP measures actual trade more than the stock market. That being said, yes, it’s a litmus test, albeit a decently well supported one. The main places it breaks down, in terms of predicting people’s lifestyles, is where there’s major banking hubs (Singapore, Seychelles, Ireland for a while).
GDP is absolute values, so there’s quite a bit of self reinforcement. Especially in service heavy areas, your massage cost 30$ for half an hour, elsewhere you can get a better one for 10$ an hour.
Although the second economy delivered twice the goods at a higher quality, the economic output was 1/3rd
Yes, it gets called a “litmus test”. If it’s higher you can be reasonably sure whatever place is richer (although banking hubs break that a bit). It itself doesn’t correspond to that more than empirically, though.
Doing Worse is subjective.
Higher GDP ≠ Doing Better.
The US has some of the highest GDP per capita on earth but that doesn’t mean it (or its economy, if you don’t define economy just as stock market go brrr) is doing well.
As in, doing worse economically. In this context, where that’s clear, it seems like the wording holds up.
GDP measures actual trade more than the stock market. That being said, yes, it’s a litmus test, albeit a decently well supported one. The main places it breaks down, in terms of predicting people’s lifestyles, is where there’s major banking hubs (Singapore, Seychelles, Ireland for a while).
GDP is absolute values, so there’s quite a bit of self reinforcement. Especially in service heavy areas, your massage cost 30$ for half an hour, elsewhere you can get a better one for 10$ an hour.
Although the second economy delivered twice the goods at a higher quality, the economic output was 1/3rd
Yes, it gets called a “litmus test”. If it’s higher you can be reasonably sure whatever place is richer (although banking hubs break that a bit). It itself doesn’t correspond to that more than empirically, though.