I’m sure people will come and find some way to complain about this, but **good**. Ruthlessly pursuing constant growth as the ultimate measure of success has caused – and is continuing to cause – wealth inequality to fucking skyrocket and somebody needs to do something about it or 99% of us are fucked.
Marcuse0 on
Look, I’m not going to say they’re wrong to focus on wellbeing over GDP, but it also kind of feels like dropping hard numerical targets which can be independently verified in favour of difficult to quantify vibes based measures of performance which while well intentioned are harder to fall short of.
Archistotle on
I can see how this is appealing; too many governments have prioritised economic growth over the national interest, & refused necessary change on the grounds that it’ll harm the economy.
On the other hand, the only thing less fun than using up the last of our social capital to prevent an economic crash… is an economic crash.
Groovy66 on
We need to step away from the forever growth economic model. It’s not sustainable or achievable, ultimately.
I wonder if Zac realises that would include stepping back from permanent population increases?
zealousmushroom on
I like the general idea. Living in a country that wants to have a healthy population enjoying a good life sounds great. However, the cynic in me feels that this is another way of saying,’We don’t understand economics on this scale, here have a stick of rock and look the other way.’
Spiderinahumansuit on
This is going to be easy to mock, but he’s being fairly sensible – the example he gives of pumping sewage and then having it cleaned up making the numbers go up but not actually improving anything is a good one.
trade-da-ting on
We need to move away from these crappy populist talking points.
No one uses GDP for quality of life. Quality of Life index shows quality of life.
GDP growth is a key component because being rich allows you to use more goods and services which improves quality of life.
But this is not the sole metric and many others are incorporated.
Zak either does know this and is making a populist statement. Or he doesn’t know this and is not fit to be PM
davepage_mcr on
A good compromise would be to focus on median income as a target – that can’t be increased without helping the people at the bottom.
SmashedWorm64 on
“Sir, the economy has ground to a halt, thousands are out of jobs and the country will be bankrupt by the end of the year… but you were aura farming when you delivered the budget last week”
Wotnd on
He doesn’t understand the difference between debt and deficit so it is absolutely no surprise that he’s ditching statistical GDP measures for vague vibes.
Intelligent people are not needed for populism, hypnoboob here is a good example.
tradegreek on
Zack saw vibecoding and was like vibenomics and chill?
humbleabode87 on
This is the most batshit crazy statement I’ve ever seen a politician make, ever.
This would immediately collapse the debt market and the economy would literally self-destruct if this got anywhere near reality.
Unfortunately there’s this thing called “government debt”, can someone let Zack know?
EntertainmentSad3174 on
It’t just like click bait. Typical politician tricks to make people believe in them.
GDP and wellbeing are two completely different things.
It’s like saying I’m gonna stop eating my dinner tonight, and buy a new phone next year.
What?
Yes, a new phone is good for me, yeah I like new phones, and you know what, eating dinner results in a lot of calories and not good for my health bla bla bla I can make a lot sort of looking-like relevant statements around that for as long as I like.
But, at the end of the day, that’s just talking for the sake of taking on completely irrelevant topics.
Xaavuza on
Ok sounds great, what’s his in-depth, strategic, thought out roadmap for making that happen.
Ok_Eagle_3079 on
Well when you are advocating for recesion it is logical not to care abouth growth of the economy.
revolucionario on
Looking at GDP data for the UK of the last 10 years it looks like part of this policy was already introduced by the coalition government in 2010 and has been continued by every government since.
The UK has a lot of problems, but too much GDP growth is really not one of them.
If you think *surveys*/some random cherry picked wellbeing proxies are better?! Then I’ve got a bridge to sell you
StandardNerd92 on
I think the problem is the economy (and investors) are addicted to constant growth, so If we have a government that isn’t a paid up member of the growth club, then we end up with a mass overreaction and huge economic consequences as people pull their investments out of the UK.
The trick is to slowly shift policy to being more consumer and taxpayer focused, without spooking the wider economy. And that’s not an easy thing to do.
Orangesteel on
Before voting green, please be aware that their policy is to exit nature and support natural over medical births. I’m sympathetic to some of their agenda, but there are some terrible policies tucked away in their manifesto sadly.
HorizonBC on
GDP targets are a big reason as to why immigration has been so high.
Immigration is an easy way for the gov to grow GDP….
dr2501 on
The UK would be bankrupt in under 2 years. Their main money-raising policy is “tax the rich” but the minute the Greens won every single wealthy person (and most high earners, and anyone else with any sense) would be gone so who would they tax? Wealth buys you mobility, these people don’t just sit around waiting to be taxed, and if they go so does their investment and lots of jobs with it.
Virtual-Baseball-297 on
If we had a balanced gdp that would support not growing then ok. But we don’t. And most don’t.
Would love to hear more on the practicality and implementation of this
jack5624 on
To people thinking that this is a better way of doing things. Maybe, but people often miss one key point. GDP per capita and wellbeing correlate very heavily, to the point where GDP per capita pretty much measures wellbeing.
Mr_miner94 on
Sounds like a politicians way of saying “we’re gonna suck at the economy”
saxsan4 on
Another reason why the greens are not a serious political party
Nanowith on
I think the problem with GDP is that it can be increased by rich people trading shares without any increase in living standards being seen by the average person.
I think a better middle-ground here would be something akin to a GDP of the median individual, where the buying/spending power of the average person matters more than the overall figure.
No_Breakfast4908 on
HYPNOTICALLY INDUCED MASSIVE TITTIES are in the green manifesto!?
asjonesy99 on
Cool in theory but this will be awesome when not pursuing GDP in a global economy leads to living standards collapsing anyway.
Only conceivable way of something like this succeeding is a legitimately historically awful international disaster that causes those at the top to refocus *worldwide*.
Fr1tzOS on
I like the *intention* behind what he’s saying but I’m not sure that scrapping easily quantifiable targets in favour of vibes is a good idea.
jeanclaudebrowncloud on
GDP can be part of wellbeing, just not the only part
Rude_Sheepherder_714 on
Basing the economy on vibes is a new one, I’ll give him that.
Would be a complete disaster for the country, but you know…
You get some benefits, and you get some benefits, and you get some benefits. Everyone gets benefits.
…just ignore the economy going backwards and the country becoming poorer. It won’t affect you, promise!
You would have to be thick to believe this stuff.
PulsatingBalloonKnot on
So it’ll all just be measured on vibes…. plus death from the open prolific use of A Class Drugs.
Disastrous-Emu-557 on
I wouldn’t focus on wellbeing but quality of life. I don’t actually care if GDP goes up, I care if my quality of life goes up.
The whole nation could be poorer by gdp but if heating, food, leisure, transport and housing are more affordable whilst I have more time for leisure, then I wouldn’t care.
I’m not saying the greens will achieve this, or that a higher gdp doesn’t cause better quality of life. Just that the metric of gdp doesn’t matter as much as quality of life.
Dusty2470 on
Ok, so i’m all in favour of raising the dickensian living standards some of us in our society are currently experiencing, its a shameful and damning indictment of the state of our country, HOWEVER, ditching verifiable measures of economic growth is a bad call. Grow the economy and use that money to raise the living standards of our poorest and ensure that everyone has a fair shake at life.
soggyarsonist on
Ah vibe governing
I think a more sensible approach would be to target growth alongside happiness.
[deleted] on
[removed]
Sh3ffiel on
GDP is a truly awful number to put all focus on. It gives no indication of whether a country is going well or not. I’d love to think everyone involved understands that, and clearly some do, but I see zero evidence of it being fully understood by MPs etc.
This doesn’t sound like necessarily a good measure, but it can’t be a worse one.
panguy87 on
We actually do need to have some focus on GDP to get out of borrowing so much so that’s entirely a good thing to not have an eye on that particular ball
Available_Monitor_92 on
This would fuck bonds aka our debt.
This is possibly worse than liz truss 😂
AnaestheticPlanA on
I’m sorry, but if the choice is between Starmer and Polanski or Farage, then Starmer has to win. For different reasons, a government led by either the Greens or Reform would be a complete catastrophe for the United Kingdom. Neither party has a viable economic or defence strategy, nor have they demonstrated any real capacity to govern in the interests of those beyond their passionate core of supporters. As such, they cannot be considered serious options.
I completely understand why, after the mismanagement of the 2010s, the British public is frustrated by stagnant living standards and the simultaneous strain of public services that have been stripped bare. As an NHS worker, I see this daily. I also recognise the tension of a historically high tax burden alongside declining service provision. I appreciate, too, that this Labour government has at times lacked energy and enthusiasm, leaving space for charismatic figures like Polanski and Farage to gain traction. However, in my experience, the level of confidence with which both men speak is often characteristic of those who have never held serious responsibility. I am confident that both would be found out quickly if ever held accountable for the weight of decisions required in government, though I sincerely hope we never have to test that theory. For what it’s worth, I will continue to support our current Prime Minister. He has demonstrated serious leadership on the world stage and has sought to safeguard key public services (health, education, and defence) despite inheriting a deeply challenging economic situation. That has required difficult decisions elsewhere, including painful constraints on welfare. He is not perfect, but he is better than what came before; and better than the alternatives currently on offer.
42 Comments
I’m sure people will come and find some way to complain about this, but **good**. Ruthlessly pursuing constant growth as the ultimate measure of success has caused – and is continuing to cause – wealth inequality to fucking skyrocket and somebody needs to do something about it or 99% of us are fucked.
Look, I’m not going to say they’re wrong to focus on wellbeing over GDP, but it also kind of feels like dropping hard numerical targets which can be independently verified in favour of difficult to quantify vibes based measures of performance which while well intentioned are harder to fall short of.
I can see how this is appealing; too many governments have prioritised economic growth over the national interest, & refused necessary change on the grounds that it’ll harm the economy.
On the other hand, the only thing less fun than using up the last of our social capital to prevent an economic crash… is an economic crash.
We need to step away from the forever growth economic model. It’s not sustainable or achievable, ultimately.
I wonder if Zac realises that would include stepping back from permanent population increases?
I like the general idea. Living in a country that wants to have a healthy population enjoying a good life sounds great. However, the cynic in me feels that this is another way of saying,’We don’t understand economics on this scale, here have a stick of rock and look the other way.’
This is going to be easy to mock, but he’s being fairly sensible – the example he gives of pumping sewage and then having it cleaned up making the numbers go up but not actually improving anything is a good one.
We need to move away from these crappy populist talking points.
No one uses GDP for quality of life. Quality of Life index shows quality of life.
GDP growth is a key component because being rich allows you to use more goods and services which improves quality of life.
But this is not the sole metric and many others are incorporated.
Zak either does know this and is making a populist statement. Or he doesn’t know this and is not fit to be PM
A good compromise would be to focus on median income as a target – that can’t be increased without helping the people at the bottom.
“Sir, the economy has ground to a halt, thousands are out of jobs and the country will be bankrupt by the end of the year… but you were aura farming when you delivered the budget last week”
He doesn’t understand the difference between debt and deficit so it is absolutely no surprise that he’s ditching statistical GDP measures for vague vibes.
Intelligent people are not needed for populism, hypnoboob here is a good example.
Zack saw vibecoding and was like vibenomics and chill?
This is the most batshit crazy statement I’ve ever seen a politician make, ever.
This would immediately collapse the debt market and the economy would literally self-destruct if this got anywhere near reality.
Unfortunately there’s this thing called “government debt”, can someone let Zack know?
It’t just like click bait. Typical politician tricks to make people believe in them.
GDP and wellbeing are two completely different things.
It’s like saying I’m gonna stop eating my dinner tonight, and buy a new phone next year.
What?
Yes, a new phone is good for me, yeah I like new phones, and you know what, eating dinner results in a lot of calories and not good for my health bla bla bla I can make a lot sort of looking-like relevant statements around that for as long as I like.
But, at the end of the day, that’s just talking for the sake of taking on completely irrelevant topics.
Ok sounds great, what’s his in-depth, strategic, thought out roadmap for making that happen.
Well when you are advocating for recesion it is logical not to care abouth growth of the economy.
Looking at GDP data for the UK of the last 10 years it looks like part of this policy was already introduced by the coalition government in 2010 and has been continued by every government since.
The UK has a lot of problems, but too much GDP growth is really not one of them.
Oh my god he’s a moron.
Per capita GDP is a *[great](https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/four-reasons-why-gdp-is-a-useful)* measure of living standards – it correlates well with health outcomes, employment, social safety nets, life expectancy etc
If you think *surveys*/some random cherry picked wellbeing proxies are better?! Then I’ve got a bridge to sell you
I think the problem is the economy (and investors) are addicted to constant growth, so If we have a government that isn’t a paid up member of the growth club, then we end up with a mass overreaction and huge economic consequences as people pull their investments out of the UK.
The trick is to slowly shift policy to being more consumer and taxpayer focused, without spooking the wider economy. And that’s not an easy thing to do.
Before voting green, please be aware that their policy is to exit nature and support natural over medical births. I’m sympathetic to some of their agenda, but there are some terrible policies tucked away in their manifesto sadly.
GDP targets are a big reason as to why immigration has been so high.
Immigration is an easy way for the gov to grow GDP….
The UK would be bankrupt in under 2 years. Their main money-raising policy is “tax the rich” but the minute the Greens won every single wealthy person (and most high earners, and anyone else with any sense) would be gone so who would they tax? Wealth buys you mobility, these people don’t just sit around waiting to be taxed, and if they go so does their investment and lots of jobs with it.
If we had a balanced gdp that would support not growing then ok. But we don’t. And most don’t.
Would love to hear more on the practicality and implementation of this
To people thinking that this is a better way of doing things. Maybe, but people often miss one key point. GDP per capita and wellbeing correlate very heavily, to the point where GDP per capita pretty much measures wellbeing.
Sounds like a politicians way of saying “we’re gonna suck at the economy”
Another reason why the greens are not a serious political party
I think the problem with GDP is that it can be increased by rich people trading shares without any increase in living standards being seen by the average person.
I think a better middle-ground here would be something akin to a GDP of the median individual, where the buying/spending power of the average person matters more than the overall figure.
HYPNOTICALLY INDUCED MASSIVE TITTIES are in the green manifesto!?
Cool in theory but this will be awesome when not pursuing GDP in a global economy leads to living standards collapsing anyway.
Only conceivable way of something like this succeeding is a legitimately historically awful international disaster that causes those at the top to refocus *worldwide*.
I like the *intention* behind what he’s saying but I’m not sure that scrapping easily quantifiable targets in favour of vibes is a good idea.
GDP can be part of wellbeing, just not the only part
Basing the economy on vibes is a new one, I’ll give him that.
Would be a complete disaster for the country, but you know…
Brilliant …screw the economy ..give everything away …destroy thr military…complete looney joke ..
You get some benefits, and you get some benefits, and you get some benefits. Everyone gets benefits.
…just ignore the economy going backwards and the country becoming poorer. It won’t affect you, promise!
You would have to be thick to believe this stuff.
So it’ll all just be measured on vibes…. plus death from the open prolific use of A Class Drugs.
I wouldn’t focus on wellbeing but quality of life. I don’t actually care if GDP goes up, I care if my quality of life goes up.
The whole nation could be poorer by gdp but if heating, food, leisure, transport and housing are more affordable whilst I have more time for leisure, then I wouldn’t care.
I’m not saying the greens will achieve this, or that a higher gdp doesn’t cause better quality of life. Just that the metric of gdp doesn’t matter as much as quality of life.
Ok, so i’m all in favour of raising the dickensian living standards some of us in our society are currently experiencing, its a shameful and damning indictment of the state of our country, HOWEVER, ditching verifiable measures of economic growth is a bad call. Grow the economy and use that money to raise the living standards of our poorest and ensure that everyone has a fair shake at life.
Ah vibe governing
I think a more sensible approach would be to target growth alongside happiness.
[removed]
GDP is a truly awful number to put all focus on. It gives no indication of whether a country is going well or not. I’d love to think everyone involved understands that, and clearly some do, but I see zero evidence of it being fully understood by MPs etc.
This doesn’t sound like necessarily a good measure, but it can’t be a worse one.
We actually do need to have some focus on GDP to get out of borrowing so much so that’s entirely a good thing to not have an eye on that particular ball
This would fuck bonds aka our debt.
This is possibly worse than liz truss 😂
I’m sorry, but if the choice is between Starmer and Polanski or Farage, then Starmer has to win. For different reasons, a government led by either the Greens or Reform would be a complete catastrophe for the United Kingdom. Neither party has a viable economic or defence strategy, nor have they demonstrated any real capacity to govern in the interests of those beyond their passionate core of supporters. As such, they cannot be considered serious options.
I completely understand why, after the mismanagement of the 2010s, the British public is frustrated by stagnant living standards and the simultaneous strain of public services that have been stripped bare. As an NHS worker, I see this daily. I also recognise the tension of a historically high tax burden alongside declining service provision. I appreciate, too, that this Labour government has at times lacked energy and enthusiasm, leaving space for charismatic figures like Polanski and Farage to gain traction. However, in my experience, the level of confidence with which both men speak is often characteristic of those who have never held serious responsibility. I am confident that both would be found out quickly if ever held accountable for the weight of decisions required in government, though I sincerely hope we never have to test that theory. For what it’s worth, I will continue to support our current Prime Minister. He has demonstrated serious leadership on the world stage and has sought to safeguard key public services (health, education, and defence) despite inheriting a deeply challenging economic situation. That has required difficult decisions elsewhere, including painful constraints on welfare. He is not perfect, but he is better than what came before; and better than the alternatives currently on offer.