Early in the Obama administration, when there was still hope of a "recovery summer" just around the corner, Obama sycophants could say that unemployment was just a temporary adjustment before Hope and Change kicked in to get our economy roaring. So enjoy the fleeting "funemployment" while you can. Remember that?
I was amazed at that transition alone.
Now, with talk of an upcoming "recovery summer" kind of embarrassing and SCOTUScare here for a while, the very concept that our measurement of GDP is good and questioning whether economic growth is the real indicator of our well being have been trotted out:
Rather than nurturing the GDP fetish, we should instead look to a better accounting of collective needs and the best way to meet those. More output might meets some of those needs, but so might less output. Increasingly–in a world where technology is leading to efficiencies that are reducing costs and lowering the use of raw materials–lower GDP could be a greater societal positive than higher GDP.
That's right, as the title trumpets, "GDP’s Going Down? That’s Good!"
President Obama was elected because he said he'd get our economy (and employment) going quickly under the impetus funding of shovel-ready projects in the massive stimulus spending bill. Now that we've had over 6 years of not getting that result, some are essentially telling us that was the plan all along.
It would have been nice to know that in 2008. Before next year rolls around and we're told that starvation is really just the best way to combat our obesity problem.
There is hope, of course. If a Republican wins in 2016, in early 2017, it will be unemployment, underemployment, and stagnation once more. And our language will be saved.
Hell, who knows? Maybe even "the State" in federal statutes will mean actual state governments again!