Forget the GDP

In praise of the “Genuine Progress Indicator.”

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

More than a million Americans are diagnosed with cancer each year, and that’s good for the US gross domestic product. In fact, the more we spend on medical bills, the healthier the gdp looks. Back in the 1930s, when Wharton economist Simon Kuznets came up with the idea of tallying the total value of goods and services produced by an economy, he noted that “the welfare of a nation can…scarcely be inferred” from this exercise. And in 1968, Robert F. Kennedy said, “Gross national product counts air pollution and cigarette advertising and ambulances to clear our highways of carnage…It measures everything, in short, except that which makes life worthwhile.”

So why is the gdp still the ubiquitous yardstick for the economy’s well-being? One alternative is the “genuine progress indicator” or gpi, developed by the think tank Redefining Progress. It includes social costs and benefits along with raw economic activity; thus divorce, with its attendant legal fees, is good for the gdp but bad for the gpi. While America’s gdp per capita more than tripled between 1950 and 2004, our gpi less than doubled.


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend