the_dunk_tank
It's the dunk tank.
This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml
Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again
view the rest of the comments
Imputed Rent
No one I have told about this had ever even heard of the concept.
USA has higher GDP than China... If we measure in nominal US dollars and pretend that every homeowner in the US pays themselves rent.
I wonder how much China's GDP would increase if you counted all the homeowners (which is like 80% of the population) as paying fictional rent to themselves.
While China doesn't calculate their gdp statistics the same way as the US, I believe they do also include imputed rent in the calculation https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Reestimating+China%27s+underestimated+consumption.-a0407668620
It is capital that is being put to productive use, I think including it in gdp is fair
Neoclassical economics on hexbear!?
The cost of rents increasing is not something you want to be padding your gdp (nearly 10%). This only benefits the FIRE sector while making production more expensive, necessitates an increase in wages or greater deprivation, and produces more unearned income and rent seeking.
How exactly is the value of the land I sit on going up productive? I don't have to do anything to improve it, I can live in a shack, but because the price of the land increases I am somehow engaged in a productive use of capital? The only winner there is myself and the bank, when I sell the property for 10x and the next owner has a 30 year mortgage to live in the same shack. I guess the state also benefits because the fake dollars in rent I pay each month keeps going up and so to does their gdp. None of that is productive.
The land is productive because you are living on it. If you didn't own the property, you would need to pay rent to live somewhere else, which would be included in gdp.
I'm not making a judgment about whether gdp itself is good or not, but including imputed rent makes sense for consistency's sake