Zack Polanski sagt, die Grünen würden BIP-Ziele aufgeben und sich stattdessen auf das Wohlergehen konzentrieren
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/mar/18/zack-polanski-says-greens-would-ditch-gdp-targets-and-focus-on-wellbeing-instead
Von Lord-Liberty
37 Kommentare
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?
You have to massively grow the government because it’s been radically stripped since thatcher and can’t currently do shit, and I’m not sure how you can do that without focusing on a flourishing economy. Honestly I wish we took some lessons from the Nordic states and focused on what makes us proud to be British, and less about who we define as being british
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.
It doesn’t matter because very few people are listening so he can just say outrageous things because he’s never going to be held to account for a policy he would drop like a hot potato in the unlikely event his Party would ever be elected.
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.
Or…. They could do both. Labour gov in the 90’s consulted psychologists including Seligman – who pushed positive psychology as a discipline- to focus on policies that focused on citizen wellbeing as well as economic growth. Aside from the war crimes, seemed to have worked.
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….
UKs national debt is too high for that.
Ech, as always ideas that are not rooted in reality.
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.
Im not one to indulge the greens but this isnt a terrible idea especially in relation to our households and working – now its common for both parents to work and spend a big portion of the extra income on childcare etc. This is measured by GDP as a big increase in economic activity when really it isnt – just a huge amount of the work done by women before was unmeasured.
Making a society happier and healthier will bring rewards, both social and financial!
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…