I didn't say there was anything wrong with having that value if you want to. The problem is not having the self awareness to realise when that framework of values is clouding your view of other perspectives.

A lack of self-awareness is a trap - the most insidious one because you don't know when you're in it :)

And you'll need a citation on "for the most part the rest of the world". Economic performance as the one true measure of prosperity and progress is very new, even in America itself: Most Americans have no sense of how very different their country is now from say, the country that launched the Apollo missions.

> Most Americans have no sense of how very different their country is now from say, the country that launched the Apollo missions.

You cannot be kidding right? Those that remember the Apollo missions will undoubtedly agree their country is different, first but not least they are most likely using a smartphone assembled and designed with technology unimaginable by NASA planning the Apollo missions; not only that, the smartphone is assembled half way around the world by a country previously in such dire poverty and famine that over 30M died due to Marxist central planning.

That’s not change unique to America though. Why would I be thinking of changes that have affected almost every country, when talking about whether Americans recognize how America has changed?

Whether someone remembers the Apollo missions or not is irrelevant to my point. Quite the opposite: It matters more what people who don’t remember think of it, and how distant their assumptions are from the reality of that time.

It’s also funny how you keep bailing on your previous assertions that we’ve dismantled, and cherry pick different parts of every argument in the hope you might finally get a “win”.

> That’s not change unique to America though. Why would I be thinking of changes that have affected almost every country, when talking about whether Americans recognize how America has changed?

Hahahaha, this is like saying, the world wars didn’t impact Europe, because it also impacted the whole world! Europeans, the war didn’t happen!! Anyways… this entire thread is more evidence that European stereotypes are valid for the most part

The issue is not that it's used as a measure, it's that the thing economic performance is supposed to serve as a proxy for - the general health and stability of a society - is then completely ignored. Homelessness, mental illness and violence are objectively more pronounced in American culture than they are in European culture.

Are you conscious of the fact that you replied to, essentially, someone saying "author mistakes preferences for metrics" with "it's not a mistake, it's a preference"?

Because economic performance does not account for unsustainable consumption of natural resources as a cost. Say I have $1M in the bank with a $10K monthly income. I am spending $100K per month. What is wrong with me measuring my happiness by the amount of money I spend?

Economic performance is a number. You can optimise it. Or you can choose any other number, and optimise it too. Is money the best number? Why not median lifespan? Why not reported happiness? Why not median wealth? US has much more money than EU, but the cost is the streets are covered with homeless. Is US really more prosperous if it can't provide a decent life for the equal percentage of people compared to EU countries?

Again this is a polarizing question.

There's nothing wrong with either perspective, rather its the case that the European perspective is different. That's not to say that Europeans are right, or that criticism flowing from Europe to America is justified, but it should at least be acknowledged that pitching two players in a competition that one of the players has less interest in competing on, is misguided.

> What exactly is wrong with Americans or for the most part the rest of the world valuing economic performance as a measure of prosperity and progress?

Prosperity of the nation? Or average people of the nation?

Imagine economy grows. But created value is distributed in hands of few. How then we think about prosperity? It is a prosperity of those few not a nation's?