Some have already pointed this out, but these stories about how the iPhone will boost GDP have left out part of the picture.
I'm going to grant that all of their math is correct, because that's not the problem. The problem is that some of that money may have been spent on something else. Let's say you buy an iPhone. Where did the money come from? Is that money you would've spent on clothes or a new TV? If so, it will have no effect on GDP because it would've boosted it anyway (clothes and TV both affect GDP just as iPhones do).
Did you save the money to purchase the iPhone? If so, then yes there may be a boost in this quarter's GDP, but that's only because you spent it this quarter instead of last quarter. So last quarter's GDP fell by the exact amount that this quarter's rose.
Did you work more hours to enable you to buy it. This is the only case that actually improves GDP, because you added value to the economy by working which you otherwise would not have done.
What about the fact that most of the money comes from the carriers in the form of a subsidy? Well, I'm not sure how phone subsidies enter the GDP, it seems odd because people are paying their monthly bill (which I believe goes into GDP) and that money is used for the phone subsidy. What matters is, if the subsidy weren't spent this quarter, it would be spent sometime; firms can't afford to let money just sit around.
Paul Krugman weighs in
No comments:
Post a Comment