Hello everyone!  In economics class we started talking about GDP (gross domestic product) for some time. For those who do not know it, the GDP was created by the capitalist countries that wanted to show that they were better than the USSR and their economic system. Even today, it is still considered the best method of measuring well-being. However, many economists begin to think that it cannot measure real well-being. Stefano Zamagni, an Italian economist, also supports this statement. He proposes an example that underlines the incorrectness of this measure: if you cut down all the trees in a forest, the GDP would rise, but it would not be good for the environment.
So should we change the measuring instrument or keep it but with other instruments at its side?

This is a really great question. I think that we should keep GDP (in order to be able to compare our current economic situation with the past) but we should use other instruments as "corrections" of GDP. We should create a like a HDI (Human Development Index) for economy which would "calculate" the health of our  system in general, including our impact on the climate. We could do it with implementing other indicators such as (for example) Carbon Emissions, Percentage of waste that is recycled, number of green houses, quality of public transportation and so on..
This is not going to change everything but in the long terms could lead to a real change in how we consider economic growth and in what we consider (economically) valuable