Economic Output Quotes

It is hard to redistribute wealth of there is no productive class producing it.

One way to measure the size of a company, industry, or economy is to determine its output. But a better way is to determine its added value - namely, the difference between the value of its outputs, that is, the goods and services it produces, and the costs of its inputs, such as the raw materials and energy it consumes.

Production does not consist in things laboriously made, but in things serviceably consumable; and the question for the nation is not how much labour it employs, but how much life it produces.

No single number has become more central to society in the past 50 years” than gross domestic product.

In terms of productivity - that is, how much a worker produces in an hour - there's little difference between the U.S., France, and Germany. But since more people work in America, and since they work so many more hours, Americans create more wealth.

A smaller and smaller area of land will be able to produce commodities of greater use or higher value

Labour is the father and active principle of wealth, as lands are the mother.

We cannot distribute more wealth than is created. We cannot in the long run pay labor as a whole more than it produces.

It would be a terrible world if everyone was an artist. Nothing would get done!

The observation that money changes induce output changes in the same direction receives confirmation in some data sets but is hard to see in others. Large-scale reductions in money growth can be associated with large-scale depressions or, if carried out in the form of a credible reform, with no depression at all.

The truth of the matter of is that stimulus money not only doesn't stimulate; it actually reduces output.

What you do by having an income tax rate reduction across the board, you really provide great incentives for people to work, produce, and increase output. So I would support a carbon tax in replacement for a progressive income tax.

Individual income can grow only as fast as productivity rises.

The more that energy costs, the less economic activity there can be.

When we hear (as we sometimes do) that (Russia's) economic output is about half the level of a decade ago or that real incomes have fallen sharply, it is worth recalling that economic statistics under the Soviet Union were hardly more reliable than any other official statements. Moreover, a country that produces what no one wants to buy, and whose workers receive wages that they cannot use to buy goods they want, is hardly in the best of economic health.

A rise in the level of saving can reduce aggregate activity temporarily but only a sustained high level of saving makes it possible to have the sustained high level of business investment that contributes to the long-run growth of output.

Cities are responsible for the vast majority of the creation of the economy. They're also places into which we pour the vast majority of resources, the vast majority of energy and the places where a huge percentage of the decisions about how systems are built and how products designed, etc., happen.

Tax increases appear to have a very large sustained and highly significant negative impact on output. Since most of our exogenous tax changes are in fact reductions, the more intuitive way to express this result is that tax cuts have very large and persistent positive output effects

Increases in output generally lead to lower prices, not higher prices.

G.D.P. is not a measure of how much value is produced for consumers. Everybody should recognize that G.D.P. is not a welfare metric.

For example, the supporters of tariffs treat it as self-evident that the creation of jobs is a desirable end, in and of itself, regardless of what the persons employed do. That is clearly wrong. If all we want are jobs, we can create any number--for example, have people dig holes and then fill them up again, or perform other useless tasks. Work is sometimes its own reward. Mostly, however, it is the price we pay to get the things we want. Our real objective is not just jobs but productive jobs--jobs that will mean more goods and services to consume.

We judge economics by what it can produce. As such, economics is rather more like engineering than physics: more practical than spiritual.

By the year 2040, the world's population is likely to increase by about 2 billion people, with also projected economic output will be up about 130 percent versus the year 2010.

Currently, Boston has only nine percent of the state's population - but we provide more than 16 percent of the jobs and 19 percent of the state's revenues.

GDP is a function of capital, labour and how productively you use both.