Do you think that GDP is a good instrument to measure a nation’s income ?

The GDP is a pertinent but imperfect indicator of how to measure a nation's income. It is pertinent because it enables to evaluate the market value of the goods and services produced, the set of the value added of all economic agents. However, in many ways it is a very imperfect indicator; to begin with, a large number of activities are not taken into account in the GDP such as voluntary work, domestic work (whereas hiring a maid is) and underground economy, these activities are usually part of wealth creation. Furthermore, if the GDP is incomplete due to its ignorance of the previous activities stated, it also embodies activities in the nation's income that do not create wealth, on the contrary. For example reparations and damage creation. If there is a car accident, the ambulance that comes, the car mechanics that must repair the car paid by the insurance money... all these contribute to the increase of the GDP because of the activities it generated. Another concrete example could be the damage to the environment that wealth creating activities generate, the GDP will not consider the social cost nor the long term impact that could be negative for wealth creation in the future (ex: a river rich in natural resources might not be exploited because a polluting nearby factory in the past made its use impossible. More concretely, taking your bike to go to work in the morning is not taken into account in the GDP whereas taking the taxi is). In addition to this, the price evolution is not always well appreciated to measure an increase in the GDP (in volume) because products evolve integrating innovations, therefore justifying the price increase. Another important argument, even though one might believe it should not be included in the strictest sense of the nation's income, is the qualitative aspect of the GDP (it does not measure the well being of the population), it ignores the living