What I would contend is more tenuous is the link between GDP and the "real" economy. I not refering to some bootleg off-the-books exchanges, but rather just the part of the "measured" economy where something of real value is created. All lot of what transpires now, in terms of money flow, provides little net benefit yet shows up as evidence of economic vitality. If we suddenly stopped making anything new, we could continue selling each other our accumulated stuff on Ebay and keep the GDP robust for awhile.

What constitutes value in a real economic context? Something (whether it be extracted energy, raw materials, a product, a service, or information) which enhances society's ability to produce or do more of the same. Otherwise, it's like an expensive fireworks display; entertaining for awhile, but then the lights go out and all that's left is the acrid smoke and diminished ability to hear.

I agree that there's more to life than "value" as defined above, and we will need to embrace that more in a future economy since the usual fix of "more stuff" always costs energy.

A few years ago I tried to get information on how many dollars changed hands in the NYSE, Nasdaq, and the Merc. I couldn't find the data on the internet or at the public library. The question arose after a talk with a stock broker who said the entire federal budget could be paid for by only a 2% tax on the stock market. After a little extrapilation I concluded that at least 90% of all economic activity in the US was not included in the GDP. Government taxes the dimes which change hands on Main Street and turns a blind eye on the dollars that change hands on Wall Street. Somehow the paycheck of the stockbroker is counted as production but what he sells isn't consider a good or a service. The King never taxes himself.