So many economic indicators are perverse - economically it would often be better for a family to get divorced, split into two homes, and then pay each other child support. Heck, economically it would be advantageous to divorce your stay-at-home wife and turn around and hire her to take care of the kids. You could even pay her more and charge her for room and board! You could charge the kids! Financialize everything!

We need metrics that are actually tied to human happiness, not human suffering.

You jest, but that's what I suggested to protect my ex's mother twenty years ago. She was a stay at home mom raising four children after an early divorce without alimony or child care, then long term caretaker for her parents until their deaths in their 90s. She managed two households, worked her entire life, and has no retirement, no pension, no social security to show for it.

The money was being spent, but the system didn't account for who was spending it. When her parents died, they had just gotten out of bankruptcy from taking out a second mortgage to cover late life and end of life care costs. She was left destitute and houseless.

Now, her daughters are paying to care for their mother. Per the article, these expenses, perversely, are proof of a successful economy under the current measurements.