Deciding what goes into an economic measure like national output is a choice about what matters. It is not a neutral fact about the world. Underneath the numbers, a judgement about values is always being made, even when it is presented as plain arithmetic.
When national statistics label unpaid household work as non-productive and leave it out, policymakers stop seeing it at all. Women do most of this work, so their large contribution drops out of the decisions that shape their lives. What the accounts refuse to count, governments act as if does not exist.
Some things can never be turned into market goods. A traditional way of life and an endangered animal are examples. A system that values only what can be bought and sold will treat them as worth nothing, however much they matter. Simply pricing them more cleverly cannot fix this blind spot.
A single growth rate gives leaders an easy excuse: they can point to the index instead of defending real trade-offs. If the full picture were visible, including unpaid work and the environment, politicians would have to make their judgements openly. Knowledge from many fields could then shape policy, not economics alone.
Pushing for unpaid work to be added to official accounts brings short-term recognition. But it also strengthens the very measuring system that caused the problem. Reformers face a real conflict between gaining visibility inside a flawed framework and wanting to tear that framework down.