They also cast doubt on the proxy indicators used by Subramanian, adding Subramanian did not account for GDP increases on the basis of productivity gains. The former CEA plotted 17 key indicators that are corelated to GDP growth from 2001 to 2018. Before 2011, 16 of the 17 indicators were positively corelated to the growth rate. But from 2011, 11 of the 17 indicators were negatively corelated to growth. The growth estimates shown by the former chief economic adviser omits productivity and quality and takes only volume into account.

Source: The Telegraph June 12, 2019 19:18 UTC