I considered that, but I think it's a stretch to think that's what they meant - they were clearly referring to actual tangible assets and labor. To be sure there is some merit in what he's saying, but I take great issue with the framing; it seems to me to almost be contradictory to outline the issues with society brought on by, what he calls, the "unproductive elites", while simultaneously framing the success of one's life in a consumerist way.

Yes, and we should factor in a $ amount per child you’ve had, also subtract a $ amount per time you yell at said child. Also how much should a compliment given to a stranger be worth? Should the value be different if it’s in sincere?

The important point is that it’s the net sum at the end that qualifies if you are a good person! If you help out 1000 people and have 12 kids, but also you contribute to a racially motivated genocide, you’re still a good person as long as the net $ sum at the end is positive. /s

Absolutely everything about the idea seems wrong. Both the idea that it’s all about accounting and the idea that you can ascribe a definite value to actions that should sum to some moral statement.