Jobs that don't create long term value AND don't serve a basic human need. We need X farmers, but we have X + Y actual farmers the Y is are optional jobs that have limited long term economic value.
Must all jobs create long term value and serve a basic human need?
I guess pretty much every job would serve a basic human need (to be employed) to someone who needs to be employed in order to make ends meet.
I guess what I'm trying to get at it is that your post read like someone trying to apply what they thought the world should be like and not how it actually is.
For example, if we have an excess of farmers that would be cleared up in the market as those not making enough income to continue being farmers would pack up and leave the occupation or try to get loans to maintain their employment long enough to weather the current conditions. The only time I see problems in employment is when an entity steps in to maintain a job when the market is already dismissing it.
Must all jobs create long term value and serve a basic human need? The negation of ((not A) and (not B)) aka !((!A) and (!B)) = A or B.
A) Jobs which meet a basic human need are more stable than jobs that fill a want. They also come back vary quickly vs jobs that fill wants.
B) Jobs that invest in the future are somewhat more stable than jobs that fill wants and they come back quickly as the economy improves.
C) Jobs that fill wants are the least stable because people need to feel that their future is very secure before they spend much in this category.
Government spending to prop up A or B can be cost effective, but to prop up C tends to be extremely costly. In some ways money is less useful than confidence. Consider the state of mind someone needs to be in to spend a weekend at a spa, get married in Hawaii, or buy an Accura vs. a Honda.
For example, if we have an excess of farmers that would be cleared up in the market as those not making enough income to continue being farmers would pack up and leave the occupation or try to get loans to maintain their employment long enough to weather the current conditions. The only time I see problems in employment is when an entity steps in to maintain a job when the market is already dismissing it
I was expressly commenting on farm subsidies. There is an idea that giving welfare to people is worse than giving it to industries however from an economic standpoint there is little difference when the output of said job does not create long term value.
