You dispute yourself what you call indisputable in your own comment! Fewer jobs means potentially less money in the economy (and theory says that in most cases, more money is lost from fewer jobs than gained from higher pay).
Why? Well, I know its tradition to say it, but there appears to be no causal relationship, just occasional coincidence. The mathematical model would be interesting to see.
That's your opinion - I don't see any source. My opinion is that it doesn't cause less jobs - I think it would eventually cause more sustainable jobs as malinvestment is removed from the economy.
Given that it will always be beneficial to work if you need extra money you take those jobs. It's always beneficial to work. But those jobs are disappearing anyway.
more people working doesn't necessarily mean less jobs available. more people working can mean more jobs / value creation opportunities which results in more jobs overall
That also doesn't factor in the indirect benefits to the economy, like all the people who can't start a new business (etc.), being stuck in jobs they don't want because if they left they'd lose their benefits.
Snark about 'actual statistical evidence' notwithstanding, people losing their jobs is entirely compatible with an increase in the number of available jobs because, unsurprisingly, not all jobs are fungible.
Jobs are not a zero-sum game. If you were working, you'd be spending more money so more jobs would be available. And the money you are spending is either coming from the other people's taxes, decreasing the number of jobs available, or it's coming from your savings, which reduces your banks float, which decreases the number of jobs available.
It's funny, I often think if all these fancy companies are so snobby about who they hire (which is kind of what it's about) then that means more people without jobs, thus less money put into the economy, thus less economic activity, thus fewer jobs..
But saying that there are a limited number of jobs is exactly falling for that fallacy. There are as many jobs are there are people who want to work. There can be other problems, like not enough entrepreneurs, too many regulations, not enough capital per person to effectively compete globally, etc.
Old people being forced to retire or everyone being forced to work fewer hours would not help. That would result in massive load of productivity and value creation. The pie might get shared more equally, but it would be a much smaller pie.
There is a popular theory that most people, or at least white collar workers, are employed in jobs that aren't economically necessary/worthwhile. Because of the way corporate politics incentivizes having more employees and making people busy. This would seem to add evidence to that.
reply