unthinkable for same reason prohibition is sticky: too many jobs depend on bad policy
Conversation
I deeply respect primacy of “jobs”, actually. I believe some hero will one day articulate this better:
Quote Tweet
Slogan for a hypothetically effective political party: “You gotta lose jobs to make jobs”
1
2
Toying with “fake jobs!” as a pithy jab
2
2
did you see that graphic going around that claimed that the biggest single “private” employer in many states was state U?
1
1
Huh. I’d believe that. I’d also guess most of those jobs are food/building/custodial related, or are there actually that many paper-pushers?
1
1
Google cost disease for basic explanation.A lot of the admin growth has nominally been to administer loan programs, which in turn is complex because of affirmative action. If you want to understand the rise of campus SJWs, follow the money.
1
4
It seems also like the “ideal rate” at which de-bullshitification happens is an open and complex question, which requires more delicacy than the “dissolve” language I’m advocating for. Downward economic pressure seems like best fit, IE, what “Republicans” are proposing here.
1
2
Of course, downward economic pressure could backfire in cases of runaway inelastic demand, so maybe somebody “half as radical” as me like Thiel could ramp up the “dropout option” by about 10-15% memetically... I don’t actually have a good answer for this.
1
1
I'm not endorsing the bullshit jobs framing btw. Bullshittiness is relative to general economic conditions and which ideological constraint boundary is active (eg. survival/war boundary vs. growth/exploration boundary).
I think of bullshit jobs as cognitive screen savers
Sure, I don’t necessarily disagree with that. “Meaningful job” > “bullshit job” > “no job”. It’s that first “>” where you get opioid addictions & populist presidencies, it’s the second “>” where you experience direct turmoil and calamity. Whole equation needs to be satisfied.
2


