Back to Quack Off

 Quack Off               

by Free Market Duck

What the hell is a "job?"

(Nov 08, 2012)

There is no such animal as "jobs."  There are only individuals choosing how they want to work, relate and exchange with others.  What if all individuals became their own "employer?"  Would they have a "job?"  How would you calculate "unemployment" statistics?

  The term "job" and "unemployment" are simply fake economic constructs for today's Keynesian economists who have adopted Marxist socialist economics and shoved individuals into erroneous mathematical equations that bear no resemblance to reality.

Washington, DC -- What is a "job?"

  All we hear today from politicians is that Americans need "jobs."  If you don't have a job, you are said to be "unemployed."  We have "unemployment" insurance.  What is an "employer?"  What is an "employee?"

  I submit that the study of economics has been so terribly distorted by the old Marxist philosophy of "workers" vs. "managers" -- or the proletariat vs. the bourgeoisie, or managers vs. the workers, or the company vs. the union -- that we have lost total sight of what is really going on in the field of study known as economics.

  In reality, we have individuals living in a nation.  Each individual has the choice to either run his own business by himself or join with others in a corporation or hire himself/herself out on an hourly/monthly/yearly wage basis to perform work for somebody else or a corporation.

  In today's political and economic terms, the concept of "employee" or "job" is simply a somewhat erroneous construct for today's socialist (Keynesian) economists to use in various mathematical equations.  In the real world, Americans do not have to have "jobs."  They do not have to be "employees."  The fact that the majority do so -- i.e., work for somebody else by exchanging labor as their product for a medium of exchange (money) -- is more a reflection of people's choices than anything else.  It is not a mandatory universal law of science or anything.

  Therefore, for politicians to claim that their political duty is to ensure that everybody in America has a "job" is pure political nonsense.  People do not need the government to ensure that they have "jobs."  Americans need the government to get out of the "job" market and allow all individuals to be free to voluntarily exchange goods and services in a free market capitalist society.

  The only true function of the government, and thus the politicians, is to ensure that all individuals' inherent freedoms and rights to their own mind, body, and property are not infringed upon.  Unfortunately, it has now been inculcated into our economic system that it is the function of the federal, state, and local governments to do everything possible to "create Jobs" for everybody in the nation.  And that's when our problems begin.

  Every politician has their own definition and moral philosophy of what constitutes "ensuring that everybody gets a job," that everybody is "employed," and if they are not "employed," then politicians have concocted methods that they think will accomplish their "full employment" goal.  Thus we get politicians who conspire with central bankers to inflate the crap out of our paper and digitized money in order to create "full employment."  We have government "unemployment insurance" with essentially no time limits.  We have food stamps for the "unemployed."  In fact "unemployment benefits" have now been stretched to include all types of "welfare benefits."  And so it goes on and on, the continual erosion of individual rights and free market capitalism in order to implement the old Marxist, state collectivist philosophy of the "proletariat" -- the workers with a for-hire "job" -- vs. the bourgeoisie -- those who manage a corporation and are not defined as having a "job" because they are managers.

  It has gotten so bad, so ingrained in the minds of our culture, that politicians now assume that it is an inherent "right" -- like freedom of speech -- for everybody to "receive" a "job."  Welcome to the Newspeak of 2013 in which "rights to receive based upon relative needs" in economics has replaced the concept of inherent individual rights to voluntarily exchange in an open free market.

  We have now established an economic caste system of relative neediness with those who are determined (by whom?) to be the most neediest, forcing (through government intervention) producers of goods and services to become subservient to the "neediest non-workers" who don't have a "job."  Nor does it stop there.  Those who have a "job," are automatically assumed to be entitled to receive "benefits" from the presumed non-workers, corporate management.  Those "workers" who do not have a "job," are assumed to be entitled to receive "benefits" such as "health care" from the government.

  But the government is us.  So we now are presumed to have a "right" to receive both a "job" and "benefits" such as "health insurance" from... whom?... ourselves, which is the government?... from The Producers?...  We have now reached the level of total economic absurdity by defining ourselves as having a "right to receive" from ourselves and our neighbors by eliminating our inherent rights to our own minds and bodies -- which now belong to that great fictitious entity called the government.  We are now living in a vicious circle of incomprehensible illogic and unreason and, in fact, we have tried to implement this absurdity as if it represented objective reality.  We have lost our minds, our basic foundational premises, and thus our individual liberties, culture, and all that goes along with it.

  We have instead adopted a suicidal philosophy of Marxist economics:  "workers vs. corporate managers," "jobs," and "unemployment."  With the government acting as "full employment" broker.  Until we get back on track, expect to see more and more nonsensical crap flowing from both Democrats and Republicans in our nation about "creating jobs" and "employment."

  There is no such animal as "jobs."  There are only individuals choosing how they want to work, relate and exchange with others in a free and open market.  What if all individuals became their own "employer?"  Would they have a "job?"  "Self-employment" is an oxymoronic term useful only for the tax collector.  What, in real terms, would  you "self-employ" yourself to do?  Obviously, it is to exchange with others.  How do you fit into the Marxist bourgeoisie vs. proletariat construct of "worker" vs. "management?"  You don't and neither does anybody else.  Hiring out your labor is not different than offering to exchange any other product or service in the market.  If you were "self-employed," would you beat yourself to death and pay your ass low wages?  How would you calculate "unemployment" statistics if everybody was "self-employed" and thus nobody would fall into the classic Marxist definition of a "worker?"  Marxist economics, today's Keynesian economics, breaks down under simple logical scrutiny.

  The terms "job" and "unemployment" are simply fake economic constructs for today's Keynesian economists who have adopted Marxist socialist economics and shoved individuals into erroneous mathematical equations that bear no resemblance to reality.

  This entire 2012 election cycle and campaigns by both Republicans and Democrats screaming about the necessity of the President and Congress to create "jobs, jobs, jobs" is just a smoke screen for altruistic state collectivism.  It's called The Santa Claus Syndrome -- "free" gifts from the government while stripping you of your individual rights.  And those who believe that politicians can create "jobs" and manage an economy also probably believe in The Easter Bunny and Tooth Fairy, too.  In the Middle East, they don't believe in the Easter Bunny.  Oh no, that would be absurd.  They believe they get to shag 72 virgins in heaven if they knock themselves off by blowing up the Brooklyn Bridge.  By the way, does that count as a "job?" – FM Duck

back to top...