Not saying those aren't real jobs (many certainly are), but I think the scope & number of those jobs can be expanded to fill the void left by more "productive" / "survival" jobs.
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/spacex-m...
Companies have been quick to cut DEI jobs as soon as the outside political pressure died down.
https://nypost.com/2023/12/28/tech/google-meta-other-tech-gi...
The military has been cutting personnel. The number of divisions has gone down. Higher military spending has been going towards procurement programs, not towards more uniformed jobs (although some defense contractors have expanded a bit).
Companies will absolutely continue paying large numbers of employees to do unnecessary jobs, they're incentivized to do so. A growing company is often seen as a good sign by shareholders and no one can really tell whether the new roles are any more or less productive. Existing employees and managers have the benefit of growing teams and getting promoted before anyone sees if the teams over-hired. Holding expendable positions also has the benefit of making for an easy layoff when investors get spooked.
Meaning the company and employees have good reason to hire and keep unnecessary jobs, don't have many short-term downsides as long as it doesn't directly cause a drop in key metrics, and have a built-in backup plan when things turn south and they can show good leadership by trimming the fat.
Our system would indeed implode if many went unemployed. Companies would go down with it though, they need people employed so they can spend money and keep the gears of capitalism turning.
I know I sound very cynical here but I don't even mean it as a bad thing. Its just the way this works, for anyone looking to down vote a cynical sounding take I'd be really interested to hear what I might be misrepresenting.