The problem isn't a lack of jobs, it's the draining of capital flow that happen when the monetary system dries up. Whether you believe that to be unfairness or just some players being so adept at the game... that doesn't matter.
The ball needs to move or people who want to play the game will be sitting out. If the ball is kept moving, even artificially, anyone who wants to play will get to play. The only ones left out would be willingly out or mentally/physically unable to play at all.
Right now, we let the game rules be such that some smart shits helped some lucky shits collect the ball and now the dumbshits think the pile of "money" is worth something when not in circulation. Look at all my symbols of currency! Doesn't matter if it's dollars, metals/commodities, or the butcoin... without a functioning-thriving ebb and flow of currency, everyone is poorer.
Spend like death with 0 is the goal. Don't take on debt or get greedy. We'll all live better.
However, I don't agree with the parent's comment that technology causes a lack of jobs - also obviously untrue if you look around you.
Currently we're on the tail-end of a recession, thus money isn't moving around, thus it's harder to insert one's self into the money stream.
As people start spending, jobs pick up. This is already happening in most of the richer parts of the recession hit world. Here in the UK, unemployment has been dropping steadily. New small businesses are appearing fast. Manufacturing's on the way up.
FWIW, I agree with everything after your very first sentence.
> The ball needs to move or people who want to play the game will be sitting out. If the ball is kept moving, even artificially, anyone who wants to play will get to play. The only ones left out would be willingly out or mentally/physically unable to play at all.
What you're saying may be true now, but surely it won't always be true? Who's to say that every mundane task won't (relatively soon) be automated? We need to start thinking about how we should deal with this.
Nice. "Work willing to be done for others willing to pay" is what defines a job. It only took you two sentences to make the rest of your post into rubbish capitalist handwaving.
>If I knew someone near me was living on <$1/day, I would raise their pay to $5 to do something mundane.
Please do this actually. Someone near you is living on <$1/day.
"It's not practical!" you'll say. That's because nothing you're saying is actually practical enough to be realistic.
Oh yeah? Running $0 worth of income through a SNAP benefits calculator tells me that an individual with no job is entitled to $200/month. That's one anti-poverty program that blows past your <$1/day by almost an order of magnitude.
Anyone with <$1/day of income would be eligible, unless they have >$2000 in a bank account or other "countable" resources.
Generally ABAWDS between 18 and 50 who do not have any dependent children can get SNAP benefits only for 3 months in a 36-month period if they do not work or participate in a workfare or employment and training program other than job search. This requirement is waived in some locations.
With some exceptions, able-bodied adults between 16 and 60 must register for work, accept suitable employment, and take part in an employment and training program to which they are referred by the local office. Failure to comply with these requirements can result in disqualification from the Program.
That doesn't sound like being forced to live on $1/day to me. Yes, of course I can voluntarily not accept the money and goods being offered to me, but that's not really the point.
Anti-poverty programs don't automagically give $200 to everyone with no job. And (I assume) the $1/day was a somewhat arbitrary value anyway.
He was a great guy.
* Lack of access to capital. I look around my neighborhood, city, state, country. There is no shortage of useful work to be done.
Because: THERE. ARE. NOT. ENOUGH. JOBS.
* The economy crashed a while ago. We still haven't recovered all the jobs we lost, by either absolute or percentage.
* Increased automation and efficiency is slowly removing those jobs you just described. Exec, a YCombinator app, makes a more efficient and automated solution to craigslist cleaning jobs. This is happening in every sector in this country. These changes ELIMINATE JOBS, these jobs will never come back. And the jobs they create do not replace the ones they removed, not in quantity, or in aggregate tax quality (i.e. one well paid programmer does not replace the amount of tax revenue from 4 people splitting the same salary. Let alone the fact that executives often take a cut of that increased productivity for themselves. Let alone the fact that it puts more load on welfare for the 3 lost jobs).
* Every single one of those jobs you just listed likely requires a number of things in today's saturated jobs market: High-school or college education (too many people, not enough jobs, means overqualified hiring requirements), a permanent address (hard when you are homeless), a certain appearance (hard when you are poor, without a place to live or bathe), some sort of experience (hard to get in this job market, especially when under educated, in poor health [mental or physical], and every other reason here), transport to and from work (or even for the work), ect.
I think you need to take a step back and look at the whole picture, it's a dire one.