In other words, bullshit jobs: http://web.archive.org/web/20161017003907/http://strikemag.o...
That's fine if employment becomes fully optional, but I fear we'll be forced into a life without the meaning of useful jobs, and without the freedom of technological unemployment.
"Bullshit jobs" depend on economic surplus to create work that is not immediately productive in terms of food, shelter, or safety. Most entertainers and craft artists fall under the definition of "bullshit jobs". Fine dining chefs are doing something entirely unnecessary. So are rock stars.
You're talking about something a bit more abstract and puritan. I was a 3602 Clerk, once, which was an essentially bullshit job created to navigate the hurdles presented by a post office clerk assigned to my company, whose skills primarily consisted of sleeping while sitting up, and storing the 12 lbs. of paperwork I generated per mailing in a closet and taking my word for its veracity. That's a bullshit job. I once worked for an agency whose primary job was procuring people willing to, for money, give permission to other people to declare evidence for a quality assigned by governing officials that obligated higher governing officials to give money to the customers of the clients for whom we procured, and whom we sought out to make a living. We were honestly just a conduit for government money that grabbed 3% of the cash that flowed through it. That's an entire bullshit agency.
A comedian creates laughs. That's not a bullshit job, that's a good job.
edit: I understand, you're just giving the source of the phrase rather than a definition of bullshit jobs. I don't think bullshit jobs and "transployment" are similar.
Edit: that is to say, I agree with you, and my original post was explaining why