Yet another unemployment critique: Artists & dreamers

I feel like enough has been said of the unemployment simulation at this point that a strategy to re-address it is in hand, but I felt like chiming yet again in anyway:

What can be said of people who choose to make a “career” out of what they love doing: artists, writers, athletes, worldtrotters, critics, academics, the list goes on. These are the kinds of privilaged, liberal, educated things so many young people long to spend a life doing, if only their living needs were met. In a society where that is financially and intellectually possible, I find it hard to believe students would still be even trying to be employed in conventional industries en masse.

Many of these jobs make a small modicum of cash, or could otherwise conceivably make money which plausibly makes someone doing it Self Employed, and therefore, arguably, “employed”.

Obviously not everyone can follow their dream, but I can’t help but think enlightened middle-earning people in a healthy economy, displaced by automation (or the jerb decimating power of immigration in the current build) wouldn’t find a passion and simply make it their job, as economically unsound as that is.

I could see that effect being modelled as a situation called a “Bohemian Culture” or “Renaissance Society”, essentially the Star Trek society utopian socialists keep banging on about. Perhaps it could soak up some unemployment without benefitting GDP or productivity (perhaps even detracting slightly from one)

I am all in for this idea. In my opinion, it fits in well while having a small notable effect. Great idea!

1 Like

Isn’t this what the Art Subsidies policy is for?

They’d certainly be connected, but I was presuming that relationship would be akin to Sciences Funding vs Technological Advantage. The state funding compels the nationwide movement besides many other factors.