Main Page Contact Register Log In

Well part of the problem is that some people accept jobs when they could be more economically beneficial without a job. A lot of people live a lifestyle and a directed to live one where they get their income from working for someone else ie accept jobs. For these people it doesn't occur that they could themselfs start running economical activity. Calling sucha thing an enterprise might be a little grandeur but that is what it is. These people might be capable of operating in a job but can't create the social and economical framework for the job to take place.

Usually talk of enterpreneurship is about moderate income or trying to strike it rich. If the problem is that you are unemployed and poor it is seldom suggested that a possible cure would be to self-employ. Rather people accept job positions with bad conditions essentially buying job creation skill at a really bad exchange rate. That is specialising away from job-creation so you can focus on job operating ultimately bites them in the ankle. We either need to guarantee that such specialization in job-operating can never be detrimental or that everybody be expected to enterpreneur in economical self-defence if it comes down to that. But if there are no job-operation specialsts then it means also that persons that specialise in job-creation over operation can't sustain themselfs. Thus the minimum standard for a job creator is to make jobs that reward their acceptors. Otherwise there is pressure to demolish the job creation specialization and use that person as a operator too.

And if everybody works just for themselfs we are basically back to hunter-gatherers that survive even without mutual trade. Offering too crappy jobs opens the door for possibly accidentally unraveling the institution of employment (or a is a legimate sign that the institution of employment starts to be a net drag).