Really. Well why didn’t you say so? Let’s tax 100% of everyone’s wealth (we want to make sure we don’t run out of money) and hire all the unemployed to dig ditches and then fill them in again. That’ll give us 100% employment. I’m sure that will mean a much greater output…right?
“resources not being utilized benefits no one”. That makes absolutely no sense. Go back and read through the thread I linked earlier. We have a limit to the amount of work that can be done at any given time. Even at 100% employment, there will be oil, coal, gold, silver, lithium, iron, copper, and a whole host of other resources that will “not be utilized”. Simply going around saying “this benefits no one” is like saying “living is hazardous to your health.”
But what’s more, even taking your premise at face value, you’re assuming that bureaucrats in Washington know exactly what resources should be used, how, when, and by whom, at any given time. Or even if you’d concede they could not know “exactly”, you’re implying they know better than the market…as in, central planning is viable. Thomas Sowell cites a very damning statistic that debunks this notion in one single step.
In one sentence, “central planning doesn’t work.” What you’re implying is that a little intellectual elite actually knows better about what the people want than the people themselves. This is quite presumptuous to say the least. (I, however would argue it’s either completely insane, or just plain asinine.)