If you follow this rabbit hole deep enough, you invariably wind up right back at the beginning. The people who buy stuff and create demand for said stuff typica

If you follow this rabbit hole deep enough, you invariably wind up right back at the beginning. The people who buy stuff and create demand for said stuff typically work for someone else, and that someone enables that person to buy said stuff by paying them a salary, in which you could argue that it’s again the employers/producers who create jobs rather than the consumers. This is not necessarily my argument, but just demonstrating that it can be argued in a way that makes it appear cyclical. Apple isn’t creating jobs out of thin air, but they do both directly and indirectly provide distinct opportunities, despite those opportunities generally having existed in some other form (possibly in some other country) before. It might seem more accurate to say that Apple shifts jobs, but that’s an equally imprecise way of framing it.