My reading of the paper at https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/09500170211015067 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/09500170211015... is th

My reading of the paper at https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/09500170211015067 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/09500170211015... is that it's all about trying to identify the vague issues and various metrics in Graeber's analysis and make them more quantifiable. The analysis in Graber's book uses surveys, so there too we can wonder how honest the answers are. The paper points out: > Graeber (2018: xxii) states that his theory has ‘been overwhelmingly confirmed by statistical research’. This statistical research consists of a YouGov poll of UK workers (YouGov, 2015) and a similar one by human resource firm Schouten & Nelissen of Dutch workers (Graeber, 2018: 6). Graeber (2018: 10) argues that, as it is not possible to calculate social value, we must take the workers’ ‘word for it’ because ‘it’s safe to assume the worker knows best’ as to how useful their job actually is. ... The YouGov survey found that 37% of UK workers say their job does not make a meaningful contribution to the world, while the Schouten & Nelissen survey finds that 40% of Dutch workers do not experience their job as meaningful. So if we follow Graeber's analysis, then we must trust the survey more than we wonder how honest they were. The paper says Graeber states "US office workers spent 46% of their time dealing with emails, administrative tasks, interruptions for non-essential tasks and in wasteful meetings" and asserts that that's a BS job, and says 'second-order BS jobs' ar part of the BS job category. The paper then points out "these calculations violate the methodological principle that workers are best placed to judge the social value of their work. Reporting that one deals with emails, administrative tasks, interruptions for non-essential tasks and wasteful meetings is not the same as saying these tasks are pointless, unnecessary or pernicious." And the paper says of the YouGov survey: "the YouGov survey item is loaded in that it sets a very high bar for non-BS jobs. Clearly, saying your job does not make a meaningful contribution to the world is not the same as saying one’s job is completely pointless, unnecessary or pernicious, as it could quite conceivably be felt to be useful to one’s nation, community, neighbourhood, customers or family." Graeber also makes predictions about how there should be different levels of BS work in different fields, and predicts that the number of BS jobs is increases, and predicts "student loans force graduates into BS jobs in order to pay back their debts." "Despite the weak empirical support marshalled by Graeber (2018) in its favour, his BS jobs theory has been taken seriously by academics, journalists and policymakers. It therefore deserves rigorous empirical testing and below we outline how we propose to do so."