The “public sector” and the “housewives”, something in common?

Mopping, sweeping, reviewing, cooking, washing cutlery, tidying rooms, etc., are some of the so-called household chores that are usually done by “housewives”. It is not uncommon for the sector of the population that maintains the traditional regime of men working outside the home and women in the home, which means that women, at some point, mark that theirs is also a job and that, although it is not paid, it is still a job, and also a heavy and tiring job, which is completely true. I’ll be the one to know.

However, the detail to be taken into account is the following: this “unpaid work”, heavy and tiring, does not really generate wealth. That is, no matter how much you sweep and sweep the room perfectly, no matter how much the cutlery glitters and the beds are perfectly laid, none of that will make your electricity bill pay, or make you have a kilo of sugar in your pantry. The result of this work is that it is not an asset that can be traded in any market. There’s not a potato coming out of a swept and reworked floor.

I am not saying that such work is useless, or that it is not necessary, but I am saying that it does not generate wealth for those who do it in their own homes and for themselves. If I wash my silverware, and pay myself a dollar out of my pocket, I’m not a dollar richer. But, if I go to another house and they pay me a dollar to wash the dirty silverware in that house, then I am a richer dollar. So, no matter how much laundry I have to wash, I won’t get rich washing my own clothes, right?

Now, the same happens with the public sector: it does not generate wealth. After a month of police work, is a country richer? After 20 years of “work” by the army, how much richer is a country, and how much richer is a country when thousands of civil servants are paid? If the public sector does not generate wealth, where does it come from? Of course, from the private sector, that is, from our own pocket. And so the basic, critical, fundamental, why pay someone who doesn’t generate wealth to do something you could do yourself?

It’s easier to pay a senator who pays a cop who pays a thief not to pee on your face than to train your brain, your muscles, and your eggs or your ovaries to be the one who, in addition to generating wealth, distributes it, like “the sower”, throwing seeds where there is soil, but knowing exactly what he is doing. It’s not about working outside, or at home, but about who we’re giving the wealth we generate, who gets our money, who gets our happy assholes that we are.