I thought that “bullshit job” implied a specific sort of performative quasi-work that(while it has to be useless, or at least extremely padded with useless to qualify) was quite distinct from the “actively harmful; but did I mention ‘actively’?” flavor.
This doesn’t mean that these examples are good; but if you are achieving 10/1 destruction ratios you aren’t looking busy and occasionally producing a mission statement or some sort of vague managerial vision product. You have to be out actively pillaging to make those sorts of numbers.
It seems detrimental to clarity to conflate “bullshit” jobs with actively negative value ones(though, in order to be bullshit, you aren’t likely to be producing positive value, or it wouldn’t be bullshit):
The existence of bullshit jobs in the Halls of allegedly rational-acting entities is definitely an interesting point; the problem of bullshit layers absorbing resources once devoted to productivity is worth being concerned about; and the psychology of people whose livelihood depends on pretending that something even they know is useless is a real job is certainly an interesting topic; but none of these are particularly closely related to the people who have quite real jobs, just involving white collar smash and grab or the more besuited sorts of corruption; and it is both likely that you’ll identify fewer useful commonalities than you would like and that you’ll underestimate the actively destructive sort.
