Socialists have no concept of opportunity costs in economics, and no one should assume they would anyway. If government "creates jobs", they don't reason that it must come at the expense of something else: the alternative forwent, i.e., what efforts could have been made toward production that were now substituted for the government's idea of what should be produced.
"We need infrastructure projects", they cheer, unable to see the effect of government jobs-programs. And even if they did create jobs, which might be true nominally, it is certainly not true that what they produce is more valuable than what would have been produced had productivity not been taxed to pay for the government's jobs-program.
They see "jobs" are an end in themselves, and don't see they're only the means to the end of production; and nor do they see that the supply of labor is scarce and must be devoted to the highest-valued uses, or else we're relatively impoverished as a whole for taking away from that.
Not to mention, on the other hand they advocate for every job-destroying policy possible while still believing the government can "create jobs" too: minimum wage laws, occupational and business licensure, unions, regulations, taxation, permits, other legislation, you name it.
I would say all unemployment is voluntary in a free market; anyone who wanted to work could; there would be no government hurdles before them preventing them from taking such a position.
And of course, they also think property can simply be redistributed without cost; without this inducing a higher time-preference in people; without it decreasing the incentive to produce; without it being a net-loss; etc.
They think they can have their cake and eat it too. The socialist is the dumbest thing around.
