That article seems to start with the assumption that the only worthwhile jobs are manufacturing jobs. It's taking a bit of a different slant in context, I think. Above I'm talking about how all jobs in some way enhance the company's bottom line, taking a company-centric approach. The article is talking on a societal level. Corporate lawyers don't help the public much, but they sure as hell help the companies that hire them - it may be a 'bullshit' job, but it's a 'necessary' job (from the fiscal point of view).
Still, I think it's ironic that in one paragraph, dog-washers and pizza deliverers get caned for being bullshit jobs, and two paragraphs later the author bemoans the loss of workers that move things (pizza...) and maintain things (dogs...) :)
