This is another - it depends question. Such questions are well worth asking, because they elicit the ‘depends on what?’ responses, which can be very useful.
Human communities have always sought bread and circuses. Bread meets the needs and circuses supply entertainment, pleasure, and sometimes meaning to life. Just living to survive can be argued to be a pretty meaningless existence. Of course the meaningfulness of just living for casual entertainment and hedonistic pleasures can also be challenged, but that’s another topic.
So circuses, frivolous things, meaningless little Christmas presents that too often end up in cupboards, but still show that someone cared enough to … can be important.
Providing bread takes work and uses labour, so it makes jobs.
Providing circuses is no different.
So what happens if people forgo the circuses and the frivolous trivia of consumerism? Reduced jobs?
Well that depends on what they do instead.
Suppose they stop consuming trivia and circuses and instead … do life improvement. They study. They go to the gym. They grow fresh food and prepare, cook and eat it at home. They do yoga, religion, charitable work, help their neighbours, and read books.
Well each of those creates some employment in itself. We need more teachers and professors to provide the study and education. We need more gyms. We need fertilisers and seeds for the small gardens, and kitchen stuff for people to cook at home. We need mosques and churches and synagogues and such places. It all creates jobs.
What people don’t properly understand is that INEFFICIENCY creates jobs.
Two cars crashed into each other? That’s inefficient driving and transport, but repairing the cars creates jobs.
People smoking and eating too much?
That creates jobs in fast food outlets and hospitals, clinics and dietary aids.
Poor environmental processes (inefficient cars, manufacturing processes, waste disposal etc.) pollutes the air and the environment making people sick. That creates jobs in hospitals, funeral parlours and environmental clean up processes.
The point is that consumption consumes - leaving no wealth at the end of it except perhaps some memories and few selfies on Facebook. By contrast things like education, good health regimens etc. build wealth. Overall, over three decades, a society that has been doing the ‘right’ things instead of frivolous consumption is a wealthier society, with much more to show for their efforts than plastic trivia in land fill and a less educated obese population. Quality of life improves.
But it hasn’t necessarily affected the total number of jobs - just the nature of those jobs.
And what about wealth distribution? At one level - no change. Wealth distribution is basically unaffected.
But it depends upon how you measure wealth.
If more people are now more educated, and healthier, then they are in a very real sense probably happier and wealthier. Not because the ‘haves’ have any less, but because society as a whole has more, so even the ‘not-so-haves’ have more.
And if you are spending your money on less but healthier food, aren’t obese, don’t smoke, and exercise at the gym regularly, the chances are you are spending less on medical bills and health care, so you are probably slightly wealthier in monetary terms too.
So this - it depends question was well worth exploring.
Hope this answer helps.