is just because it is division of labor.

That which constitutes the cause of the economical poverty of our
age is what the English call over-production (which means that a
mass of things are made which are of no use to anybody, and with
which nothing can be done).

It would be odd to see a shoemaker, who should consider that people
were bound to feed him because he incessantly made boots which had
been of no use to any one for a long time; but what shall we say of
those men who make nothing,--who not only produce nothing that is
visible, but nothing that is of use for people at large,--for whose
wares there are no customers, and who yet demand, with the same
boldness, on the ground of division of labor, that they shall be
supplied with fine food and drink, and that they shall be dressed
well? There may be, and there are, sorcerers for whose services a
demand makes itself felt, and for this purpose there are brought to
them pancakes and flasks; but it is difficult to imagine the
existence of sorcerers whose spells are useless to every one, and
who boldly demand that they shall be luxuriously supported because
they exercise sorcery. And it is the same in our world. And all
this comes about on the basis of that false conception of the
division of labor, which is defined not by reason and conscience,
but by observation, which men of science avow with such unanimity.

Division of labor has, in reality, always existed, and still exists;
but it is right only when man decides with his reason and his
conscience that it should be so, and not when he merely investigates
it. And reason and conscience decide the question for all men very
simply, unanimously, and in a manner not to be doubted. They always