People have jobs-— i.e. they sell their services to the highest bidder.
Jobs do not have people.
When a businessman rents or buys services from another human being, he rents or buys those services, i.e. he employs or hires that person.
However, businessmen in free societies do not buy people-— that would be slavery.
Look, here’s another way to put the difference between humans and commodities from Thomas Sowell that doesn’t depend on natural law:
Some free-market advocates argue that the same principle which justifies free international trade in commodities should justify the free movement of people as well. But this ignores the fact that people have consequences that go far beyond the consequences of commodities.
Commodities are used up and vanish. People generate more people, who become a permanent and expanding part of the country’s population and electorate.
It is an irreversible process — and a potentially dangerous process, as Europeans have discovered with their “guest worker” programs that have brought in many Muslims who are fundamentally hostile to the culture and the people that welcomed them.
Unlike commodities, people in a welfare state have legal claims on other people’s tax dollars and expensive services in schools and hospitals, not to mention the high cost of imprisoning many of them who commit crimes.
Wrong. I made the distinction quite clear. In your lust to sound high minded, you once again didn't employ basic reading comprehension skills. Just like I never called Reagan a protectionist, I never said human beings were commodities. That would be slavery. You have this dual habit of accusing others of making statements that were never made and then you reach conclusions that simply aren't true.
Btw, guess you never heard the phrase, "that ballplayer is a hot commodity", or "that movie star is a hot commodity". LOL Its used all the time in the real world and for good reason. Especially in the world of 21st century globalism, which libertarians like you have fostered and dumped on the rest of us.