All else being equal, What is the value of job creation? Job creation value
Just to clarify, I have no experience, academic background or deep understanding of economics. Apologies for such a basic question but I couldn't find a real answer.
I hear a lot about job creation:

&quot;This will create X jobs&quot;
&quot;Losing jobs overseas&quot;
Etc.

I have trouble understanding the inherent value of the current amount of jobs to society.  If jobs are lost together with the productivity they created then I get why there is a problem.  For example: A factory was destroyed in a fire, the workers lost their jobs, and society lost the productivity of the factory. But if all other things remain equal, what is the value of a job?  I'm going to add my very naïve analysis below to help illustrate my thinking.
Naïve interpretation
Let's say we have a country that has some people working right now. Suddenly 10,000 stopped working without affecting productivity. Maybe there was a temporary need that was filled or perhaps some technology made their jobs obsolete.
If current amount of jobs is an inherently positive thing, I should now be at a worse state than before. As I see it, I just got 10,000 potential workers. Modern humans, even not well trained ones, produce vastly more than they cost to support.
I can certainly understand that it can be traumatic to lose your job but that's an argument for job stability or something, not job creation.
The argument that all those people are not retrainable at all, seems a bit far-fetched. They can't all be 60 year olds who trained their entire life in this field and are uneducated in absolutely anything else. And if that was the case, it would be better treated as a surprising early retirement. Tragic for people who weren't prepared, yes, but a completely different problem.
You are correct that creating jobs in themselves, generally speaking does not have any economic value (save some exceptional situations - see below). In fact this is not novel observation, and you will find this stated in any 101 economic textbook for example see Mankiw Principles of Economics 8ed pp 33. As written in the textbook (in an excerpt from Economics article):

Little in the literature seems more relevant to
contemporary economic debates than what usually is called the broken window fallacy. Whenever a government program is justified not on its merits but by the jobs it will create, remember the broken window: Some teenagers, being the little
beasts that they are, toss a brick through a bakery window. A crowd gathers and laments, “What a shame.” But before you know it, someone suggests a silver lining to the situation: Now the baker will have to spend money to have the window repaired. This will add to the income of the
repairman, who will spend his additional income,
which will add to another seller’s income, and so
on. You know the drill. The chain of spending will
multiply and generate higher income and employment. If the broken window is large enough, it
might produce an economic boom! . . .


Most voters fall for the broken window fallacy,
but not economics majors. They will say, “Hey,
wait a minute!” If the baker hadn’t spent his
money on window repair, he would have spent it
on the new suit he was saving to buy. Then the
tailor would have the new income to spend, and
so on. The broken window didn’t create net new
spending; it just diverted spending from somewhere else. The broken window does not create
new activity, just different activity. People see the
activity that takes place. They don’t see the activity that would have taken place.
The broken window fallacy is perpetuated in
many forms. Whenever job creation or retention
is the primary objective I call it the job-counting fallacy. Economics majors understand the
non-intuitive reality that real progress comes
from job destruction. It once took 90 percent of
our population to grow our food. Now it takes 3
percent. Pardon me, Willie, but are we worse off
because of the job losses in agriculture? The
would-have-been farmers are now college professors and computer gurus. . . .
So instead of counting jobs, we should make
every job count

The above being said there is some value to creating/preserving jobs in some situations. For example, during recessions some public works program might be part of a mix that is intended to stimulate the economy, or during short but severe unpredictable crises such as the current Covid-19 situation.
For example, the Furlough/Kurzarbeit schemes  are generally considered by conventional economists  to be valuable as they can help boost aggregate demand and prevent even more severe recession (Giupponi &amp; Landais; 2020),however such support is exceptional.