Some serious logic, no faulty assumptions here

I am going to make an argument in this blog that seems so logical to me. and so different than what we are doing for the most part. 

To give some credibility to what I’m about to say, I received an A in Logic 101 and I am able to complete quite a few logic puzzles from easy logic puzzles for beginners. I totally get the

To clarify my credibility: I can answer the riddle: there's these two guards, one for each door. One leads to a room with a tiger... armed with a gun. The other leads to the wonderful Diamond City, a city full of diamonds, where the walls are diamonds, the doors are diamonds, the water is diamonds and the air is diamonds.

But, I have a heck of a time explaining it with my words.

and don't even get me started on all thumbs are fingers, therefore all fingers are thumbs faulty assumptions and the like 

Okkkkayyy, before I go on another tangent let’s get down to biness or bizness  (saying/writing biness and bizness is not getting old to me so my apologies go out to everyone else who I’m pretty sure it is old to)

So Playcadia has one game out there and it has the potential to be really fun.  It could even have potential to be exercise inducing and spatial awareness inducing as well.

However, that is not my vision of what Playcadia and of what other companies have the potential to do with the Playvolution.

I am picturing games for more than just amusement and distraction.  I am picturing jobs that are designed like a game.

But I have just a thin wispy glimmer of what I mean by that. 

Because it takes time and energy to design jobs that are like games.  It takes research and manpower and money and it might be all based on an invalid theory that people are more productive at play than at work (but I really, really don’t think that is true!  I’d be willing to bet my blogging earnings on that with anyone who challenges me and can come up with a way to test it).

But my argument is this (and there definitely might be some circular reasonings, fallacies... some all fingers are thumbs if you will):

PREMISES

It takes energy and resources to design jobs that are like games.

It is essentially a job to design jobs that are like games.

If people played instead of worked they would be infinitely more productive and value producing.

A huge problem is that there aren’t enough jobs and people are overqualified for their jobs.

Machines are taking over perfunctory tasks.

If machines perform more and more perfunctory tasks, people can work on producing more value.

Turning jobs into games would cause production/value to increase as well as bring more value to people's life.

The cost of employing these gamemakers is nothing compared to the increased value from the playforce.

THEREFORE
Gammmmmeeee on!!!!!

FYI I plan on reading this (maybe I should have done in a second to get my logic back to its tiptop college day shape

http://www.theskepticsguide.org/resources/logicalfallacies.aspx