Graeber didn't fixate on this. He saw it as a sad reflection of what the supposedly "best economic system in the history of man" had ended up creating in terms of meaningful work for actual human beings.
Graeber believes that our current state is a local minima (or maxima depending on your perspective) and there are social, political, and economic options that result in systems without these "bullshit" outcomes. His underlying beliefs are anarchist, he believes people can self-organize without many of the concerns we have in modern society.
The reason he is interesting is that his underlying views of society are of those from way outside of the Overton Window, so he sees some things more clearly than those with more "normal" viewpoints. While I do not agree with him on many things, all his books are critiques of the entirety of the modern socioeconomic system.
> Do we want some congressional committee to sit around and decide which jobs are bullshit? I sure don't.
The suggestion that he thought the government should decide which jobs are real and which are bullshit is antithetical to everything he believed. He would argue that the fact that you can only see it as a question of either "free market" or "government managed" is a part of the oppressive system itself.