Skilled labor = real human deserving of a fair wage.
Unskilled labor = meat machine that we need to pay by law, but we gladly wouldn’t pay them a dime if we could get away with it because they aren’t real people.
I’m a software engineer. There’s people on my team that went to Yale for computer science. There’s also people on my team that took a six month coding boot camp. They’re both great at their jobs.
For me it’s not really an us/them opposition, my disgust is with how unskilled laborers are viewed/treated because of our lack of education. That somehow makes us subhuman and undeserving of a living wage. That we should be thankful for a minimum wage.
I have no issue with skilled laborers, I have an issue with owners/CEO/etc… us laborers of all skills are in the same boat. Best friend works for Intel, Intel makes tons of money, friend gets pay cut and added responsibility. ¿Que?
The problem lies in the fact that we need to categorise these subjects to write more effective policy. And it doesn’t matter what words you use, they always get these connotations as familiarity grows.
Is it made less difficult to achieve a living wage for everyone by affirming, or by challenging, the practice of characterizing some labor as “unskilled”?
What it does it make you sound like a dunce for pretending like there aren’t many many jobs that require special skills.
What you’re doing is applying manipulative tactics and blatantly lying to further an agenda rather than just applying simple logic and reason. When you do that, you inhibit the cause you claim to support.
Maybe you should try some of that logic and reason I was speaking about earlier rather than pointing to Wikipedia articles you don’t understand and pretending like it makes you right.
Skilled labor is economists jargon, so the meaning of it does not match the dictionary definition.
No one is saying there is literally no skill involved in unskilled labor.
Skilled labor = real human deserving of a fair wage.
Unskilled labor = meat machine that we need to pay by law, but we gladly wouldn’t pay them a dime if we could get away with it because they aren’t real people.
-Asshat Owners
Technically skilled as in requiring education (financed by the state), unskilled can learn on the job within days.
But politics has a way with twisting those words into a us/them dichotomy.
deleted by creator
I’m a software engineer. There’s people on my team that went to Yale for computer science. There’s also people on my team that took a six month coding boot camp. They’re both great at their jobs.
Specifics of software engieneering. Doesn’t work with civil engieneering, electrical engieneering and many other fields.
I agree, I was purely agreeing with
I still think the formality of some fields is still too “can you afford it,” but that’s for another topic
You can’t learn those things online or in books?
in six months
Removed by mod
Some people just can’t be trained to write code. You still need the aptitude at the end of the day.
For me it’s not really an us/them opposition, my disgust is with how unskilled laborers are viewed/treated because of our lack of education. That somehow makes us subhuman and undeserving of a living wage. That we should be thankful for a minimum wage.
I have no issue with skilled laborers, I have an issue with owners/CEO/etc… us laborers of all skills are in the same boat. Best friend works for Intel, Intel makes tons of money, friend gets pay cut and added responsibility. ¿Que?
The problem lies in the fact that we need to categorise these subjects to write more effective policy. And it doesn’t matter what words you use, they always get these connotations as familiarity grows.
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
Some more sarcasm and condescension
deleted by creator
What constitutes skilled labor and who should be paid a living wage are two distinct conversations.
Is it made less difficult to achieve a living wage for everyone by affirming, or by challenging, the practice of characterizing some labor as “unskilled”?
What it does it make you sound like a dunce for pretending like there aren’t many many jobs that require special skills.
What you’re doing is applying manipulative tactics and blatantly lying to further an agenda rather than just applying simple logic and reason. When you do that, you inhibit the cause you claim to support.
You seem to be inserting an appeal to purity, by characterizing certain skills as “special”.
No shit.
An appeal to purity is not good, in case you are not aware if the term.
Maybe you should try some of that logic and reason I was speaking about earlier rather than pointing to Wikipedia articles you don’t understand and pretending like it makes you right.
Sure. To the economist the terms are jargon, but to the bootlicker they are sacred words. Your heresy is unwelcome.