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.
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.
To add to this, the whole education level dictates importance thing never made sense to me anyways. I may see a doctor once or twice a year, but I need garbage collected every week. On the level of social importance it strike me then that the garbage person is therefor more important than a doctor.
Education requires no skill, you just kiss professor’s ass and do as you’re told, your reward is a diploma. Here, is that reductionist enough for you?
By the way, cashier job can’t be learned within days, you need to be literate and know at least basic math and average kid goes to school for at least 8 years so fuck you. I can’t even think of a job that requires no education.
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.
I asked you a particular question, and you have since returned only hostility and insultation.
Do you have any contribution relating to the question I asked, or to the concern that it carries no particular meaning merely to assert that some skills may be given the characterization “special”?
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.
Many jobs societally requiring a degree could be learned on the job very quickly.
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.
To add to this, the whole education level dictates importance thing never made sense to me anyways. I may see a doctor once or twice a year, but I need garbage collected every week. On the level of social importance it strike me then that the garbage person is therefor more important than a doctor.
I think its unintended but by that definition then carpentry or other trades which used to be learned by apprenticeship on the job aren’t skilled?
Education requires no skill, you just kiss professor’s ass and do as you’re told, your reward is a diploma. Here, is that reductionist enough for you?
By the way, cashier job can’t be learned within days, you need to be literate and know at least basic math and average kid goes to school for at least 8 years so fuck you. I can’t even think of a job that requires no education.
Some more sarcasm and condescension
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.
I asked you a particular question, and you have since returned only hostility and insultation.
Do you have any contribution relating to the question I asked, or to the concern that it carries no particular meaning merely to assert that some skills may be given the characterization “special”?