No such thing as unskill labor. This phrase is pointed to push an image of saturation. If labor took no skill than why does a person need to do it? If it was so autonomous as to need no action at all, then it’s simply stagnant. Movement requires control of muscles, a skill learned early in life. A skill that one can loose if injury is sustained by the brain. A skill that can be learned twice if forgotten. A skill, nonetheless. Nothing a human does intentionally is unskilled. All intentional brain activity relies on skill. No matter how base that skill is, by definition, still a skill.
Playing games with the definition of the word “skill” doesn’t change the fact that these categories correctly predict market behavior regardless of the name you give them.
You’re stubbornly refusing to accept that polysemy exists, and as a result are insisting that everyone else use your definition instead of the commonly accepted one.
Which, again, is all completely irrelevant since you can call these “A” and “B” and get exactly the same correct predictions.
You’re stubbornly refusing to accept that polysemy exists
That’s basically every fight with a grammar Nazi on the Internet.
In this case, the guy feels insecure about the whole skilled and unskilled labor issue and acts like its purely artificial distinction and that just meeting the barest definition of skill is sufficient to satisfy it. I just assume these must be the guys who could get perfect A’s in class if they really tried / weren’t already beyond what they were being taught and school is really useless / had enough money and if the entire world wasn’t against them.
Having said that, rewarding skilled labor significantly more than unskilled labor is really double dipping. People who are capable of skilled labor already have benefits at the very least in regards to access to markets other people don’t have. Ironically, the same impulse that drives skilled labor to get better benefits and salaries is the same impulse that people seem to think being labelled an “essential worker” should entitle them to regardless of how replaceable they are.
People should get living wages and there should be less wealth inequality, but this whole “essential worker” is just class warfare nonsense. Welcome to supply and demand, and the demand for “essential workers” went down. Happens a lot in the skilled labor market too, the answer isn’t “but I didn’t get mine’s!”, it’s thing like livable wages, having enough jobs, universal health care, universal income, all the things people at least began talking about before they were distracted into class warfare due to Big Data Cambridge Analytica troll factory disinformation campaigns by the ultrarich. Like I get people would be perfectly ok with leaving someone with a shit job in the trash just because they weren’t an “essential worker”, but they should try some empathy instead of thinking a label makes them special, whether it actually does or not.
I quoted oxford dictionary. What definition is mine? You seem to think this is like the word cool or bad. There’s not multiple different definitions. A skill is the ability to do something well. You seem to be giving the word “well” much more magnitude than it by definition holds. Doing something well means doing it satisfactory or in a good way. If all these people are doing unsatisfactory work, doing no good work, and yet still allowed to hold jobs; seems like a stretch.
No such thing as unskill labor. This phrase is pointed to push an image of saturation. If labor took no skill than why does a person need to do it? If it was so autonomous as to need no action at all, then it’s simply stagnant. Movement requires control of muscles, a skill learned early in life. A skill that one can loose if injury is sustained by the brain. A skill that can be learned twice if forgotten. A skill, nonetheless. Nothing a human does intentionally is unskilled. All intentional brain activity relies on skill. No matter how base that skill is, by definition, still a skill.
Playing games with the definition of the word “skill” doesn’t change the fact that these categories correctly predict market behavior regardless of the name you give them.
Dictionary Definitions from Oxford Languages · Learn more skill /skil/ noun the ability to do something well.
What games am i playing with the definition?
You’re stubbornly refusing to accept that polysemy exists, and as a result are insisting that everyone else use your definition instead of the commonly accepted one.
Which, again, is all completely irrelevant since you can call these “A” and “B” and get exactly the same correct predictions.
That’s basically every fight with a grammar Nazi on the Internet.
In this case, the guy feels insecure about the whole skilled and unskilled labor issue and acts like its purely artificial distinction and that just meeting the barest definition of skill is sufficient to satisfy it. I just assume these must be the guys who could get perfect A’s in class if they really tried / weren’t already beyond what they were being taught and school is really useless / had enough money and if the entire world wasn’t against them.
Having said that, rewarding skilled labor significantly more than unskilled labor is really double dipping. People who are capable of skilled labor already have benefits at the very least in regards to access to markets other people don’t have. Ironically, the same impulse that drives skilled labor to get better benefits and salaries is the same impulse that people seem to think being labelled an “essential worker” should entitle them to regardless of how replaceable they are.
People should get living wages and there should be less wealth inequality, but this whole “essential worker” is just class warfare nonsense. Welcome to supply and demand, and the demand for “essential workers” went down. Happens a lot in the skilled labor market too, the answer isn’t “but I didn’t get mine’s!”, it’s thing like livable wages, having enough jobs, universal health care, universal income, all the things people at least began talking about before they were distracted into class warfare due to Big Data Cambridge Analytica troll factory disinformation campaigns by the ultrarich. Like I get people would be perfectly ok with leaving someone with a shit job in the trash just because they weren’t an “essential worker”, but they should try some empathy instead of thinking a label makes them special, whether it actually does or not.
Username checks out.
Yep, livable wages, having enough jobs, universal health care, universal income are The Obvious Solution.
I quoted oxford dictionary. What definition is mine? You seem to think this is like the word cool or bad. There’s not multiple different definitions. A skill is the ability to do something well. You seem to be giving the word “well” much more magnitude than it by definition holds. Doing something well means doing it satisfactory or in a good way. If all these people are doing unsatisfactory work, doing no good work, and yet still allowed to hold jobs; seems like a stretch.