Someone working in a low wage position or position that does not require higher education does not mean that their labour is unskilled. If you are upset that someone in an “unskilled labour” position getting a living wage would mean that they make more than you do in a “skilled” position, it doesn’t mean that theyre being paid too much for their labour… It means your labour is also being undervalued.
Stop falling into the trap of shaming your fellow man for wanting to be able to live.
I don’t care what anyone else makes, but don’t confuse the definition for the term that you made up in your head about what you want it to mean with what the term actually means.
I don’t know why you people are so obsessed with changing the language. What’s the difference between unskilled labor and low wage labor? It’s describing the same thing.
For reference, I didn’t make up any definitions, terms or anything else. The definition of skill I provided is from Oxford dictionary. The concept of “low-wage labour” that investopedia proposes has roots in Marx’s writings circa 1877. Call it what you want to call it, define it how you want to define it. Stop using it as an excuse to pay people unlivable wages.
Who is “you people” by the way, I’m always curious what group I’m being put into when the group isn’t named.
And for what it’s worth, changing terms doesn’t change the reality, but understanding of reality can necessitate changing the terms. Re: Carlin, yes it seems soft that the brutalistic name of “shell shock” was eventually softened to “post traumatic stress disorder” because we finally understood the condition better. Carlin’s suggesting that the change to PTSD was anything other than a rebranding of accuracy is a misunderstanding of the condition at best and disingenuous at worst. I love Carlin but he wasn’t some all knowing God-King.
We aren’t defining ‘skill’ we are defining ‘skilled labor’ and ‘unskilled labor’. Different terms.
I’m not going to use communist ‘Marxist’ language, why would I do that?
‘You people’ are the communists.
Your explaination of the change in language totally misses the point. The language, whatever that may be, does not change the condition. No matter what. We are still talking about the exact same condition, what we call it means very little.
Same with labor. Skilled labor is a very specific term, as is unskilled labor. Your issue seems to be that you’re offended by the use of ‘unskilled’, in this context it has a specific meaning that is not what you’re attributing to it IE ‘requiring no skill’.
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/u/unskilled-labor.asp
Someone working in a low wage position or position that does not require higher education does not mean that their labour is unskilled. If you are upset that someone in an “unskilled labour” position getting a living wage would mean that they make more than you do in a “skilled” position, it doesn’t mean that theyre being paid too much for their labour… It means your labour is also being undervalued.
Stop falling into the trap of shaming your fellow man for wanting to be able to live.
I don’t care what anyone else makes, but don’t confuse the definition for the term that you made up in your head about what you want it to mean with what the term actually means.
I don’t know why you people are so obsessed with changing the language. What’s the difference between unskilled labor and low wage labor? It’s describing the same thing.
Changing the terms doesn’t change the reality.
https://youtu.be/-ZAo_dUbh9s
For reference, I didn’t make up any definitions, terms or anything else. The definition of skill I provided is from Oxford dictionary. The concept of “low-wage labour” that investopedia proposes has roots in Marx’s writings circa 1877. Call it what you want to call it, define it how you want to define it. Stop using it as an excuse to pay people unlivable wages.
Who is “you people” by the way, I’m always curious what group I’m being put into when the group isn’t named.
And for what it’s worth, changing terms doesn’t change the reality, but understanding of reality can necessitate changing the terms. Re: Carlin, yes it seems soft that the brutalistic name of “shell shock” was eventually softened to “post traumatic stress disorder” because we finally understood the condition better. Carlin’s suggesting that the change to PTSD was anything other than a rebranding of accuracy is a misunderstanding of the condition at best and disingenuous at worst. I love Carlin but he wasn’t some all knowing God-King.
We aren’t defining ‘skill’ we are defining ‘skilled labor’ and ‘unskilled labor’. Different terms.
I’m not going to use communist ‘Marxist’ language, why would I do that?
‘You people’ are the communists.
Your explaination of the change in language totally misses the point. The language, whatever that may be, does not change the condition. No matter what. We are still talking about the exact same condition, what we call it means very little.
Same with labor. Skilled labor is a very specific term, as is unskilled labor. Your issue seems to be that you’re offended by the use of ‘unskilled’, in this context it has a specific meaning that is not what you’re attributing to it IE ‘requiring no skill’.