this post was submitted on 07 Dec 2023
537 points (87.7% liked)
Asklemmy
43891 readers
752 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
There's no such thing as unskilled labor. Labor is labor, specially if someone else has to do it even if you don't want to.
I'd actually say it's the reverse, all labor is unskilled labor, but some of it takes previous unskilled labor to perform and is thus compressed.
That previous experience, efficiency, and effectiveness in carrying out the labor is the skill.
Nah, it's just compound labor. "Skill" is just the expressed form of training in current work, ie labor is only worth that which labor is required to replicate it.
The distinction between labor that requires significant existing training and labor that can learn on the job is a useful one. 'Skilled'/'unskilled' is really just a demeaning way of looking at how hard a given laborer would be to replace.
Whether a job must be done by someone one way or another is completely orthogonal. It's depressing how little value people place on the people who do what must be done. Child rearing is probably the archetypical example.