Warning: Some posts on this platform may contain adult material intended for mature audiences only. Viewer discretion is advised. By clicking ‘Continue’, you confirm that you are 18 years or older and consent to viewing explicit content.
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’.
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’.