this post was submitted on 21 Feb 2024
1610 points (99.0% liked)

People Twitter

5268 readers
1966 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a tweet or similar
  4. No bullying or international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jimmydoreisalefty@lemmy.world 112 points 9 months ago (52 children)

Generational labeling...

I see it as a way to divide the working class, same as the "lower class"/"middle class" and "unskilled labor"/"skilled labor".

[–] dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works 15 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Lower vs middle class maybe sure, there is discussion there. Skilled vs unskilled labor: you don't know how to read even Wikipedia. It has nothing to do with skill (you can watch a guy dice an onion in his hand in 4.2 seconds and it's still "unskilled labor") and everything to do with choosing the right vocabulary to express a point: some jobs require college or trade school and some do not.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

All skilled labor is compressed unskilled labor, or in other words, all unskilled labor is skilled labor.

Training and raising someone to do a job contributes to the value produced by their labor, it matters more in comparison to the aggregate whole than anything else.

[–] dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works 4 points 9 months ago (3 children)

I don't know how to respond to this? I mean yes you are right but the compression is not situation agnostic which is the whole point: some jobs ("skilled labor") require a particular degree or pretraining as a point of entry, and others ("unskilled labor") do not. It doesn't mean it's not valuable or not worth pursuing, but it's a mincing of words that are poorly chosen in the first place.

At the end of the day yes both varieties are worth pursuing and are necessary but one has a zero knowledge entry point and the other does not. I don't agree with "skilled vs unskilled" as vocab goes, but this is the point.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago (3 children)

A line chef isn't considered an unskilled laborer. Unskilled labor is like flipping burgers, digging ditches, and that sort of thing.

[–] BarrelAgedBoredom@lemm.ee 23 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Unskilled labor is a bullshit term used to diminish the work done by people in low paying jobs. Many people would say that a line cook is unskilled, slightly above flipping burgers or digging ditches. It's nebulous and useless for productive conversation

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

There are definitely jobs that don't really require any specific skills. If you can learn all of your duties after 1 minute of instructions, what would you call that? It doesn't need to be interpreted as a derogatory term, but it's accurate for a lot of positions.

[–] dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works 2 points 9 months ago

No you've missed the point. It has nothing at all to do with value or pay scale as you can easily see by comparing a B.S. grad in engineering with a trained plumber who will definitely make more money. All "unskilled" means is that you didn't go to school to start. Period. It doesn't mean it's not valuable or doesn't require skill, it means whoever started the discussion picked shitty words.

[–] dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works 3 points 9 months ago (4 children)

No youre conflating how you define the word "skill" with the actual definition. It's absolutely unfortunate but just means you didn't go to school to get the job.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 8 points 9 months ago (3 children)

I'd be inclined to believe you if the boomers weren't literally the ruling class.

Even the poor ones are still land owners, and meanwhile the rest of us have to fight uphill both ways to get a single measly Congress seat!

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 23 points 9 months ago

Even the poor ones are still land owners

This is very far from the truth. There has been an explosion of senior homelessness over the last 4 years because the poor baby boomers can't afford the rising cost of rent on a fixed income, and are too old to go get jobs.

[–] orcrist@lemm.ee 20 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Let me tell you, then... Boomers are NOT the ruling class. A small group of rich people control most of the wealth in the world. Those people are the ruling class.

[–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 7 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Really? Because when I see the folks that hold the line against anything positive getting done, I don't see rich people, I see wannabe rich boomers. Blocking legislation, packing courts, gerrymandering, keeping the electoral college, introducing politics of spite, it's all the fucking boomers and I refuse to be gaslit that they aren't at the core of the problem.

[–] asteriskeverything@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

I'd say the core of the jawbreaker of fucked upness is the elite wealthy. However boomers aren't too many layers away though imo

[–] irmoz@reddthat.com 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

And who are those boomers protecting? The owning class.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] AFKBRBChocolate@lemmy.world 17 points 9 months ago

That's really far from the truth. For every article talking about boomers contributing to inflation by spending fat 401k's, there's another saying boomers didn't manage to save anything and either have to work until they die or end up part of the homelessness problem.

load more comments (50 replies)