3 ms·
The point is the workers themselves didn't become less valuable because people != their job. If your job is in danger of becoming less valuable, have more skil
by MWil 13y ago
The point is the workers themselves didn't become less valuable because people != their job. If your job is in danger of becoming less valuable, have more skills ready to go, gain more skills while you work, gain more skills quickly when you are danger of losing work, gain more skills when you do lose work. Oh and by the way, ALL jobs are in danger of becoming less valuable. So this is really just a constant.
If these opportunities don't exist, it's not the death of the job who is to blame. It's the system that failed to provide for opportunities when the job dies (as it is likely to do).
- ThomPete 13y agoIf you are unskilled worker and the only jobs that are possible getting is in the tech and financial industry, there is no possibility of getting new skills to get a job. You are simply just out of luck. You are hanging on to some unrealistic notion of it's just a matter of changing your skill-set. Many of these people can't.
- sokoloff 13y agoTech and finance don't make food, serve food, clean, ensure sanitation, do landscaping, trash removal, construction, auto repair, transportation, make clothing, or 100 other things that people will continue to spend money on and where human labor will continue to be needed. I agree that a low-skilled worker is at a disadvantage, but assuming that a tech/finance slanted world offers no low-skilled jobs seems incorrect to me.
- ThomPete 13y agoGiven that the tech world needs less and less people to run a successful company it also needs less and less people to serve it. Of course there are lowskilled jobs that is not the discussion. The discussion is whether there is enough.