Consensus is not the truth. And if an _unskilled worker_ is getting paid less than a highly skilled worker, that is the justified reason for there being inequality.
The wording "unskilled employee" is actually in the article itself. So the fact that you can have leverage multiplied by a large skill/knowledge difference is not enough. Then, what will be enough?
When Marc Andresseen says you have to be in the top 25% in two fields or the top 1% in one field, and you have to be pegged against an "unskilled worker" how is that fair?
What about "Quality of Life" as a reasonable metric? What about the legitimate difference in skill? Why do "Journalists" think that they are beyond citations when almost every one does it by default?
3 comments
[ 4.7 ms ] story [ 12.1 ms ] threadThe wording "unskilled employee" is actually in the article itself. So the fact that you can have leverage multiplied by a large skill/knowledge difference is not enough. Then, what will be enough?
When Marc Andresseen says you have to be in the top 25% in two fields or the top 1% in one field, and you have to be pegged against an "unskilled worker" how is that fair?
What about "Quality of Life" as a reasonable metric? What about the legitimate difference in skill? Why do "Journalists" think that they are beyond citations when almost every one does it by default?
Why doesn't Kyle Chayka know anything?