No, you’re grossly misinterpreting what I’m saying.
Heart Surgery is represented as the condensed unskilled labor of decades of experience before even being able to perform one. All of that training requires decades of hard training to replicate.
I’m not implying that you can get 40 dudes with no training to do heart surgery together.
You’re still thinking of it in completely the wrong way. All skilled labor is, is unskilled labor for training, and current labor. Nobody gives a shit who trained who, or where it magically needs to hang.
Training is unskilled labor. The value of skilled labor represents the time it took to train for said labor. It doesn’t mean you can throw bodies at a skilled problem.
If you’re missing the point this badly, I don’t think you’ll ever get it.
If the value of skilled labor was equal to the time it took to train there would not be situations where someone was screwed or blessed. My kids teachers have masters degrees I only have a 4-year degree in engineering. Guess who makes more money?
I think the observation is that little or no broad difference emerges between training for providing skilled labor, versus simply providing labor that may be considered as unskilled. In either case, one provides labor, with or without the intention of developing skill, but certainly converging toward such an effect.
No, you’re grossly misinterpreting what I’m saying.
Heart Surgery is represented as the condensed unskilled labor of decades of experience before even being able to perform one. All of that training requires decades of hard training to replicate.
I’m not implying that you can get 40 dudes with no training to do heart surgery together.
How would that even work? Who is training the surgeon? Where does the unskilled labor go, does it hover about the person like a spirit?
Maybe humans are more complicated than “well since this guy has a CPR cert his labor is 1.2x the person without”.
You’re still thinking of it in completely the wrong way. All skilled labor is, is unskilled labor for training, and current labor. Nobody gives a shit who trained who, or where it magically needs to hang.
Fine. Skills + labor = skilled labor.
Are you studying to be an economist or something?
Almost. Labor + labor = skilled labor, as skills are just embodied labor.
No, I’m not studying to become an economist, but I am familiar with economics.
Again this makes no sense. You just admitted that throwing random people at a problem doesn’t mean they know how to fix it.
You’re again missing the entire point.
Training is unskilled labor. The value of skilled labor represents the time it took to train for said labor. It doesn’t mean you can throw bodies at a skilled problem.
If you’re missing the point this badly, I don’t think you’ll ever get it.
If the value of skilled labor was equal to the time it took to train there would not be situations where someone was screwed or blessed. My kids teachers have masters degrees I only have a 4-year degree in engineering. Guess who makes more money?
You’re still not quite right, value and price are not the same. Price is influenced by supply and demand, value is not.
I think the observation is that little or no broad difference emerges between training for providing skilled labor, versus simply providing labor that may be considered as unskilled. In either case, one provides labor, with or without the intention of developing skill, but certainly converging toward such an effect.