The comparison is between the skilled and unskilled.
-if one commits themselves to learning multiple skills without plans of expanding their skilled business to a point where they are able to have people who will begin working for them, has one subconsciously and unknowingly aligned themselves to always be in a position to receive? that is a position where they always have to hope and depend on "a giver" to come patronize them for their survival.
-for the Unskilled, who knows he will need the services of skilled labour for some special tasks, does this not mean that he has already aligned himself unknowingly to always have more money for special tasks, that is to be a source to the skilled( the giver)?
In this case, I see it as a balance between two groups of people who have work and business skills so that they are able to create jobs for those who are not very proficient in developing aspects of their existing skills.
Therefore, humans can be called a symbiotic mutualism, which actually cannot live in one room. Instead they have to go outside to meet the needs of life and survival. Mutual need, providing power from all needs, both individuals in particular and certain groups in general. If in biological science this is referred to as a food chain, it is not much different from being analogized as a life chain. Whereas in social science this is usually one of the characteristics of socialist living beings.
Aligning skills can be honed, developed and can be used as a skill to be a factor in continuing the work ethic for those who have the facilities to continue learning it. Now this advice can often be through formal, informal schools, or courses that are built on purpose to have a special character in a person.