A common piece of life advice I see is "work in trades" instead of going to college, and while I think there is certainly some value in exploring alternative paths rather than going into debt for a dime-a-dozen degree, I do wonder how the advice of working in trades proliferated. It is career advice that sounds good on paper, but is also not as cut-and-dry as the comments would have you believe.
I'm sure it started from hearing random folks who supposedly work in trades are making great money, but the concept of working in trades becoming pushed more and more by the redpill community seems a bit suspicious to me. When did the sentiment of working in trades start to become more common? Was there a particular person or organization who made it more popular?
I think it is important to understand the origins of "popular" sentiments in order to truly determine whether there is an ulterior motive. For example, the common idea of "there aren't enough people in STEM" isn't really true, it's just a claim made by industries to pressure Congress into allowing them to import more cheap labor.
Could there potentially be a larger interest pushing the idea of working in trades as being a lucrative career path? Perhaps it is far-fetched to assume that there are greater forces at play who have an interest in convincing people to work in trades, but trades play a crucial role in maintaining a functional society, and without these people, the current status quo would fall apart. Glorifying trades would upset the status quo of "intellectualism," but appealing to male pride and honor and appealing to the men who see the futility of modern society is a viable means of ensuring that men remain working for a system that thinks lesser of them.
I'm not saying that working in trades is bad or that going to college is better. Working in trades is very admirable, but it is also important to be mindful that there is no surefire pathway to wealth or a fulfilling life. Neither STEM or trades may be the gateway to success that is pushed on the internet, and it is important to consider the path you take based on the circumstances you have been given.
While it is noble to work in a trade and not something I would discourage, bear in mind that the argument that trades won't be automated will be moot when (multi-)national companies take over the sole trader and the small business owner. Robots with advance mechanics and AI can easily out-perform a human and provide a service critical to trades - 24-hour emergency call outs that a sole trader can not do and costs more money for a small business owner.
The red pill and increasingly now the black pill community - by and large I refer to the self-help gurus - engage in survivorship bias. They only ever see the winners in anything. They don't tell you the many people who failed, whether that's a trade, higher education, bodybuilding, looksmaxxing and so forth. People are sold a dream - quick, easy solutions - and encouraged to join programmes to find solutions to their problems for a monthly fee on a course designed to fail but the provider will also engage in survivorship bias there too - by only showing the winners and not the many losers who "didn't try hard enough" and need to be upsold on a more expensive programme. Survivorship bias can be written as the phrase "history is written by the winners".
For every successful tradesperson, many failed as as more people chase a trade to specialise in, there are only so many customers and so much cash going around, many will fail. That's what you're not being told. It is not the easy, guaranteed money maker people claim it will be for everyone.