My point is everyone can never have equal “value”. The blue collar father urging their kid to be a doctor is not doing it because he thinks he is inherently less “valuable” than a doctor. The father is urging their kid because the father has experience on the type of quality of life a blue collar father can provide versus a doctor father can provide, which is a function of the price that they can sell their labor at.

You are still being reductive in a way that I think misses the point grandparent was trying to make. It may be true that not everyone's career can have the same value, but it's hopeless to try and define that by paychecks alone - that's just not how society values things.

In other words your argument could works equally well for the father urging their kid to do something that on average won't pay better, but will bring them more respect and social standing.

I find that it is usually purchasing power which results in respect and social standing. What are examples of the opposite, that do not involve being related or networked to someone who does have purchasing power?

If most plumbers started earning top 10% wages in the US, they would have similar social standing to doctors. Even doctors have probably moved down in relative status, where the new ones are basically W2 employees with metrics for a big company.

The example could be replaced by a father encouraging their child to be a scientist rather than an accountant - likely a net financial loss.

Hell, put a noble prize winner (or Olympic gold medallist, or astronaut, or you pick) in a room with a guy who made 50mm on property development. No contest, but chances are the developer is at least 10x as wealthy.

There are examples all around you; might not be why you respect people, but its' what people actually do. Trying to reduce this all to wealth just doesn't stand up to even a little scrutiny, though it's equally clear that wealth does contribute.