Using Li(x):=∫x2dt/logt, as usual, here is an elementary argument that Li(x)>x/logx for x≥7, so no need to appeal to a lower bound valid only starting at e5≈148.4 as in the Rosser-Schoenfeld paper from the comments.
For x>1, let f(x)=Li(x)−x/logx. Then
f′(x)=1logx−(logx−1(logx)2)=1(logx)2>0,
so f is increasing on (1,∞). Since f(7)≈.1145, for x≥7 we have f(x)≥f(7)>0, so Li(x)>x/logx.
Since f(6)≈−.1716, f vanishes somewhere between 6 and 7. That happens slightly below 6.58: from PARI, I find f(6.58)≈.000076.
Similarly, for x>1 let g(x)=Li(x)−x/logx−x/(logx)2. Then
g′(x)=2(logx)3
so g is increasing on (1,∞). From PARI, g(20)≈−.044 and g(21)≈.028, so Li(x)>x/(logx)+x/(logx)2 for x≥21. Since g(20.65)≈.0030005, g vanishes slightly below 20.65.
More generally, from repeated integration by parts
Li(x)=N∑n=1(n−1)!x(logx)n+∫x2N!dt(logt)N+1+cN
for N≥0 and x>1, where cN is a constant.
Therefore the difference
gN(x):=Li(x)−N∑n=1(n−1)!x(logx)n
has g′N(x)=N!/(logx)N+1>0, so gN is increasing on (1,∞). Find an x0 where gN(x0)>0 and then
Li(x)>∑Nn=1(n−1)!x/(logx)n for x≥x0.