The Instigator
397492387
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Topaet
Con (against)
Winning
9 Points

The gender pay gap is insignificant.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Topaet
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/22/2018 Category: Economics
Updated: 2 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 557 times Debate No: 115933
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

397492387

Pro

According to politifact the vast majority of the gender pay gap is do to conscious choices and according to politifact if lets say a man make very good choices and earns 50000 a year a woman who makes the same choices will make 47,500 dollars a year.

Sorry I'm bad at english.

Happy debating!
Topaet

Con

Happy debating to you as well.
I"m going to start this debate by showing how you have misrepresented what politifact actually stated and then continue with showing how the study that politifact used to justify its statements actually contradicts your assertion that "the gender pay gap is insignificant" and finish my first round with showing that even if the study showed that the gender pay gap is insignificant, it would be irrelevant as the study is flawed.

1.Misrepresentation of politifact:
You have claimed that "according to politifact if lets say a man make very good choices and earns 50000 a year a woman who makes the same choices will make 47,500 dollars a year."
However, this is a misrepresentation of what politifact actually stated: "The study by CONSAD Research Corp. took into account women being more likely to work part-time for lower pay, leave the labor force for children or elder care, and choose work that is "family friendly" with fuller benefit packages over higher pay. The study found that, when factoring in those variables, the gap narrows to between 93 cents and 95 cents on the dollar." [1] It seems as if you were being intentionally deceptive by only reporting the projection that best suited your needs (95 %) while simply excluding the more daunting projection that showed that the wage gap could actually be 40% bigger than you stated and not directly citing your source (such as providing a link).
Additionally, another study that politifact cited also found a 7% net wage gap, which contradicts your claim of a 5% net wage gap. "Still, a study by the American Association of University Women controlled for a number of factors, including college major, occupation, age, geographical region and hours worked, and found a persistent 7 percent wage gap between men and women a year after graduating college. "[1]

2.The study that politifact based its reports on actually states that the wage gap is statistically significant.
"They found that when earnings were measured as only the hourly wage rate, they differed statistically significantly between genders in six of the seven occupational categories." [2]

3.The CONSAD study is flawed.
One of several flaws is that discriminatory hiring practices (studies indicate that there is a 25% discrimination rate between male and female job applicants [3]) which lead to women"s average work experience not being as good as men"s are classified as an "explained" difference in the CONSAD study and therefore not included in the 5-7% "net pay gap". Therefore, the actual wage gap would be higher if discriminatory hiring practices were not excluded from the study.

In conclusion, the wage gap is significant as, even according to the flawed study and your deceptive report of the net wage gap there is still a 5% wage gap and when the study"s actual results are taken into account the net wage gap is projected to be up to 7% which even further increases when factors that were not taken into account by the study such as discriminatory hiring practices are accounted for.
Additionally, I would like to ask you: would you consider it irrelevant if more than 5% of your salary was withheld from you because of discrimination? I doubt anyone would consider that either irrelevant or insignificant.

Sources:
[1]: http://www.politifact.com...
[2]: https://www.shrm.org... p.14
[3]: http://eclairs.fr... p.6
Debate Round No. 1
397492387

Pro

Excuse me but at this point it seems that you were making stuff up it never said that the gender pay gap was anywhere near 40% like you just so claimed I would advise fact checking yourself before you try and fact check me.
Topaet

Con

7% is 140% of 5%, therefore a 7% wage gap would be 40% larger than a 5% wage gap. I assume this was simply a misunderstanding and I'm looking forward to your actual reply to my round 1. All of my arguments still stand
Debate Round No. 2
397492387

Pro

Sorry that was a misunderstanding but the problem with claiming their is a large and persistent pay gap is that all the gender pay gap is is the median income of women over the median income of men without accounting for age, race, demographics etc. also even with saying that those broad unfair generalizations make sense still the most sited statistic is wrong at least in 2016 (according to the BLS) women made 83% of what men made not even close to the 77% most feminists claim.

P.S I'm not trying to say that the feminists are lying or even that their statistics are wrong just that they may be relying on outdated ones.

Sources:
https://www.bls.gov...

https://money.howstuffworks.com...
Topaet

Con

"in 2016 (according to the BLS) women made 83% of what men made not even close to the 77% most feminists claim."
That may be true but my job in this debate is simply to show that the gender pay gap is not insignificant.

My argument that "The study that politifact based its reports on actually states that the wage gap is statistically significant." still remains uncontested.

Additionally, even if the wage gap was just 5%, it would still be significant as it would mean that 1/20th of a woman's salary was taken away, simply because she is a woman. As long as there is a statistically significant wage gap, the wage gap is relevant and should be closed according to article 23 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: "(2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work." [1]



"In conclusion, the wage gap is significant as, even according to the flawed study and your deceptive report of the net wage gap there is still a 5% wage gap and when the study's actual results are taken into account, the net wage gap is projected to be up to 7%[2], which even further increases when factors that were not taken into account by the study such as discriminatory hiring practices are accounted for. [3]
Additionally, I would like to ask you: would you consider it irrelevant if more than 5% of your salary was withheld from you because of discrimination? I doubt anyone would consider that either irrelevant or insignificant."

Sources:
[1]: http://www.un.org...
[2]: http://www.politifact.com...
[3]: http://eclairs.fr...
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by BertrandsTeapot 2 months ago
BertrandsTeapot
397492387TopaetTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: I think it goes without saying that Con not only used more reliable sources, but used his/her sources in a more effective manner. Pro wasted an entire round's argument misunderstanding what should be a relatively basic economic calculation for someone in this forum and didn't bother to refute any of Con's claims. Overall, Con used better reasoning, argument structure, and logic to win this debate.
Vote Placed by RMTheSupreme 2 months ago
RMTheSupreme
397492387TopaetTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Reasons for voting decision: I genuinely don't understand how the word 'significant' was defined here but will give Con the win because Pro didn't use any sources other than a mentioned but not linked Politifact blog and essentially spent the whole debate asking Con why Con said 40% but bringing no real points of their own past round 1 (which Con attacked in their own Round 1).