Total Posts:27|Showing Posts:1-27
Jump to topic:

Does the gender wage gap really exist?

Heirio
Posts: 7
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 6:15:08 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
I've seen Armoured Skeptic and Shoe0nhead, and I've been convinced that the gender wage gap has just been due to different jobs. Now, however, I've been presented with data concerning this which goes against that. This, rather recent, data shows how women in the same occupation as men get less pay.

I'm not sure what to think any more and I'm really confused.

Could someone help me out here?
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Posts: 12,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 6:42:17 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 6:15:08 PM, Heirio wrote:
Could someone help me out here?

No, it doesn't exist. The calculation -- 77 cents on the dollar -- is a load of nonsense and lacks any degree of rigor. It's calculated by taking an average of women's earnings and comparing them to an average of men's earnings: it doesn't account for differences in occupation, education, hours, life decisions, etc. It's an embarrassing figure that anyone well-versed in economic modeling would scoff at.

The caveat is that the literature does document a "motherhood" gap -- i.e., women, particularly those who are well-educated and particularly highly paid, tend to see a material decline in their wages after returning from maternity leave. That isn't really a glaring, policy problem as far I'm concerned, though, nor does it make headlines like "77 cents on the dollar."
~ResponsiblyIrresponsible

DDO's Economics Messiah
Heirio
Posts: 7
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 7:03:51 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 6:42:17 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 3/18/2016 6:15:08 PM, Heirio wrote:
Could someone help me out here?

No, it doesn't exist. The calculation -- 77 cents on the dollar -- is a load of nonsense and lacks any degree of rigor. It's calculated by taking an average of women's earnings and comparing them to an average of men's earnings: it doesn't account for differences in occupation, education, hours, life decisions, etc. It's an embarrassing figure that anyone well-versed in economic modeling would scoff at.

I've seen some sources that say otherwise, like http://blogs.marketwatch.com...

There are others.

Is this research inaccurate?
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Posts: 12,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 7:10:03 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 7:03:51 PM, Heirio wrote:
At 3/18/2016 6:42:17 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 3/18/2016 6:15:08 PM, Heirio wrote:
Could someone help me out here?

No, it doesn't exist. The calculation -- 77 cents on the dollar -- is a load of nonsense and lacks any degree of rigor. It's calculated by taking an average of women's earnings and comparing them to an average of men's earnings: it doesn't account for differences in occupation, education, hours, life decisions, etc. It's an embarrassing figure that anyone well-versed in economic modeling would scoff at.

I've seen some sources that say otherwise, like http://blogs.marketwatch.com...

There are others.

Is this research inaccurate?

I'd never heard of the "Institute for Women's Policy Research," but the name, as you can imagine, raises some red flags. I'm too lazy to google it, but if I had to guess, it's likely an advocacy group.

One thing caught my eye in the article you linked:

"The Institute for Women"s Policy Research crunched government data and found that in each of the 20 most common occupations for women in 2013, women"s median weekly earnings for full-time work were less than weekly earnings for men. Within those top 20 jobs, that relationship holds true for occupations with the largest shares of women."

As expected, that method is almost as flawed as the 77 cents on the dollar calculation -- it's literally comparing median weekly earnings (which are even more volatile than monthly earnings, by the way, so the explanatory power further erodes) to each other without adjusting, again, for hours worked, education, background, etc. Even if it raises the explanatory power somewhat by looking within occupations, the explanatory power is far too low.

If we really wanted to model this -- and I'm assuming you're familiar with regression models, but let me know if not, and I could give you a brief crash course -- the only way to plausible do it would be with fixed-effect coefficients (for age, occupation, education etc etc etc) and a dummy variable for gender. If we remove any of those variables from the equation, the explanatory power of the model (adjusted R^2) absolutely disintegrates. If the dummy variable came back with a significant wage advantage for men, only then could we actually conclude that there's this pervasive wage gap -- though I highly doubt that's the case, and almost all of the research I've seen on this suggests as much.
~ResponsiblyIrresponsible

DDO's Economics Messiah
Heirio
Posts: 7
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 7:13:08 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 7:10:03 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 3/18/2016 7:03:51 PM, Heirio wrote:
At 3/18/2016 6:42:17 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 3/18/2016 6:15:08 PM, Heirio wrote:
Could someone help me out here?

No, it doesn't exist. The calculation -- 77 cents on the dollar -- is a load of nonsense and lacks any degree of rigor. It's calculated by taking an average of women's earnings and comparing them to an average of men's earnings: it doesn't account for differences in occupation, education, hours, life decisions, etc. It's an embarrassing figure that anyone well-versed in economic modeling would scoff at.

I've seen some sources that say otherwise, like http://blogs.marketwatch.com...

There are others.

Is this research inaccurate?

I'd never heard of the "Institute for Women's Policy Research," but the name, as you can imagine, raises some red flags. I'm too lazy to google it, but if I had to guess, it's likely an advocacy group.

One thing caught my eye in the article you linked:

"The Institute for Women"s Policy Research crunched government data and found that in each of the 20 most common occupations for women in 2013, women"s median weekly earnings for full-time work were less than weekly earnings for men. Within those top 20 jobs, that relationship holds true for occupations with the largest shares of women."

As expected, that method is almost as flawed as the 77 cents on the dollar calculation -- it's literally comparing median weekly earnings (which are even more volatile than monthly earnings, by the way, so the explanatory power further erodes) to each other without adjusting, again, for hours worked, education, background, etc. Even if it raises the explanatory power somewhat by looking within occupations, the explanatory power is far too low.

If we really wanted to model this -- and I'm assuming you're familiar with regression models, but let me know if not, and I could give you a brief crash course -- the only way to plausible do it would be with fixed-effect coefficients (for age, occupation, education etc etc etc) and a dummy variable for gender. If we remove any of those variables from the equation, the explanatory power of the model (adjusted R^2) absolutely disintegrates. If the dummy variable came back with a significant wage advantage for men, only then could we actually conclude that there's this pervasive wage gap -- though I highly doubt that's the case, and almost all of the research I've seen on this suggests as much.

I am not familiar at all with those models.
A crash course would be greatly appreciated!
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Posts: 12,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 7:20:59 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 7:13:08 PM, Heirio wrote:
I am not familiar at all with those models.
A crash course would be greatly appreciated!

Sure.

So the goal of a very basic regression model is to determine and quantify as best we can the relationships between variables. We pull data on some variables that are exogenous (not determined by the model) -- in this case, we're not using any endogenous variables, except our y term, which would be some measure of wages -- and regress them against the variable we're trying to determine.

So it might look like this:

Wages = Beta * education + Beta * age + Beta * time spent unemployed + Beta * gender_dummy + other stuff

And by throwing all of this data into a statistical program, we can determine the values of the coefficients, which explain these effects.

So the "gender dummy" above would take on a value of either 0 or 1 -- let's say it would be 0 if the person is a male or 1 if it's a female. If we have a coefficient of, say, -2.50 (and we're measuring wages in dollars), we can interpret that as: "Women, on average, earn $2.50 dollars less than men, holding all else constant."

The remaining coefficients will explain the effects of, say, education, employment, etc. So, let's say we have a coefficient of 5 and education is measured by years in school (crude measure, but let's go with it). We would interpret this as: "If a person's education increases by 1 year, wages on average increase by $5."

So, if we had values for each of our exogenous explanatory variables, we could calibrate a value for wages. The goal of this model, of course, is to account for all of the factors that might impact wages -- i.e., controlling for other factors that may throw off our gender dummy variable and distort the analysis -- so we can isolate the effect of gender.

In other words, the analysis is far more rigor than calculating an average or a median without controlling for the myriad of factors that impact wages. The analysis on this is typically incredibly superficial and really not worth the paper it's published on.
~ResponsiblyIrresponsible

DDO's Economics Messiah
kasmic
Posts: 1,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 7:23:33 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 6:15:08 PM, Heirio wrote:
I've seen Armoured Skeptic and Shoe0nhead, and I've been convinced that the gender wage gap has just been due to different jobs. Now, however, I've been presented with data concerning this which goes against that. This, rather recent, data shows how women in the same occupation as men get less pay.

I'm not sure what to think any more and I'm really confused.

Could someone help me out here?

The Wage Gap.

Often times conversations about the wage gap become heated or divisive. Each side often claims the other to be misinformed or perhaps indoctrinated by propaganda. Due to the confusion on this topic, I gathered some information to put the wage gap into perspective.

"In 2012, the median earnings of American women working full time year-round were $37,791. American men earned a median income of $49,398. The gender wage gap has hovered at about 77 cents on the dollar since 2007." (1)

This shows that generally men are paid more than women in the U.S. The typical response to this is to ask why women are paid less. Is it discrimination? Perhaps it is because they choose lower-paying jobs?

Consider,

"Earnings are high for both women and men who work as computer and information systems managers. But while median earnings for men in 2011 were just over $98,000, median earnings for women were around $86,000. Likewise, aerospace engineers tend to earn a good living. But while a typical male aerospace engineer took home just over $100,000 in 2011, his female counterpart was paid $83,000."(2)

This shows that Higher income occupations pay men more than women on average for the same work.

"Median earnings for male engineering technicians in 2011 were just over $56,000 compared with median earnings of $43,000 for female engineering technicians. Among drafters, typical earnings for men were just over $51,000 while typical earnings for women were just over $45,000." (2)

This shows that median income occupations pay men more than women on average for the same work. Clearly the pay gap is empirically evident and as such, is indisputable. It may be exaggerated, but the wage gap is evident.

"Decades of research shows that no matter how you evaluate the data, there remains a pay gap " even after factoring in the kind of work people do, or qualifications such as education and experience " and there is good evidence that discrimination contributes to the persistent pay disparity between men and women. In other words, pay discrimination is a real and persistent problem that continues to shortchange American women and their families." (3)

While the wage gap is often exaggerated, it does exist. That much is evident. It seems to me high time that those who exaggerate the problem cease as it causes reasonable doubt in the facts and figures. That stated, I also think it is time for those who believe there to be no disparity in pay to acknowledge the facts. Perhaps if we could look at this issue reasonably we might be able to actually address it.

Sources listed here.

http://www.debate.org...
"Liberalism Defined" http://www.debate.org...
"The Social Contract" http://www.debate.org...
"Intro to IR An Open Discussion" http://www.debate.org...

Check out my website, the Sensible Soapbox http://www.sensiblesoapbox.com...
My latest article: http://www.sensiblesoapbox.com...
triangle.128k
Posts: 3,675
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 9:17:38 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 6:15:08 PM, Heirio wrote:
I've seen Armoured Skeptic and Shoe0nhead, and I've been convinced that the gender wage gap has just been due to different jobs. Now, however, I've been presented with data concerning this which goes against that. This, rather recent, data shows how women in the same occupation as men get less pay.

I'm not sure what to think any more and I'm really confused.

Could someone help me out here?

I'm triggered that you only mentioned men and women and not any of the other 500 genders in existence.
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Posts: 12,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 9:27:13 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 9:17:38 PM, triangle.128k wrote:
At 3/18/2016 6:15:08 PM, Heirio wrote:
I've seen Armoured Skeptic and Shoe0nhead, and I've been convinced that the gender wage gap has just been due to different jobs. Now, however, I've been presented with data concerning this which goes against that. This, rather recent, data shows how women in the same occupation as men get less pay.

I'm not sure what to think any more and I'm really confused.

Could someone help me out here?

I'm triggered that you only mentioned men and women and not any of the other 500 genders in existence.

lmfao.
~ResponsiblyIrresponsible

DDO's Economics Messiah
Heirio
Posts: 7
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2016 9:53:10 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 9:17:38 PM, triangle.128k wrote:
At 3/18/2016 6:15:08 PM, Heirio wrote:
I've seen Armoured Skeptic and Shoe0nhead, and I've been convinced that the gender wage gap has just been due to different jobs. Now, however, I've been presented with data concerning this which goes against that. This, rather recent, data shows how women in the same occupation as men get less pay.

I'm not sure what to think any more and I'm really confused.

Could someone help me out here?

I'm triggered that you only mentioned men and women and not any of the other 500 genders in existence.

Heh heh heh
Heirio
Posts: 7
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/19/2016 3:40:24 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
One of the sources used was a study in 2009 on 15,000 graduates.
These were the folks behind it.
https://en.wikipedia.org...
Are they reliable?
sadolite
Posts: 8,842
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2016 12:30:36 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
No, my wife makes way more money than me. It's a load of crap. One has to negotiate ones wages, you can't expect a business just to give you a raise because you show up everyday. If your presence is valuable and you are not afraid to ask for more money you will get it. And just so you know, most jobs cap out. The only path to unlimited income is a corrupt career in govt or self employment.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
Quadrunner
Posts: 1,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2016 11:57:11 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
There is still a gender gap, but its likely just the after effects of the old system that haven't been ironed out yet. For example, if there are older men, in higher quantities in most traditionally male occupations, then you would then expect the men to be making more money on average because they've had more raises, and have more experience. That doesn't mean women are getting paid less then their equal coworkers though. It just indicates that things aren't completely evened out yet. Women still have equal opportunity, and their numbers will continue to rise naturally because of it, but careers don't happen overnight, and neither does the mindset of the people who may or may not choose them for long term.

Another thing to think about is the effect of our culture on a population of women's chosen paths. A lot of them just don't care about feminism and equality, and might work for a while and quit to be a stay at home mom. That's something that will create a wage gap, but as long as the opportunity is there to work if she wants, I don't see a problem with being traditional.

There is a lot of skewed information that exists because news outlets are either too lazy to account for all variables, or pushing the story they think will sell. A lot of groups that need funding do dirty little tricks too to make the numbers imply something that they don't. Without worrying about it, realize there is a wage gap, there is still sexism in the work force, but this day and age, its no longer an issue the woman can't handle legally if she needs to, and its not really a widespread issue to begin with.

There is a very real issue surrounding pregnancy, and maternity leave for a lot of women though. I'm sure that cuts their wages as well one way or the other, and whether their allowed to or not hiring businesses will have a bias based on the "price" of their employee.
Wisdom is found where the wise seek it.
roun12
Posts: 177
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/23/2016 4:52:25 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 7:23:33 PM, kasmic wrote:
At 3/18/2016 6:15:08 PM, Heirio wrote:
I've seen Armoured Skeptic and Shoe0nhead, and I've been convinced that the gender wage gap has just been due to different jobs. Now, however, I've been presented with data concerning this which goes against that. This, rather recent, data shows how women in the same occupation as men get less pay.

I'm not sure what to think any more and I'm really confused.

Could someone help me out here?

The Wage Gap.

Often times conversations about the wage gap become heated or divisive. Each side often claims the other to be misinformed or perhaps indoctrinated by propaganda. Due to the confusion on this topic, I gathered some information to put the wage gap into perspective.

"In 2012, the median earnings of American women working full time year-round were $37,791. American men earned a median income of $49,398. The gender wage gap has hovered at about 77 cents on the dollar since 2007." (1)

This shows that generally men are paid more than women in the U.S. The typical response to this is to ask why women are paid less. Is it discrimination? Perhaps it is because they choose lower-paying jobs?

Consider,

"Earnings are high for both women and men who work as computer and information systems managers. But while median earnings for men in 2011 were just over $98,000, median earnings for women were around $86,000. Likewise, aerospace engineers tend to earn a good living. But while a typical male aerospace engineer took home just over $100,000 in 2011, his female counterpart was paid $83,000."(2)

This shows that Higher income occupations pay men more than women on average for the same work.

"Median earnings for male engineering technicians in 2011 were just over $56,000 compared with median earnings of $43,000 for female engineering technicians. Among drafters, typical earnings for men were just over $51,000 while typical earnings for women were just over $45,000." (2)

This shows that median income occupations pay men more than women on average for the same work. Clearly the pay gap is empirically evident and as such, is indisputable. It may be exaggerated, but the wage gap is evident.

"Decades of research shows that no matter how you evaluate the data, there remains a pay gap " even after factoring in the kind of work people do, or qualifications such as education and experience " and there is good evidence that discrimination contributes to the persistent pay disparity between men and women. In other words, pay discrimination is a real and persistent problem that continues to shortchange American women and their families." (3)

While the wage gap is often exaggerated, it does exist. That much is evident. It seems to me high time that those who exaggerate the problem cease as it causes reasonable doubt in the facts and figures. That stated, I also think it is time for those who believe there to be no disparity in pay to acknowledge the facts. Perhaps if we could look at this issue reasonably we might be able to actually address it.

Sources listed here.

http://www.debate.org...

Men generally work more hours overall and likely have a higher level of education than women in the same positions which would lead to a wage difference. Also, there is the fact that men are more likely to negotiate for higher wages than women are. Did the study control for these variables? Most likely not.
"No, I disagree. 'R' is among the most menacing of sounds. That's why they call it MURDER, not Muckduck." - Dwight

"Tell people there's an invisible man in the sky who created the universe, and the vast majority will believe you. Tell them the paint is wet, and they have to touch it to be sure." - George Carlin
kperry
Posts: 19
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2016 2:08:02 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
: At 3/18/2016 6:15:08 PM, Heirio wrote:
I've seen Armoured Skeptic and Shoe0nhead, and I've been convinced that the gender wage gap has just been due to different jobs. Now, however, I've been presented with data concerning this which goes against that. This, rather recent, data shows how women in the same occupation as men get less pay.

I'm not sure what to think any more and I'm really confused.

Could someone help me out here?


Real world experience tells me the wage gap is just a myth. I've worked different jobs in different fields and I can tell you honestly I have never earned less than my male co-workers.
j50wells
Posts: 345
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2016 10:46:39 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
It does but not for the reasons that some people think. While I will be the first to admit that there are some snarky, sexist bigots who hate the idea of women working and will pay them less, for the most part this is not the case.
If I, a man, work at McDonald's, I will be paid the same rate as a woman. If I work really hard and prove my worth, the manager might pull me aside and secretly tell me that they are going to pay me an extra dollar an hour and inform me to keep it under my hat, but they will also give a girl a raise if she works hard also.
To find out why men get paid more, on average, we need to move away from the bottom rung of pay. There are many jobs that pay more but 90% of women cannot do them or do not want to do them. Logging is a job that very few women can do. Because it is a dangerous job, and because it takes very strong, tuff men to log, it pays much higher than the average job. There are many jobs similar to logging that women cannot do or do not want to do. Here are just a few; Road construction, framing, commercial fishing and crabbing, electrician, pipe layer, brick mason, concrete worker, truck driver, heavy equipment operator. All of these jobs are hard, dangerous, sweaty, long hour jobs. Because of this the pay must be higher because no one would work those jobs for low wages. I used to work road construction. I ran a 90 pound jack hammer 12 hours a day. There were no women in our company that could run a jack hammer. One girl tried but she hurt her back. In fact, very few men could run the jack hammer. They paid me extra money to run it because it was a very hard task.
Right now I drive a truck. Very few women drive trucks because it is a hard job. Truck drivers work 14 hour days. Most women are not willing to work hours like that. Truck driving is dangerous so they pay me much more than if I was a hair stylist or beautician.
In the business world men get paid more because on average they work 20-30 days more per year than a woman does. That's just a fact. Managers know this so they are likely to pay men 5-10% more.
I think that we need to think this through. If we make laws that force companies to pay us all the same, then companies will be forced to pay by piece and pace. Instead of an hourly wage, you will be paid by how many burgers you make, or how many hair cuts you give. In the business world salaries will drop drastically. Instead of being paid 60k, you will get a 20k base salary and then will make commission off of everything that you do. Women should think long and hard before they try to force an imaginary fair pay act. It will be anything but fair. If I get paid hair stylist wages to drive an 80,000 pound truck over a mountain pass in mid-winter, then I'm going to quit, and so will the other men. We'll go to beauty school and become hair stylists, and so take away some of the jobs that women would have taken.
themightyindividual
Posts: 98
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2016 5:57:19 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
Here's the problem with such a statistic: it averages the results, not the opportunity. For example, most garbage men, soldiers, and deep sea fisherman are men, and these are jobs that pay a good amount and men are inherently good at, so of course they will make more ON AVERAGE. But that isn't to say the there is a bias, except for the bias in nature (women aren't attracted to the hard disgusting jobs that pay a lot as much as men are) so women do jobs like being a waitress more often than men because let's face it, they're better at it. But these jobs coincidentally are super easy and fun and thus don't pay much. It's not that all the bosses in the world hate women and want to pay them less (probably the opposite bias exists) it's that by design, women like to do the easier jobs.
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2016 3:06:28 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
The wage gap was created a couple decades ago when women's rights advocates took the total income of all men and total income of all women and compared the two. They then concluded that since women made 77% as much as men made, that there was a gender gap based upon the virtue of the gender itself, not on the virtue of merit.

This idea has been proven inconclusive and wrong, and is found to be a great measure of human stupidity and economic illiteracy by most credible economists worldwide. The wage gap doesn't exist when so many external factors, such as experience, efficiency, productivity, and most importantly job choice press into the wages of individuals, male or female.

If all garbage-men were to make $40,000 annually, and it so happened to be that all garbage-men are males, while all the computer scientists that make double are females - this won't mean that a gender gap exists, even though the salaries of the two occupations is 1:2 respectively. It simply means that this group chose a lower paying job, while the other group didn't.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
tajshar2k
Posts: 2,385
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2016 3:33:57 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 6:15:08 PM, Heirio wrote:
I've seen Armoured Skeptic and Shoe0nhead, and I've been convinced that the gender wage gap has just been due to different jobs. Now, however, I've been presented with data concerning this which goes against that. This, rather recent, data shows how women in the same occupation as men get less pay.

I'm not sure what to think any more and I'm really confused.

Could someone help me out here?

It does, but it's not the 77 cents that leftist idiots are claiming it to be. It's somewhere around 99 cents if you take other factors into play, but I don't think it's a big deal.
"In Guns We Trust" Tajshar2k
Rigoletto
Posts: 62
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2016 4:28:00 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/6/2016 3:33:57 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
At 3/18/2016 6:15:08 PM, Heirio wrote:
I've seen Armoured Skeptic and Shoe0nhead, and I've been convinced that the gender wage gap has just been due to different jobs. Now, however, I've been presented with data concerning this which goes against that. This, rather recent, data shows how women in the same occupation as men get less pay.

I'm not sure what to think any more and I'm really confused.

Could someone help me out here?

It does, but it's not the 77 cents that leftist idiots are claiming it to be. It's somewhere around 99 cents if you take other factors into play, but I don't think it's a big deal.

It shouldn't exist at all, that's the issue. Fair is fair, unfair is unfair. It doesn't matter to what degree.
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2016 12:38:35 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/18/2016 9:17:38 PM, triangle.128k wrote:
At 3/18/2016 6:15:08 PM, Heirio wrote:
I've seen Armoured Skeptic and Shoe0nhead, and I've been convinced that the gender wage gap has just been due to different jobs. Now, however, I've been presented with data concerning this which goes against that. This, rather recent, data shows how women in the same occupation as men get less pay.

I'm not sure what to think any more and I'm really confused.

Could someone help me out here?

I'm triggered that you only mentioned men and women and not any of the other 500 genders in existence.

+1
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2016 12:45:16 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/6/2016 4:28:00 PM, Rigoletto wrote:
At 4/6/2016 3:33:57 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
At 3/18/2016 6:15:08 PM, Heirio wrote:
I've seen Armoured Skeptic and Shoe0nhead, and I've been convinced that the gender wage gap has just been due to different jobs. Now, however, I've been presented with data concerning this which goes against that. This, rather recent, data shows how women in the same occupation as men get less pay.

I'm not sure what to think any more and I'm really confused.

Could someone help me out here?

It does, but it's not the 77 cents that leftist idiots are claiming it to be. It's somewhere around 99 cents if you take other factors into play, but I don't think it's a big deal.

It shouldn't exist at all, that's the issue. Fair is fair, unfair is unfair. It doesn't matter to what degree.

https://mises.org...

Read this article.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
TheFlex
Posts: 1,745
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2016 1:06:06 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/7/2016 12:45:16 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 4/6/2016 4:28:00 PM, Rigoletto wrote:
At 4/6/2016 3:33:57 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
At 3/18/2016 6:15:08 PM, Heirio wrote:
I've seen Armoured Skeptic and Shoe0nhead, and I've been convinced that the gender wage gap has just been due to different jobs. Now, however, I've been presented with data concerning this which goes against that. This, rather recent, data shows how women in the same occupation as men get less pay.

I'm not sure what to think any more and I'm really confused.

Could someone help me out here?

It does, but it's not the 77 cents that leftist idiots are claiming it to be. It's somewhere around 99 cents if you take other factors into play, but I don't think it's a big deal.

It shouldn't exist at all, that's the issue. Fair is fair, unfair is unfair. It doesn't matter to what degree.

https://mises.org...

Read this article.

Welcome back.
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2016 1:07:01 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/7/2016 1:06:06 AM, TheFlex wrote:
At 4/7/2016 12:45:16 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 4/6/2016 4:28:00 PM, Rigoletto wrote:
At 4/6/2016 3:33:57 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
At 3/18/2016 6:15:08 PM, Heirio wrote:
I've seen Armoured Skeptic and Shoe0nhead, and I've been convinced that the gender wage gap has just been due to different jobs. Now, however, I've been presented with data concerning this which goes against that. This, rather recent, data shows how women in the same occupation as men get less pay.

I'm not sure what to think any more and I'm really confused.

Could someone help me out here?

It does, but it's not the 77 cents that leftist idiots are claiming it to be. It's somewhere around 99 cents if you take other factors into play, but I don't think it's a big deal.

It shouldn't exist at all, that's the issue. Fair is fair, unfair is unfair. It doesn't matter to what degree.

https://mises.org...

Read this article.

Welcome back.

You bet. Thanks!
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
The-Voice-of-Truth
Posts: 6,574
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2016 3:09:28 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/7/2016 1:07:01 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:

Just a quick wassup and welcome back before I go off to sleep, lol.
"You're more of a fluentic fail doer who sometimes does a doo dah with a diggity ding, managing to push open doors that weren't meant to be opened, only to find that there's no floor, so you instead become spiderman and crawl on the walls." -Vaarka

I'm Rick Harrison and this is my pawn shop. I work here with my old man and my son, Big Hoss, and in 23 years I've learned one thing. You never know what is gonna come through that door
mc9
Posts: 1,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2016 6:26:10 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/7/2016 1:07:01 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 4/7/2016 1:06:06 AM, TheFlex wrote:
At 4/7/2016 12:45:16 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 4/6/2016 4:28:00 PM, Rigoletto wrote:
At 4/6/2016 3:33:57 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
At 3/18/2016 6:15:08 PM, Heirio wrote:
I've seen Armoured Skeptic and Shoe0nhead, and I've been convinced that the gender wage gap has just been due to different jobs. Now, however, I've been presented with data concerning this which goes against that. This, rather recent, data shows how women in the same occupation as men get less pay.

I'm not sure what to think any more and I'm really confused.

Could someone help me out here?

It does, but it's not the 77 cents that leftist idiots are claiming it to be. It's somewhere around 99 cents if you take other factors into play, but I don't think it's a big deal.

It shouldn't exist at all, that's the issue. Fair is fair, unfair is unfair. It doesn't matter to what degree.

https://mises.org...

Read this article.

Welcome back.

You bet. Thanks!

Guess who's back (pulls up obscure member from three years ago)