silly how the same arguments are being used again 35+ years later [video=youtube;tC1gRZ6pEko]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tC1gRZ6pEko[/video]
Actually the latest research shows that when all things are taken into consideration there is still a 5% wage gap that cannot be accounted for.
On average men work more than women and on average women tend to follow their instincts of caretaking and narturing by picking low-paid professions such as Kindergarden-teacher, looking out for elders and nurse. Additionally, on average women take out longer parental leave and women are the ones who tend to stay home with their sick child. Furthermore, more men than women work over-time even though almost all workers are free to do so If you work 130 hours/month instead of 200 and if you invest your money on shoes and handbags instead on stocks and on your business you will of course end up with less money.
all those factors are taking into consideration in the latest research and report, and there is still a 5% gap that cannot be accounted for. - http://commons.wikimannia.org/images/Gender_Wage_Gap_Final_Report_2009.pdf sometimes that link fails to load if so you can get the report from here - http://commons.wikimannia.org/File:Gender_Wage_Gap_Final_Report_2009.pdf There are observable differences in the attributes of men and women that account for most of the wage gap. Statistical analysis that includes those variables has produced results that collectively account for between 65.1 and 76.4 percent of a raw gender wage gap of 20.4 percent, and thereby leave an adjusted gender wage gap that is between 4.8 and 7.1 percent. [or 5% average] BTW : I am male. Your last sentence is a little bit discriminative, to make the assumption that women spend money on shoes and handbags instead of stocks and business investment is just a stereotypical viewpoint, - - - Updated - - - They shouldn't have to, they should be paid the same as their male counterparts when all considerations are taken into account, the same goes the other way round as well.
bosses dont have to give you a raise and usually you only get more money if you ask for it unless you're the always employee of the month type
I didn't say they did, all I said was that IMO no matter the gender people should be paid equally .. again IMO the best way would be to get rid of salary based wages and employ everyone on a hourly rate, that way the more work people do the greater their pay.
so if one person gets a raise everyone gets a raise? no if one person gets a raise its because he or she deserves it if one person doesnt get a raise its because they dont deserve it. thats how it should be. you shouldnt get extra money just for having a vagina.
If you go back to my first response I did say that when the two people are doing the same job, no problem with people getting paid more for doing a better job . .the problem arises when two people are doing the same job at the same level and one is paid more than the other. Neither should you get more just for having a penis
I still feel this "issue" is pretty much bollox, selfishly and unfairly addressed. However, what is real and certainly does affect the "pay differences" between men and women is the fact that female dominated professions are- on average- less paid than male-dominated. If this is derriving from gender I let to be unsaid. All I have to say here is that the female-demoinated professions of teacher and nurse are among the two most respectable professions one can have imo and the salary is ridiculously low in relation to their relevance and importance for society.
if you dont ask for a raise you probably wont get one and that has nothing to do with gender. sorry, better luck next time no one gets more for having a penis otherwise its discrimination and there are laws against it.
It's really funny to me that Thomas Sowell was actually young once, and he has a small afro, and the left is still using the same arguments he took down back then.
You are the one making the accusation so please do provide where I say anything like " women should get payed more for having a vagina"
Evidence suggests the remaining 5% gap is the result of choice namely the Researchers believe the 5% gap is the result of women choosing more compensation in the form of non-wage benefits but the Researchers couldnt quantify this factor because of the limitations of their model, namely multivariate regression analysis. When there is a high R value (coefficient of correlation) between dependent variables in multivariate regression analysis the results cant be quantified because there is said to be collinearity. Basically, when there is collinearity, you cant tell whats influencing what. Is the dependent variable, benefits, being influencing by the independent variable, gender, or is the dependent variable being influenced by another dependent variable in the model? However, its likely the remaining 5% is the result of more choice that just couldnt be quantified statistically
Women tend to choose easy majors that result in them being qualified for less lucrative careers and men are more likely to choose difficult majors that result in them being qualified for more lucrative careers when they graduate for example: In 2007 women earned 17 percent of Bachelors degrees in engineering, compared to earning 79 percent of Bachelors degrees in education. In 2006 women earned only 20 percent of Bachelor degrees in physics, computer science, and engineering If women want to get paid more then they should choose a more difficult major that will result in them being qualified for a more lucrative career. It's not like women are being discriminated against in STEM. For example: A study by The National Academy of Sciences found in hiring experiments Reveal 2:1 Faculty Preference For Women on STEM Tenure Track found that in experiments with professors from 371 colleges and universities across the United States that science and engineering faculty actually preferred women two-to-one over identically qualified male candidates for assistant professor positions. Some people might even go so far as to suggest a 1:1 preferance for identically qualified male and female applicants is equality and a 2:1 preference for women over identically qualified male applicants is actually evidence of discrimination against men in STEM. Crazy, I know-right??? As an egalitarian, I believe women should be equally accountable for the consequences of their actions and choices. As an egalitarian, I believe that's equality. Blaming men, blaming the patriarchy for the consequences of your actions, of your choices, is not accountability.
since the pay gap has been accounted for, (except for the few variables that you cant exactly put into numbers like personal choice and not asking for a raise) the pay gap pretty much dries up to zero% but you still think females should get payed more. you literally believe having a vagina should mean you get payed more.
No need to post all that a simple they don't know why would have been enough, as to the "likely" comment that is just a guess with nothing to support it.
An obvious lie on you part, the 5% pay gap has not been accounted for, if as you suggest it is down to personal choice and not asking for a raise provide the data that shows this, otherwise it is merely your opinion which in reality means little .... when you can provide that data you might have a point, until then your just blowing smoke.
It's your opinion that the 5% gap is discrimination and you have nothing to support that belief. You really have to understand multivariate regression analysis to understand why the researches couldn't account for the 5%. Do you understand multivariate regression analysis???
Show me where exactly it is accounted for in the gender pay gap outside of the 5% remaining. Show me exactly where those two factors are added in. You cant because there is no way to count them.