This da da epitome of da article right here
Look man, if you don't want to be called a mental ****** by evil liberals then work on how you present your points. Act like someone who has had any type of formal education is presenting an argument. Not all conservatives are like you, you're a certain breed of conservatives. You're in the same boat as those poor southern republicans who dropped out of high school, live on welfare but vote for Trump.
Da proof is in da puddin' b
You drip condescending arrogance and everything you bloviate about me is a lie, and you're da only one who believes it because your stuck in your personal smug bubble of self serving platitudes.
As mentioned, the topic of pay "inequality" always seems to get them in their emotions.What you be telling these women to make them so heated papi
As mentioned, the topic of pay "inequality" always seems to get them in their emotions.
Example: I was having drinks with my homie and his girl a few weeks ago. We're discussing politics and joking about the self-destructing debacle of Hillary/Trump. His girl interjects about something she read online: women make 77 cents for every dollar men make. I ask her to explain; she literally just repeats that same line and says it's pure discrimination. I calmly explain to her that while the average wage for women is ~77% of the average wage of men, the difference is not likely a result of discrimination. I further elaborate that women are more likely to either temporarily or permanently drop out of the workforce. Also, women are more likely to work part-time and unsurprisingly, part-time employees overall make less than full-time employees. At this point, she's getting flustered. I continue to say that more women than men drop out of the labor force to take care of their kids, which is absolutely cool with me. I even put it out there that women without children tend to make a bit more than men without children (regardless of age). She's now heated and saying that it's not a woman's fault for leaving the workforce. I ask her, "So it's not a woman's choice to leave the workforce? Who forced her?" She yells that it's the children's fault for forcing mothers to quit their jobs. I'm pretty confused at this point, but she abruptly tells me that since this wage gap exists, women should be getting paid the difference by the government.
My homie is cracking up at this point (his fault for choosing to be with a self-proclaimed feminist and fan of Anita Sarkeesian), but I try to dig in a little deeper. I ask her, "If women are getting paid less, wouldn't companies hire women instead to work the same exact job, thereby increasing profit and minimizing costs?" She tells me she's offended I would even ask that and that discrimination is the only answer to this inequality. I send my homie a few links and articles that debunk this discrimination-based wage gap and he tells me she's not reading any of it. So much for being open-minded, huh?
The false rape accusations are absolutely disgusting and have destroyed many men's lives. Yes, even black men got thrown in prison for this BS (e.g. read Patrice O'Neal's story).
3rd wave Feminists are da reason rollingstone ran a fake rape story, cuz when da **** hit da fan, instead of being conciliatory and potentially harm their rape culture narrative and admit they were wrong, their new angle became "to bring awareness".:Lol
And that anita broad ALMOST ruined video games... That whole #gamergate ive followed from da beginning..trying to inject political correctness into da industry and vilify its fans.
As mentioned, the topic of pay "inequality" always seems to get them in their emotions.
Example: I was having drinks with my homie and his girl a few weeks ago. We're discussing politics and joking about the self-destructing debacle of Hillary/Trump. His girl interjects about something she read online: women make 77 cents for every dollar men make. I ask her to explain; she literally just repeats that same line and says it's pure discrimination. I calmly explain to her that while the average wage for women is ~77% of the average wage of men, the difference is not likely a result of discrimination. I further elaborate that women are more likely to either temporarily or permanently drop out of the workforce. Also, women are more likely to work part-time and unsurprisingly, part-time employees overall make less than full-time employees. At this point, she's getting flustered. I continue to say that more women than men drop out of the labor force to take care of their kids, which is absolutely cool with me. I even put it out there that women without children tend to make a bit more than men without children (regardless of age). She's now heated and saying that it's not a woman's fault for leaving the workforce. I ask her, "So it's not a woman's choice to leave the workforce? Who forced her?" She yells that it's the children's fault for forcing mothers to quit their jobs. I'm pretty confused at this point, but she abruptly tells me that since this wage gap exists, women should be getting paid the difference by the government.
My homie is cracking up at this point (his fault for choosing to be with a self-proclaimed feminist and fan of Anita Sarkeesian), but I try to dig in a little deeper. I ask her, "If women are getting paid less, wouldn't companies hire women instead to work the same exact job, thereby increasing profit and minimizing costs?" She tells me she's offended I would even ask that and that discrimination is the only answer to this inequality. I send my homie a few links and articles that debunk this discrimination-based wage gap and he tells me she's not reading any of it. So much for being open-minded, huh?
see this is the problem when dealing with most "intellectual" liberals. you cant claim to base your arguments on facts when you dismiss a bunch of logical and factual arguments with "all those factors aside, these factors are more important because they support MY viewpoint". It's just showing your bias.All those factors aside, dollar for dollar, same hours worked for the same positions, women and minorities actually do make less. I'd say it's more dependent on what they know they can negotiate. Source? corporate accountants. To me you came across as a jackass, and your boy is a gitwit.As mentioned, the topic of pay "inequality" always seems to get them in their emotions.
Example: I was having drinks with my homie and his girl a few weeks ago. We're discussing politics and joking about the self-destructing debacle of Hillary/Trump. His girl interjects about something she read online: women make 77 cents for every dollar men make. I ask her to explain; she literally just repeats that same line and says it's pure discrimination. I calmly explain to her that while the average wage for women is ~77% of the average wage of men, the difference is not likely a result of discrimination. I further elaborate that women are more likely to either temporarily or permanently drop out of the workforce. Also, women are more likely to work part-time and unsurprisingly, part-time employees overall make less than full-time employees. At this point, she's getting flustered. I continue to say that more women than men drop out of the labor force to take care of their kids, which is absolutely cool with me. I even put it out there that women without children tend to make a bit more than men without children (regardless of age). She's now heated and saying that it's not a woman's fault for leaving the workforce. I ask her, "So it's not a woman's choice to leave the workforce? Who forced her?" She yells that it's the children's fault for forcing mothers to quit their jobs. I'm pretty confused at this point, but she abruptly tells me that since this wage gap exists, women should be getting paid the difference by the government.
My homie is cracking up at this point (his fault for choosing to be with a self-proclaimed feminist and fan of Anita Sarkeesian), but I try to dig in a little deeper. I ask her, "If women are getting paid less, wouldn't companies hire women instead to work the same exact job, thereby increasing profit and minimizing costs?" She tells me she's offended I would even ask that and that discrimination is the only answer to this inequality. I send my homie a few links and articles that debunk this discrimination-based wage gap and he tells me she's not reading any of it. So much for being open-minded, huh?
I agree with most of their points but this is basically 95% of what liberals do in NT threads when dealing with conservatives
Thanks for the insight, Rusty. Glad you don't resort to ad-hominem attacks, but instead offer up a cogent perspective.Famb you were rustling oye girl.As mentioned, the topic of pay "inequality" always seems to get them in their emotions.
Example: I was having drinks with my homie and his girl a few weeks ago. We're discussing politics and joking about the self-destructing debacle of Hillary/Trump. His girl interjects about something she read online: women make 77 cents for every dollar men make. I ask her to explain; she literally just repeats that same line and says it's pure discrimination. I calmly explain to her that while the average wage for women is ~77% of the average wage of men, the difference is not likely a result of discrimination. I further elaborate that women are more likely to either temporarily or permanently drop out of the workforce. Also, women are more likely to work part-time and unsurprisingly, part-time employees overall make less than full-time employees. At this point, she's getting flustered. I continue to say that more women than men drop out of the labor force to take care of their kids, which is absolutely cool with me. I even put it out there that women without children tend to make a bit more than men without children (regardless of age). She's now heated and saying that it's not a woman's fault for leaving the workforce. I ask her, "So it's not a woman's choice to leave the workforce? Who forced her?" She yells that it's the children's fault for forcing mothers to quit their jobs. I'm pretty confused at this point, but she abruptly tells me that since this wage gap exists, women should be getting paid the difference by the government.
My homie is cracking up at this point (his fault for choosing to be with a self-proclaimed feminist and fan of Anita Sarkeesian), but I try to dig in a little deeper. I ask her, "If women are getting paid less, wouldn't companies hire women instead to work the same exact job, thereby increasing profit and minimizing costs?" She tells me she's offended I would even ask that and that discrimination is the only answer to this inequality. I send my homie a few links and articles that debunk this discrimination-based wage gap and he tells me she's not reading any of it. So much for being open-minded, huh?
-But she was wrong and you're wrong. She was right and you're right
The entire gap is not based on explainable factors (which economist generally gets labelled discrimination), but part of it is. It is well researched topic in Labor Economics, you could probably search on Google Scholar or NBER and find many papers on the gender pay gap. You gonna get real familiar with the oaxaca decomposition
I have read many articles showing that part of the wage gap is explainable, there is part of the gender wage gap that just can't be explain, at least by not any model out there right now.
That signals there is discrimination
-Secondly, you're "if women make less, why don't companies" just hired women is a nice troll job but I figure you're touching on this:
Women go cost women just much as men, and yes they choose to drop out the labor market (I'll touch on that). But during that time think about it, the company doesn't get any productivity from that worker, so in return he pays that women a lower wage to make up for it. Men don't drop out, so in turn they get a higher wage. I'm pretty sure this was what you were arguing to baby girl.
But
Women aren't just choosing to drop out the labor force on a whim. Taking care an child has large negative economic consequences, and currently America's social and economic is making women bare to many of those cost herself. Women should get paid maternity leave, so should men. Currently women have to stay home for weeks to months, yet men get looked at funny style for being out over a week. When you see both groups taking the same amount of time off after a baby, you will see the pay gap shrinking. Because their compensation structure will both change. Right now women generally have to drop out, while a man doesn't
Then
Now add to that the household division of labor is crazy unbalanced. Women put in way more time, and energy into raising a child and taking care of households (doing basic house work) than men do. This is time women aren't compensated for, time she could be in the labor market proving trading her time for more money, or investing in human capital that will lend to higher wages.
Then
Society (both men and older women) funnel our girls into lower paying careers, or act somewhat hostile to her entering a male dominated field. This **** starts from when like pre-algebra. Girls get told that being cute is just as important that being competent. So men and women might be in the same field, doing what is classified as the same job on a survey, but when you look closer the man's job is more specialized, and he can demand a higher wage
-So let's review. Women have pushed to make choices that will negatively affect them economically, men don't, and add to that women put in tons of work that goes uncompensated. Work that benefits other men, and society as a whole
It will take a combination of public policy, and men making different decision in the workplace, and them doing more work to take care and raise kids. Add women making different choices. But society is still on the hook for part of the problem It is all about trade offs. And someone the person saying it is all about discrimination, is missing the other half of the picture. So it the dude saying it discrimination doesn't pay a factor, or it is just women's choices that are lending to her lower pay.
I know you be getting wavy with liberation way of thinking and that people's choices explain everything. I dipped my toes into those waters at one point in life. But the most dangerous thing about that way of thinking is that it ignores the socio-economic systems driving outcomes we see in society
-And to be honest, you come off just as bad in your story as ole girl does.
all this is a good breakdown of why women get paid less and it is a societal "problem" but none of the green highlighted text does anything to suggest that it's employer discrimination. It seem's like you're supporting his point that the girl saying "it must be discrimination!!!" is talking nonsense because you just listed a whole bunch of reasons that have nothing to do with the employer to why women get paid less on average.Famb you were rustling oye girl.As mentioned, the topic of pay "inequality" always seems to get them in their emotions.
Example: I was having drinks with my homie and his girl a few weeks ago. We're discussing politics and joking about the self-destructing debacle of Hillary/Trump. His girl interjects about something she read online: women make 77 cents for every dollar men make. I ask her to explain; she literally just repeats that same line and says it's pure discrimination. I calmly explain to her that while the average wage for women is ~77% of the average wage of men, the difference is not likely a result of discrimination. I further elaborate that women are more likely to either temporarily or permanently drop out of the workforce. Also, women are more likely to work part-time and unsurprisingly, part-time employees overall make less than full-time employees. At this point, she's getting flustered. I continue to say that more women than men drop out of the labor force to take care of their kids, which is absolutely cool with me. I even put it out there that women without children tend to make a bit more than men without children (regardless of age). She's now heated and saying that it's not a woman's fault for leaving the workforce. I ask her, "So it's not a woman's choice to leave the workforce? Who forced her?" She yells that it's the children's fault for forcing mothers to quit their jobs. I'm pretty confused at this point, but she abruptly tells me that since this wage gap exists, women should be getting paid the difference by the government.
My homie is cracking up at this point (his fault for choosing to be with a self-proclaimed feminist and fan of Anita Sarkeesian), but I try to dig in a little deeper. I ask her, "If women are getting paid less, wouldn't companies hire women instead to work the same exact job, thereby increasing profit and minimizing costs?" She tells me she's offended I would even ask that and that discrimination is the only answer to this inequality. I send my homie a few links and articles that debunk this discrimination-based wage gap and he tells me she's not reading any of it. So much for being open-minded, huh?
-But she was wrong and you're wrong. She was right and you're right
The entire gap is not based on explainable factors (which economist generally gets labelled discrimination), but part of it is. It is well researched topic in Labor Economics, you could probably search on Google Scholar or NBER and find many papers on the gender pay gap. You gonna get real familiar with the oaxaca decomposition
I have read many articles showing that part of the wage gap is explainable, there is part of the gender wage gap that just can't be explain, at least by not any model out there right now.
That signals there is discrimination
-Secondly, you're "if women make less, why don't companies" just hired women is a nice troll job but I figure you're touching on this:
Women go cost women just much as men, and yes they choose to drop out the labor market (I'll touch on that). But during that time think about it, the company doesn't get any productivity from that worker, so in return he pays that women a lower wage to make up for it. Men don't drop out, so in turn they get a higher wage. I'm pretty sure this was what you were arguing to baby girl.
But
Women aren't just choosing to drop out the labor force on a whim. Taking care an child has large negative economic consequences, and currently America's social and economic is making women bare to many of those cost herself. Women should get paid maternity leave, so should men. Currently women have to stay home for weeks to months, yet men get looked at funny style for being out over a week. When you see both groups taking the same amount of time off after a baby, you will see the pay gap shrinking. Because their compensation structure will both change. Right now women generally have to drop out, while a man doesn't
Then
Now add to that the household division of labor is crazy unbalanced. Women put in way more time, and energy into raising a child and taking care of households (doing basic house work) than men do. This is time women aren't compensated for, time she could be in the labor market proving trading her time for more money, or investing in human capital that will lend to higher wages.
Then
Society (both men and older women) funnel our girls into lower paying careers, or act somewhat hostile to her entering a male dominated field. This **** starts from when like pre-algebra. Girls get told that being cute is just as important that being competent. So men and women might be in the same field, doing what is classified as the same job on a survey, but when you look closer the man's job is more specialized, and he can demand a higher wage
-So let's review. Women have pushed to make choices that will negatively affect them economically, men don't, and add to that women put in tons of work that goes uncompensated. Work that benefits other men, and society as a whole
It will take a combination of public policy, and men making different decision in the workplace, and them doing more work to take care and raise kids. Add women making different choices. But society is still on the hook for part of the problem It is all about trade offs. And someone the person saying it is all about discrimination, is missing the other half of the picture. So it the dude saying it discrimination doesn't pay a factor, or it is just women's choices that are lending to her lower pay.
I know you be getting wavy with liberation way of thinking and that people's choices explain everything. I dipped my toes into those waters at one point in life. But the most dangerous thing about that way of thinking is that it ignores the socio-economic systems driving outcomes we see in society
-And to be honest, you come off just as bad in your story as ole girl does.
see this is the problem when dealing with most "intellectual" liberals. you cant claim to base your arguments on facts when you dismiss a bunch of logical and factual arguments with "all those factors aside, these factors are more important because they support MY viewpoint". It's just showing your bias.
As mentioned, the topic of pay "inequality" always seems to get them in their emotions.
Example: I was having drinks with my homie and his girl a few weeks ago. We're discussing politics and joking about the self-destructing debacle of Hillary/Trump. His girl interjects about something she read online: women make 77 cents for every dollar men make. I ask her to explain; she literally just repeats that same line and says it's pure discrimination. I calmly explain to her that while the average wage for women is ~77% of the average wage of men, the difference is not likely a result of discrimination. I further elaborate that women are more likely to either temporarily or permanently drop out of the workforce. Also, women are more likely to work part-time and unsurprisingly, part-time employees overall make less than full-time employees. At this point, she's getting flustered. I continue to say that more women than men drop out of the labor force to take care of their kids, which is absolutely cool with me. I even put it out there that women without children tend to make a bit more than men without children (regardless of age). She's now heated and saying that it's not a woman's fault for leaving the workforce. I ask her, "So it's not a woman's choice to leave the workforce? Who forced her?" She yells that it's the children's fault for forcing mothers to quit their jobs. I'm pretty confused at this point, but she abruptly tells me that since this wage gap exists, women should be getting paid the difference by the government.
My homie is cracking up at this point (his fault for choosing to be with a self-proclaimed feminist and fan of Anita Sarkeesian), but I try to dig in a little deeper. I ask her, "If women are getting paid less, wouldn't companies hire women instead to work the same exact job, thereby increasing profit and minimizing costs?" She tells me she's offended I would even ask that and that discrimination is the only answer to this inequality. I send my homie a few links and articles that debunk this discrimination-based wage gap and he tells me she's not reading any of it. So much for being open-minded, huh?
All those factors aside, dollar for dollar, same hours worked for the same positions, women and minorities actually do make less. I'd say it's more dependent on what they know they can negotiate. Source? corporate accountants. To me you came across as a jackass, and your boy is a gitwit.
I agree with most of their points but this is basically 95% of what liberals do in NT threads when dealing with conservatives
dude brought up a few good points and you dismissed them with "facts" an anonymous source, how is what you did any different?
if she comes forth with an ignorant viewpoint what's wrong with making her look stupid? or does that only apply when a person has an "anti-liberal" viewpoint?
liberals are overall more progressive and logical in their arguments but lets be real, both sides are hella bias and pick and choose which "facts" they find important purely to support their predetermined stances on the argument.
all this is a good breakdown of why women get paid less and it is a societal "problem" but none of the green highlighted text does anything to suggest that it's employer discrimination. It seem's like you're supporting his point that the girl saying "it must be discrimination!!!" is talking nonsense because you just listed a whole bunch of reasons that have nothing to do with the employer to why women get paid less on average.
As mentioned, the topic of pay "inequality" always seems to get them in their emotions.
Example: I was having drinks with my homie and his girl a few weeks ago. We're discussing politics and joking about the self-destructing debacle of Hillary/Trump. His girl interjects about something she read online: women make 77 cents for every dollar men make. I ask her to explain; she literally just repeats that same line and says it's pure discrimination. I calmly explain to her that while the average wage for women is ~77% of the average wage of men, the difference is not likely a result of discrimination. I further elaborate that women are more likely to either temporarily or permanently drop out of the workforce. Also, women are more likely to work part-time and unsurprisingly, part-time employees overall make less than full-time employees. At this point, she's getting flustered. I continue to say that more women than men drop out of the labor force to take care of their kids, which is absolutely cool with me. I even put it out there that women without children tend to make a bit more than men without children (regardless of age). She's now heated and saying that it's not a woman's fault for leaving the workforce. I ask her, "So it's not a woman's choice to leave the workforce? Who forced her?" She yells that it's the children's fault for forcing mothers to quit their jobs. I'm pretty confused at this point, but she abruptly tells me that since this wage gap exists, women should be getting paid the difference by the government.
My homie is cracking up at this point (his fault for choosing to be with a self-proclaimed feminist and fan of Anita Sarkeesian), but I try to dig in a little deeper. I ask her, "If women are getting paid less, wouldn't companies hire women instead to work the same exact job, thereby increasing profit and minimizing costs?" She tells me she's offended I would even ask that and that discrimination is the only answer to this inequality. I send my homie a few links and articles that debunk this discrimination-based wage gap and he tells me she's not reading any of it. So much for being open-minded, huh?
Famb you were rustling oye girl.
-But she was wrong and you're wrong. She was right and you're right
The entire gap is not based on explainable factors (which economist generally gets labelled discrimination), but part of it is. It is well researched topic in Labor Economics, you could probably search on Google Scholar or NBER and find many papers on the gender pay gap. You gonna get real familiar with the oaxaca decomposition
I have read many articles showing that part of the wage gap is explainable, there is part of the gender wage gap that just can't be explain, at least by not any model out there right now.
That signals there is discrimination
-Secondly, you're "if women make less, why don't companies" just hired women is a nice troll job but I figure you're touching on this:
Women go cost women just much as men, and yes they choose to drop out the labor market (I'll touch on that). But during that time think about it, the company doesn't get any productivity from that worker, so in return he pays that women a lower wage to make up for it. Men don't drop out, so in turn they get a higher wage. I'm pretty sure this was what you were arguing to baby girl.
But
Women aren't just choosing to drop out the labor force on a whim. Taking care an child has large negative economic consequences, and currently America's social and economic is making women bare to many of those cost herself. Women should get paid maternity leave, so should men. Currently women have to stay home for weeks to months, yet men get looked at funny style for being out over a week. When you see both groups taking the same amount of time off after a baby, you will see the pay gap shrinking. Because their compensation structure will both change. Right now women generally have to drop out, while a man doesn't
Then
Now add to that the household division of labor is crazy unbalanced. Women put in way more time, and energy into raising a child and taking care of households (doing basic house work) than men do. This is time women aren't compensated for, time she could be in the labor market proving trading her time for more money, or investing in human capital that will lend to higher wages.
Then
Society (both men and older women) funnel our girls into lower paying careers, or act somewhat hostile to her entering a male dominated field. This **** starts from when like pre-algebra. Girls get told that being cute is just as important that being competent. So men and women might be in the same field, doing what is classified as the same job on a survey, but when you look closer the man's job is more specialized, and he can demand a higher wage
-So let's review. Women have pushed to make choices that will negatively affect them economically, men don't, and add to that women put in tons of work that goes uncompensated. Work that benefits other men, and society as a whole
It will take a combination of public policy, and men making different decision in the workplace, and them doing more work to take care and raise kids. Add women making different choices. But society is still on the hook for part of the problem It is all about trade offs. And someone the person saying it is all about discrimination, is missing the other half of the picture. So it the dude saying it discrimination doesn't pay a factor, or it is just women's choices that are lending to her lower pay.
I know you be getting wavy with liberation way of thinking and that people's choices explain everything. I dipped my toes into those waters at one point in life. But the most dangerous thing about that way of thinking is that it ignores the socio-economic systems driving outcomes we see in society
-And to be honest, you come off just as bad in your story as ole girl does.
the only time you bring up discrimination is on what can't be explained, which is a pretty weak argument seeing that you followed it up by doing a great job of providing a thorough explanation of all the non employer discrimination factors that lead to this statistic.
As mentioned, the topic of pay "inequality" always seems to get them in their emotions.
Example: I was having drinks with my homie and his girl a few weeks ago. We're discussing politics and joking about the self-destructing debacle of Hillary/Trump. His girl interjects about something she read online: women make 77 cents for every dollar men make. I ask her to explain; she literally just repeats that same line and says it's pure discrimination. I calmly explain to her that while the average wage for women is ~77% of the average wage of men, the difference is not likely a result of discrimination. I further elaborate that women are more likely to either temporarily or permanently drop out of the workforce. Also, women are more likely to work part-time and unsurprisingly, part-time employees overall make less than full-time employees. At this point, she's getting flustered. I continue to say that more women than men drop out of the labor force to take care of their kids, which is absolutely cool with me. I even put it out there that women without children tend to make a bit more than men without children (regardless of age). She's now heated and saying that it's not a woman's fault for leaving the workforce. I ask her, "So it's not a woman's choice to leave the workforce? Who forced her?" She yells that it's the children's fault for forcing mothers to quit their jobs. I'm pretty confused at this point, but she abruptly tells me that since this wage gap exists, women should be getting paid the difference by the government.
My homie is cracking up at this point (his fault for choosing to be with a self-proclaimed feminist and fan of Anita Sarkeesian), but I try to dig in a little deeper. I ask her, "If women are getting paid less, wouldn't companies hire women instead to work the same exact job, thereby increasing profit and minimizing costs?" She tells me she's offended I would even ask that and that discrimination is the only answer to this inequality. I send my homie a few links and articles that debunk this discrimination-based wage gap and he tells me she's not reading any of it. So much for being open-minded, huh?
Famb you were rustling oye girl.
-But she was wrong and you're wrong. She was right and you're right
The entire gap is not based on explainable factors (which economist generally gets labelled discrimination), but part of it is. It is well researched topic in Labor Economics, you could probably search on Google Scholar or NBER and find many papers on the gender pay gap. You gonna get real familiar with the oaxaca decomposition
I have read many articles showing that part of the wage gap is explainable, there is part of the gender wage gap that just can't be explain, at least by not any model out there right now.
That signals there is discrimination
-Secondly, you're "if women make less, why don't companies" just hired women is a nice troll job but I figure you're touching on this:
Women go cost women just much as men, and yes they choose to drop out the labor market (I'll touch on that). But during that time think about it, the company doesn't get any productivity from that worker, so in return he pays that women a lower wage to make up for it. Men don't drop out, so in turn they get a higher wage. I'm pretty sure this was what you were arguing to baby girl.
But
Women aren't just choosing to drop out the labor force on a whim. Taking care an child has large negative economic consequences, and currently America's social and economic is making women bare to many of those cost herself. Women should get paid maternity leave, so should men. Currently women have to stay home for weeks to months, yet men get looked at funny style for being out over a week. When you see both groups taking the same amount of time off after a baby, you will see the pay gap shrinking. Because their compensation structure will both change. Right now women generally have to drop out, while a man doesn't
Then
Now add to that the household division of labor is crazy unbalanced. Women put in way more time, and energy into raising a child and taking care of households (doing basic house work) than men do. This is time women aren't compensated for, time she could be in the labor market proving trading her time for more money, or investing in human capital that will lend to higher wages.
Then
Society (both men and older women) funnel our girls into lower paying careers, or act somewhat hostile to her entering a male dominated field. This **** starts from when like pre-algebra. Girls get told that being cute is just as important that being competent. So men and women might be in the same field, doing what is classified as the same job on a survey, but when you look closer the man's job is more specialized, and he can demand a higher wage
-So let's review. Women have pushed to make choices that will negatively affect them economically, men don't, and add to that women put in tons of work that goes uncompensated. Work that benefits other men, and society as a whole
It will take a combination of public policy, and men making different decision in the workplace, and them doing more work to take care and raise kids. Add women making different choices. But society is still on the hook for part of the problem It is all about trade offs. And someone the person saying it is all about discrimination, is missing the other half of the picture. So it the dude saying it discrimination doesn't pay a factor, or it is just women's choices that are lending to her lower pay.
I know you be getting wavy with liberation way of thinking and that people's choices explain everything. I dipped my toes into those waters at one point in life. But the most dangerous thing about that way of thinking is that it ignores the socio-economic systems driving outcomes we see in society
-And to be honest, you come off just as bad in your story as ole girl does.
Thanks for the insight, Rusty. Glad you don't resort to ad-hominem attacks, but instead offer up a cogent perspective.
I'd also like to offer up this for you and @Mark Antony
-- I recommend this podcast which further discusses the topic: http://freakonomics.com/podcast/the...der-pay-gap-a-new-freakonomics-radio-podcast/
