gender pay gap disproved about 30+ years ago

Precisely!

Yep. But fact remains that the woman who majors in gender studies will still earn as much as her gay (male) friend who majored in gender studies too. If apples are compared to apples differences are non-existent/really small.

And as you, I and many others in here have pointed out, the fact that men on average earn more money makes complete sense and is not a result of "misogyny" but of the rules of the free market. But of course Feminism is a Communistic ideology and they do not like the free market so it is not surprising at all they think it is "evil bourgeois misogyny" that the male doctor earns more than the female waitress.

+1

As a "baby eating, sexist Fascist" (as Feminist tend to call me ) I believe competence beats genitalia. I believe every employer is competent enough to pick the employee they find the most competent and suitable for the position in question. Quotas are not only stupid but also dangerous and would only- in the long run- result in poor production and sh-t quality of products.

Feminism is Marxistoid and will always blame what they consider to be the "ruling class". Finding faults in themsleves if of course completely unthinkable for the Reds.

 

Since I have NEVER stated that it is due to discrimination your first comment means nothing, I have consistently stated that it could be because of discrimination.

I feely admit that my knowledge of multivariate regression analysis is limited, as far as I am aware it is a statistical tool that allows you to examine how multiple independent variables are related to a dependent variable. Once it is identified how these multiple variables relate to the dependent variable, you can take information about all of the independent variables and use it to make much more powerful and accurate predictions about why things are the way they are. From what I can understand even using this tool the study shows only a 95% prediction rate as to why their is a wage gap .. that still leaves 5% unaccounted for.

 

Evasion on your part .. provide your data that the 5% is because of personal choice and not asking for a raise, 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.

 

No idea of you are a "baby eating, sexist Fascist" or not .. lol, but for the most I agree with you, the only point I want to make is that if an employer employs a person of either gender and they are as competent as their opposite gender colleague then they should be paid the same .. simple really.

I don't agree with Quotas at all.

 

Show me how you got 5%

 

did you not read the study I linked to in post #6 or read the portion I quoted from that report?

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]

http://commons.wikimannia.org/File:Gender_Wage_Gap_Final_Report_2009.pdf

 

nowhere in your wikipedia report do they talk about women not asking for raises like men do. factor in how women tend to not ask for more money and the wage gap goes poof. better luck next time
from your link

"A greater percentage of women than men tend to work part-time. Part-time work tends to
pay less than full-time work.
A greater percentage of women than men tend to leave the labor force for child birth, child
care and elder care. Some of the wage gap is explained by the percentage of women who
were not in the labor force during previous years, the age of women, and the number of
children in the home.
1
2
Women, especially working mothers, tend to value “family friendly” workplace policies
more than men. Some of the wage gap is explained by industry and occupation, particularly,
the percentage of women who work in the industry and occupation. "

 

Your assertion is, of course a POSSIBLE reason, it has no more or less value than my assertion that it is POSSIBLY down to discrimination. You cannot provide anything that provides evidence that your assertion is correct .. you just assume that it is.

 

if its discrimination then people would be getting sued and they aren't. case closed.

 

Are you really that naive to believe that?

 

i've been asking you for proof for about a week now and you've come up with nothing. i'm the type to believe something when i see proof instead of just assuming. i know for a fact that women dont ask for raises as often as men do and until i see proof that its discrimination i'm not just going to assume that the 5% gap is due to illegal behavior because that would be naive.

 

Great if you know it as a "fact" you should have no trouble producing the evidence and data to support it .. please do so.

I've also been asking you for this proof for about a week as well, if you want to convince me that it is the reason for that 5% then put up or shut up.

You are the one who has made the absolute statement that it is due to not asking for a raise etc, I have made no such statement about it being due to discrimination .. so are you all mouth and no trousers, if not let us all see your proof.

 

you made the claim, you supply the data. you're here in this thread telling me there is a 5% pay gap that is due to discrimination and you still 5 days later haven't proved it. you're just wasting my time at this point.

 

As long as there's a pay gap that we can't whittle away by explanations like career choice, it seems difficult to rule out sexism as a component of that. I mean, come on, we all know we see women and men differently. Is it really so hard to believe that this has an impact on pay?

 

Post the comment please .. because I am calling BS on your statement. I have NEVER stated as a fact that the 5% unaccounted for discrepancy is down to discrimination, where as you have categorically stated it is due to not asking for a raise etc you are the one making the statement of (supposed) fact not me.

I fully understand you need to evade and squirm because you cannot provide a shred of evidence to your assertion though all you are really doing is degrading your creditability.

Here are your comments where you state as a fact that women do not ask for raises

So as I expected you are all mouth and no trousers .. add full of BS to that as well.

I have no need to provide anything because I have not made a claim that the 5% is due to discrimination, you on the other hand has consistently claimed it is due to women not asking for raises . .so yet again, provide your proof of this so called fact, or will you yet again squirm and evade.

 

Exactly my point, there is no way to tell (as yet) what the factor is that causes a 5% difference when ALL known items are taken into consideration, yet there is a poster here who claims that they know for a fact that it is because women do not ask for raises, a fact, apparently missed by the most comprehensive report on gender wage discrepancy .. perhaps the poster should inform the report authors that he has found the missing factor that they couldn't find

 

right here you said "all things taken into consideration" all things would include women not asking for more money.
here it is explained on the wall street journal
here it is on npr

- - - Updated - - -

your pathetic argument is an utter failure. if women get payed less there would be lawsuits until it stopped. where are the lawsuits? they dont exist LOL

 

here we even have the ultra liberal huffing paint post saying the remaining gap is due to women's poor negotiating skills

 

oh dear, talk about trying to weasel your way out of something, you stated "you made the claim", so yet again where did I make the claim, you also stated as a fact the following " i know for a fact that women dont ask for raises as often as men do" so please provide the data etc for that fact, your little article is not proof, it is stereotyping..

 

I see as well as evading you have a reading comprehension problem as well.

From your source - "The AAUW notes that part of the new 6.6-cent wage-gap may be owed to women's supposedly inferior negotiating skills ", perhaps you would do well to look up the definition of those two words.

 

i'm making the claim that its not discrimination and 100% legal proof being no lawsuits.

 

So prove it, and as to lawsuits, do you live in a bubble? -

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ledbetter_v._Goodyear_Tire_&_Rubber_Co.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schultz_v._Wheaton_Glass_Co.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wal-Mart_Stores,_Inc._v._Dukes

Just those three render your comment of "no lawsuits" irrelevant and wrong.

 

Woman my age make 20% more than I do....

This pay gap (*)(*)(*)(*) is bull(*)(*)(*)(*)...

 

a handfull of cases, (one 45 years old, another ruled in favor of the employer) dont prove a your wage gap myth isnt a myth. sorry

 

So now you are moving the goalposts, your comment was "i'm making the claim that its not discrimination and 100% legal proof being no lawsuits.", I've supplied you three cases that are lawsuits based on gender discrimination affecting wages, ergo your statement is BS.

The number of cases is irrelevant, even one case proves you assertion of "100% legal proof being no lawsuits" wrong.

Now you can accept your assertion is wrong or continue to evade and move the goalposts.

The first helps your creditability the second diminishes it more.