So now you're accepting that there is a gender pay gap? You just think it justified because men are more valuable to a company than women? — Michael
It apparently takes a tremendous amount of genius to read an accessibly written government report which addresses your concerns quantitatively and then makes the opposite conclusion from the one you're drawing. — fdrake
As a university student, it is the case that someone's constantly trying to convince me that there is an ongoing issue with discrimination against any and all minorities. — Coldlight
Just because there is difference in numbers doesn't mean it's a gap :-} — Coldlight
Coldlight, as a university student you are in a milieu of maximum exposure to the various ideological debates going on in society. Once you leave university and get a job in business, read the newspaper (or website) of your choice, associate mostly with people like yourself, you will hear less about all of this discrimination and pay equity stuff. — Bitter Crank
Over the last 50 years the reason for women being in the workforce has changed as well. — Bitter Crank
All that is water over the dam at this point, but the problem of inequality still exist, even if they aren't as extreme as they were in the past. — Bitter Crank
What, exactly, does it mean for there to be a "gap", then? — Michael
I doubt it. If all the nonsense with the "gap" vanishes, these reports will become just as worthless. So, no, I'm not going to be impressed by the amount of quantitative data anyone throws at me. Just because there is difference in numbers doesn't mean it's a gap :-} That's what I am addressing.
A gap would exist if:
I work in a factory making an x amount of components.
You make the same amount of components in the same time.
We get paid differently.
Why is inequality a problem? Was equality in the USSR any better, for example? — Coldlight
But they aren't.IF women are as productive as men in a given job, everything else being equal (like time on the job) then they should be rewarded in the same way that men are. — Bitter Crank
It exists for them as a reality so that they have something to complain about. It's easier than competing and trying to improve one's situation, no doubt. — Coldlight
It's not that they won't pay them, it's simply that they have a lot of learning to do, and they're not willing to pay people to learn. Most students at that age go in a company and they don't even know what's what - you need someone to babysit them, they are expensive, they don't really know how things go, etc. etc. It's more of a hassle than anything else - that's why small businesses, for the most part, don't accept students.Take as an example the fact that if a student wants to get some practice in a specific field before getting their degree, chances are, they will have to work a couple of months for free as no one will pay them for their work, and employers know they need to get experience. — Coldlight
A lot of it is politics it seems to me. Which is why I dislike working in that kind of environment.Things like job performance, getting promoted at work aren't as simply things people depict them to be. — ssu
I can confirm that this was definitely true - though I'm not sure how true it is nowadays.I have not idea what conditions in the USSR were with respect to pay rates, though soviet women were far more commonly employed in professional and technical fields than in the United States, at least. — Bitter Crank
People who don't have skin in the game don't behave rationally, that's true. So middle-level managers who have no stake in the company, etc. don't (always) behave rationally.What world are you living in! Since when does anyone behave entirely rationally, have you ever even picked up a psychology textbook? — Pseudonym
What percentage of crimes (punishable by jail) are committed by men?
Yeah of course, because the better the performance is on paper, the more they get paid. So if they can make the performance seem better, and if they can make the company seem like it is going in a great direction (even if it isn't), they stand to profit from it. It's not like they overestimate future earnings because they're idiots - no, they do it on purpose."Evidence indicates that CEOs tend to be optimistic, overconfident, risk averse, and self-interested. Optimistic and overconfident CEOs overestimate future earnings growth and underestimate the earnings' risk, thereby perceiving a larger cost for issuing equity than debt." — Pseudonym
That's not a bias, that's normal. I tend to work with what I know too, everyone does that. You have better performance that way."We find that CEOs are significantly more likely to purchase targets near their birth place, consistent with either informational advantages or familiarity bias." — Pseudonym
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.