[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;46002117]But if a man has a kid he has no issues, if a woman has a kid she has to take time off.
That choice between business and family is a much bigger one with worse consequences for a woman.[/QUOTE]
One has a baby inside of them, the other doesn't. It shouldn't be a surprise that having children would have a bigger impact on women than men.
I like to think that if the perceived 'wage gap' were as intentional of a thing as it's touted to be, companies would have the economic sense to start employing [B]only women[/B], since they'd save quite a lot of money on staff pay!
[QUOTE=PsiSoldier;46002856]I like to think that if the perceived 'wage gap' were as intentional of a thing as it's touted to be, companies would have the economic sense to start employing [B]only women[/B], since they'd save quite a lot of money on staff pay![/QUOTE]
That would be a significantly more obvious form of discrimination that would get stamped out real quick. They used to do that same shit with children and we see how that turned out.
[QUOTE=BrainDeath;46002078]imagine voting against this lmao[/QUOTE]
Imagine being educated on the situation.
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;46002117]But if a man has a kid he has no issues, if a woman has a kid she has to take time off.
That choice between business and family is a much bigger one with worse consequences for a woman.[/QUOTE]
Such is life, unless you can find a way around pregnancy... :P
[QUOTE=MegaJohnny;46002136]Ok, fair enough. But doesn't that expose an inequality in job position or hours allocated? If women are consistently in lower positions than men, [B]and we don't know exactly why[/B], the investigation shouldn't stop there just because the adjusted pay gap isn't as big.[/QUOTE]
Well, we do know exactly why.
When (on average) you spend less time working over your lifespan, you accrue less seniority.
[QUOTE=sgman91;46001084]The point being that a gap that small shouldn't be assumed to be a result of discrimination when there are other factors involved, namely: the possibility of pregnancy, women are generally less forceful when asking for promotions ([URL]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20085399[/URL]), etc.
You can't just assume discrimination when the gap mirrors the gap between many other groups. Once we understand the problem I'm not against doing something, but at this moment in time we simply don't.[/QUOTE]
See, you listed two reasons why there is still a gap between the two and it has nothing to do with discrimination in the work place.
If you don't ask for a raise, you don't get even considered for a raise. And the possibility of pregnancy is a very real risk with investing in a worker. This isn't actually some evil plot to keep women down.
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;46002117]But if a man has a kid he has no issues, if a woman has a kid she has to take time off.
That choice between business and family is a much bigger one with worse consequences for a woman.[/QUOTE]
women have it hard? What about men, men have it hard! Like passing a human head through your vagina? PLEASE, my head is [i]consistently[/i] up my own ass
[QUOTE=catbarf;46002397]Furthermore, it was proposed earlier this year and failed then too. Democrats are bringing up legislation with extremely leading names instead of important, pressing issues, to score points for advertising ('This guy voted against a paycheck fairness act!') when re-election season starts in the fall. It's underhanded and it's unacceptable.[/QUOTE]
this is a problem with both parties, really
[QUOTE=BrainDeath;46002078]are americans even real
imagine voting against this lmao[/QUOTE]
Not really, forcing employers to pay ridiculous amounts of money for people who flip burgers isn't all that dumb.
[QUOTE=Dalndox;46002656]It's almost like that bill the Republicans tried to repeal about 40 or so times, after it had become law.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;46003894]this is a problem with both parties, really[/QUOTE]
Never suggested it's acceptable when Republicans do it, or that it's only the Democrats that do this. But at the same time, it's especially hypocritical for people who complained about the Republicans doing PR stunts instead of real work last year to now be supporting Democrats and again blaming Republicans when the same thing happens now from the other side.
The OP says that the Republican party is digging their own grave with stuff like this, but honestly, given the choice I would side with them in this specific instance, just as I sided with the Democrats last year. This is not good legislation and it's not right to use it as a PR bid.
[QUOTE=catbarf;46003980]This is not good legislation and it's not right to use it as a PR bid.[/QUOTE]
honestly any partisanship shown in this thread was the exact intent of the name, as it is with many bills. Get knee-jerk reactions from the public to rally support over something more complex, turn people into the bad guys over one situation when really it's ten other things. Making a fuckton of personal agendas ride the coattail of a big name or wholly unrelated bills has been the name of the game for a long time now
but still badmouthing dems over repeating themselves a few times in light of recent events was either a lethal level of ironic hypocricy or hilariously naive
Gaps in stuff like this are more often than not gender discriminatory, no matter how you spin this or how small the gap is. People will do anything to help their superiority complex
It's easy to say a 4 percent or 7 percent difference in salary is marginal when you're not the one being affected by it and it's easy to say its just the government going after businesses when, again, you're not the one getting the short end of the stick. I guarantee that if the world was somehow reversed and FP's main audience was the minority in these situations, there'd be hell to pay. But since we white men are systematically improved, it's real easy to just sit on the sideline and say that none of this is really important since it doesn't affect you.
Here's the source of my previous statement.
[url]http://www.consad.com/content/reports/Gender%20Wage%20Gap%20Final%20Report.pdf[/url]
I've been having a hard time wording stuff recently. What I've been trying to say is that the problem isn't as big of a deal as people make it seem in comparison to the raw wage gap data. I mean, it's still a problem that there is any at all, but not as big as most people think it is.
[QUOTE=Nukefuzz;46007734]Here's the source of my previous statement.
[url]http://www.consad.com/content/reports/Gender%20Wage%20Gap%20Final%20Report.pdf[/url]
I've been having a hard time wording stuff recently. What I've been trying to say is that the problem isn't as big of a deal as people make it seem in comparison to the raw wage gap data. I mean, it's still a problem that there is any at all, but not as big as most people think it is.[/QUOTE]
It's a problem that people who put in more hours get paid more ? What the fuck.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.