The Gender Pay Gap

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

21 hours ago, kelownabomberfan said:

It was totally besmirching his reputation because he was slandering a fellow Canadian and big supporter of Canadian aboriginals based on blatantly false information.  It made him look extremely silly. And you would think a Canadian senator would want to avoid looking silly.

 

 

 

All the more reason he shouldn't be tweeting nonsense about an FA supporter being racist. Shame on him indeed.

Well, if this doesn't smack of racism for you then I don't know what to say. 

 

So you go and defend this tweet as not even a hint of racism- then you go ahead and admonish Senator Sinclair for  being offended by it. dafuq man? 

 

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

21 hours ago, kelownabomberfan said:

I think there definitely is some hate here, towards a certain gender, and this is what is allowing the tolerance of actual discrimination to combat fake discrimination.  Instead of misogyny,  we have blatant misandry. And that just is wrong.

There is no way there is any "misandry" here in this thread- 

"Attempts to make misandry the equivalent of misogyny rely on two misconceptions: first, that gender is a spectrum as opposed to a hierarchy; and second, that victimhood is in fact a source of power and privilege."

here is an interesting article- I figure you will not even bother giving it a read, but it's there anyways. 

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/misandry-men-hate-crime-women-sexism-racism-feminism-a8586591.html

[kelownabomberfan]

22 hours ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

Kelly Anne Conway now? 

No - I was talking about Jim Jeffries.

22 hours ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

 

Why are you quoting a serial liar now?

I was quoting Bill Clinton?  My bad.

22 hours ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

 

Anyways I don't see anything that is.... "fake news" or "alternative facts" please let me know What to look out for. I am not too familiar with Jordan's schitck.  

looking back on that interview, what really cheesed me off was Jeffries' use of "jump cuts" to show a bunch of comments by JP that were completely out of context.  I get it, it's a comedy show, so you go for the laughs.  I did watch the whole thing through, and I was glad that he also made that lunatic protestor look bad too, so at least there was some sort of fairness.

22 hours ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

 

I thoughtful was a pretty funny segment. C'mon - you didn't find the airhorn in the protest students face funny? That was comedic gold.

Yes, that was good.

22 hours ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

 

And I totally respect Jordan more, after that clip where he admits that he was wrong about the gay wedding cake. It was refreshing to watch some state an opinion... listen to what someone else has to say... and is open minded to change their stance on something.

Yes.  It would have been nice to see the protestor do the same thing.  

[kelownabomberfan]

3 hours ago, Mark H. said:

Okay, the lady in the video makes the following key points, which I will summarize:

1. Companies employ more men in higher positions

2. If women want to be paid more, they need to apply for those higher positions

3. Yes, women are discriminated against in the workplace

4. We need to teach young women to have to the confidence to apply for higher paying jobs

5. Women are being discriminated against only because they allowed themselves to be

6. None of the above have anything to do with gender

This leads me to several pointed questions:

1. How can anything possibly be that simple? 

2. If women are allowing themselves to be discriminated against - how is she so sure it has nothing to do with their gender?   

3. How does she know that women aren't applying for those higher positions?  

 

She also made some other points.  One major one being - it's illegal to pay women less than a man.  And so there is no gender pay gap.  That's her point.  And yes, it really is that simple.

[kelownabomberfan]

3 hours ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

Well, if this doesn't smack of racism for you then I don't know what to say. 

what you could say is that you are looking at something out of context, and because you have been told that JP is a bad man, you have just chosen to go ahead and accept that he must be some sort of racist.  And that's just sad.

3 hours ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

 

So you go and defend this tweet as not even a hint of racism- then you go ahead and admonish Senator Sinclair for  being offended by it. dafuq man? 

 

I admonished "Senator" Sinclair because he is a Canadian politician, who is supposed to be representing all Canadians.  He certainly is being paid by all Canadians to be a senator.  This position comes with some responsibility, including understanding what he is saying and doing in the public eye.  In this case, he was made to look foolish by the alt-left, and he didn't accept the responsibility he should have by fully understanding what he was doing.  In this case, he was engaging in and enabling the slander of a fellow Canadian, one who has close relations with the Canadian FA community.  It makes no sense.  What was he trying to do?  He isn't running for office.  He is appointed for life.  So why virtue signal like this, and get it so wrong?  Why stake your reputation on something that makes you look like an idiot?  It was poor judgement from someone who should be better than this.  Stay out of the alt-left hate Senator Sinclair.  It's already pretty full.

[kelownabomberfan]

2 hours ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

There is no way there is any "misandry" here in this thread- 

That's not what I said.  I said that discriminating against a person because of their gender is wrong.  And I said that misandry plays a role in that.  And I don't see how it can't.  How else do you deliberately tell someone that they can't get a scholarship and can't work for the RCMP, just because of their genitalia? There has to be something morally wrong with that stance, because all discrimination is morally wrong.

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

52 minutes ago, kelownabomberfan said:

what you could say is that you are looking at something out of context, and because you have been told that JP is a bad man, you have just chosen to go ahead and accept that he must be some sort of racist.  And that's just sad.

Anyways- I walked back the JP being a racist- he's not. But that tweet of his- totally racist. He's not dumb, so wasn't an accident. So if not racist- then race-baiting? which is worse? Sorry- I don't buy the "out of context" argument - that is a cheap out. But sure- continue to defend that tweet as not being racist, have fun with that. 

 

52 minutes ago, kelownabomberfan said:

I admonished "Senator" Sinclair because he is a Canadian politician, who is supposed to be representing all Canadians.  He certainly is being paid by all Canadians to be a senator.  This position comes with some responsibility, including understanding what he is saying and doing in the public eye.  In this case, he was made to look foolish by the alt-left, and he didn't accept the responsibility he should have by fully understanding what he was doing.  In this case, he was engaging in and enabling the slander of a fellow Canadian, one who has close relations with the Canadian FA community.  It makes no sense.  What was he trying to do?  He isn't running for office.  He is appointed for life.  So why virtue signal like this, and get it so wrong?  Why stake your reputation on something that makes you look like an idiot?  It was poor judgement from someone who should be better than this.  Stay out of the alt-left hate Senator Sinclair.  It's already pretty full.

First off. there is no "Alt-left" it is just a childish made up moniker made up by Trump to justify the white supremacists in Charlottesville- so go ahead, keep using that too. 

https://www.wired.com/story/what-is-alt-left/

https://www.cnn.com/2017/08/16/politics/what-is-alt-left/index.html

It's a "made-up term" used by people on the right to "suggest there is a similar movement on the left," Segal said.

But there's no equivalent with the anti-Semitic and bigoted groups that call themselves "alt-right", he said.

 

So...Sinclair takes umbrage with the tweet and is offended by it , because it is OBVIOUSLY racist and he is virtue signaling? Yeah we can disagree with that one- you can continue defending the racist tweet all you want and call out Senator Sinclair for being offended by that, that is your prerogative. 

[Mark H.]

12 hours ago, kelownabomberfan said:

She also made some other points.  One major one being - it's illegal to pay women less than a man.  And so there is no gender pay gap.  That's her point.  And yes, it really is that simple.

That’s like saying no one shoots elephants because selling ivory is illegal. 

There’s not enough information or context in that interview. Basically, she’s saying women are being discriminated against but they are not underpaid. 

If it’s as simple as there is no gender pay gap because it’s illlegal - then no one needs to read whatever she wrote in her book. 

[Logan007]

On 2019-02-09 at 3:56 PM, wanna-b-fanboy said:

Well, if this doesn't smack of racism for you then I don't know what to say. 

 

So you go and defend this tweet as not even a hint of racism- then you go ahead and admonish Senator Sinclair for  being offended by it. dafuq man? 

 

This is the tweet he was explaining about before Re: the Indian comment.  The post that I made.

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

29 minutes ago, Logan007 said:

This is the tweet he was explaining about before Re: the Indian comment.  The post that I made.

yes. yes it is. It is textbook racism. 

 

This is derailing the gender pay gap discussion- maybe we should trim this issue off to a new thread?

 

Edited February 11, 2019 by wanna-b-fanboy

[Logan007]

33 minutes ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

yes. yes it is. It is textbook racism. 

 

This is derailing the gender pay gap discussion- maybe we should trim this issue off to a new thread?

 

You're insane.  I'm done.

[Mark H.]

1 hour ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

This is derailing the gender pay gap discussion- maybe we should trim this issue off to a new thread?

No.

I realize I have been part of this as well - but I think we need to cool our heels for a while. 

LOCKED FOR 48 HOURS.

[Eternal optimist]

Of course there is a gender pay gap - the difficulty lies not in establishing and acknowledging its' existence... but in implementing proper economic policy to help close the gap.

[kelownabomberfan]

8 minutes ago, Eternal optimist said:

Of course there is a gender pay gap - the difficulty lies not in establishing and acknowledging its' existence... but in implementing proper economic policy to help close the gap.

Why do you believe that it exists? Have you seen it?

[Eternal optimist]

32 minutes ago, kelownabomberfan said:

Why do you believe that it exists? Have you seen it?

Average earnings by gender, per Statistics Canada:

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1110014301

[Brandon]

35 minutes ago, Eternal optimist said:

Average earnings by gender, per Statistics Canada:

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1110014301

That's an average of everyones salaries put together.   That doesn't equate a pay gap between genders.    

The only way that would ever equal out with everyone making the same amount of money with no difference between jobs or genders would be if we were communist.   

What you want to post is the average salary between genders doing the exact same job with the exact same qualifications at the exact same company with the exact same amount of experience.  

Jeeze if people were so easily duped by looking at that link then no wonder why so many people are sheep and will believe anything told to them. 

[Brandon]

1 hour ago, Eternal optimist said:

Of course there is a gender pay gap - the difficulty lies not in establishing and acknowledging its' existence... but in implementing proper economic policy to help close the gap.

We will use dentists for an example.    It's predominately a male dominated field.     Dental hygienists are predominately female.    

You would propose that in order to equal out the numbers that the dentists should be making an equal salary to the hygienists? 

Lets do some basic math.   

Average dentist makes about 180 000

Average hygienist is about 50 000

In order to balance the numbers based on your link the dentist would need to take a pay cut and the hygienist would take a massive raise where both make 115 000 to equal everything out? 

 

Alternatively the only other way to make gender pay equal on that link you posted would be to force Canada to employ at each job an exact split of 50/50 with both genders.  

I don't see why people can't understand why the numbers favor the male side because most men pursue careers that pay better while most women pursue lower paying jobs and also factor in that most will go on maternity leave if they have children and/or will stay at home.  

 

 

[Eternal optimist]

5 hours ago, Brandon said:

I don't see why people can't understand why the numbers favor the male side because most men pursue careers that pay better while most women pursue lower paying jobs and also factor in that most will go on maternity leave if they have children and/or will stay at home. 

Alright then, lets' remove even more factors. The NHS tables provide the wages by work category and can be split by gender:

https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs-enm/2011/dp-pd/dt-td/Rp-eng.cfm?TABID=2&LANG=E&APATH=3&DETAIL=0&DIM=0&FL=A&FREE=0&GC=0&GK=0&GRP=0&PID=106738&PRID=0&PTYPE=105277&S=0&SHOWALL=0&SUB=0&Temporal=2013&THEME=98&VID=0&VNAMEE=&VNAMEF=

Using your example, if you look at dentists, the average male dentist, working full-time, not on maternity leave, earned $133,062 back in 2011. The average female dentist, also working full-time, not on maternity leave, earned $81,962. Note that dental hygienists have their own cohort, which even there males earn higher wages ($67,885 vs $55,816).

 

[kelownabomberfan]

6 hours ago, Eternal optimist said:

Alright then, lets' remove even more factors. The NHS tables provide the wages by work category and can be split by gender:

https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs-enm/2011/dp-pd/dt-td/Rp-eng.cfm?TABID=2&LANG=E&APATH=3&DETAIL=0&DIM=0&FL=A&FREE=0&GC=0&GK=0&GRP=0&PID=106738&PRID=0&PTYPE=105277&S=0&SHOWALL=0&SUB=0&Temporal=2013&THEME=98&VID=0&VNAMEE=&VNAMEF=

Using your example, if you look at dentists, the average male dentist, working full-time, not on maternity leave, earned $133,062 back in 2011. The average female dentist, also working full-time, not on maternity leave, earned $81,962. Note that dental hygienists have their own cohort, which even there males earn higher wages ($67,885 vs $55,816).

 

Thanks for posting that.  I am curious though to understand how this demonstrates a "pay gap" - Dentists usually incorporate and then put up their shingle.  Are you suggesting that customers that come in to have their teeth pulled/cleaned/worked on are deliberately paying female dentists less than male dentists?  Or are male dentists just charging more for the same work?  In the first example, that would be blatant sexism. And I don't understand why a female dentist would put up with it.  In the second example that's something that could be fixed by female dentists doing more research into what the market will bear and start charging more.

I've had both female and male dentists over the past 25 years.  They were all good.  And I know my benefit plans didn't ask me to tick a box "Is your dentist male or female"?  They didn't care.   I paid the same amount no matter what my dentists' genitalia was.  

My point, this is useful data, that bears pondering, but I don't buy that female dentists are being deliberately discriminated against.  It could be as simple as them not wanting to take on as many patients.  

[Eternal optimist]

4 hours ago, kelownabomberfan said:

Thanks for posting that.  I am curious though to understand how this demonstrates a "pay gap"
Male dentists on average earn more than female dentists with the same credentials. Alot more - to the tune of about $50,000 on average a year - which is the gap. An average is when you take all the numbers in a subset, add them together, then divide it by the total numbers in the subset.

- Dentists usually incorporate and then put up their shingle.
Both male and female dentists can elect to incorporate and would declare wages as needed to take funds out of their corporation accordingly. Neither gender has an inherent advantage/disadvantage over the other in doing this - you're just stating how corporations work. I don't see how this is relevant.

 Are you suggesting that customers that come in to have their teeth pulled/cleaned/worked on are deliberately paying female dentists less than male dentists?  Or are male dentists just charging more for the same work?  In the first example, that would be blatant sexism. And I don't understand why a female dentist would put up with it.  In the second example that's something that could be fixed by female dentists doing more research into what the market will bear and start charging more.
I'm not suggesting either example - I only used dentists as an example because the previous poster had used them to facilitate his argument.
Not all dentists are self-employed, some could be part of an employer/employee work relationship. I'm suggesting that based on the data provided, that the discrepancy in the given profession (dentistry) is large enough that a wage gap exists between males and females.

I've had both female and male dentists over the past 25 years.  They were all good.  And I know my benefit plans didn't ask me to tick a box "Is your dentist male or female"?  They didn't care.   I paid the same amount no matter what my dentists' genitalia was.  
Again I don't see how this is relevant, you're confusing a gender rights argument with the wage gap which are two different things.

My point, this is useful data, that bears pondering, but I don't buy that female dentists are being deliberately discriminated against.  It could be as simple as them not wanting to take on as many patients.
Okay, well my point is I've provided data showing an on average ~$50,000 per year difference in wages between males and females of the same profession. The data is from an independent, reliable third party (Statistics Canada). The difference can't be attributable to maternity leave, as the subset only includes individuals that worked 49-52 hours (30+ hours per week) per footnote 3 of the NHS tables.

 

[Mark H.]

Quite a discrepancy in pay across the country - seems the highest paid dentists are in Saskatchewan

https://www.livingin-canada.com/salaries-for-dentists.html

Feel free to draw your own metaphorical conclusions...

 

 

[kelownabomberfan]

2 hours ago, Eternal optimist said:

Okay, well my point is I've provided data showing an on average ~$50,000 per year difference in wages between males and females of the same profession. The data is from an independent, reliable third party (Statistics Canada). The difference can't be attributable to maternity leave, as the subset only includes individuals that worked 49-52 hours (30+ hours per week) per footnote 3 of the NHS tables.

And I still don't get how this is evidence of a "gender pay gap". There are obviously other factors in play here.  As I said I have never personally seen female dentists be paid less than male dentists, so this "independent reliable third party" you state is not telling the entire story.

[kelownabomberfan]

1 hour ago, Mark H. said:

Quite a discrepancy in pay across the country - seems the highest paid dentists are in Saskatchewan

https://www.livingin-canada.com/salaries-for-dentists.html

Feel free to draw your own metaphorical conclusions...

 

 

what's funny is that the highest paid dentists are in the province with the lowest amount of teeth. 

[Brandon]

OMG you guys are such nerds....  I  used dentists as an example because they make twice as much as hygienists and they are a male dominated field.  I  said this to show that you can't take an average of everyones salaries because some people (men) tend to pursue higher paying jobs then females.  

Dentists themselves charge whatever the F they want.  It's not like men charge more to clients because they are men...  every dentist charges whatever they bloody well want to.   It's not a set fixed rate.   Jesus Christ the naysayers are realllllllly stretching to try to make their point.   

 

How about you look up the salaries of people working as a cashier at Wal-Mart,  I'm pretty sure both men and women both make a small pitiful salary that is the same between both genders.  

[Eternal optimist]

23 minutes ago, Brandon said:

I  said this to show that you can't take an average of everyones salaries because some people (men) tend to pursue higher paying jobs then females. 
If it's the jobs/profession that provides the higher wage rate, then why would women's average (for the SAME PROFESSION) be so much lower?

Dentists themselves charge whatever the F they want.  It's not like men charge more to clients because they are men...  every dentist charges whatever they bloody well want to.   It's not a set fixed rate.   Jesus Christ the naysayers are realllllllly stretching to try to make their point.
No see, that's my point, dentists (or whomever) will charge what the market will bear. Logically, if both genders are charging the same or similar rates (market rate), and both cohorts are working full-time, we would expect average wages segregated by gender to be about the same, or at the very least, not significantly different.

How about you look up the salaries of people working as a cashier at Wal-Mart,  I'm pretty sure both men and women both make a small pitiful salary that is the same between both genders. 
Done, I'm not sure about Wal-Mart cashiers specifically, but there is a cashier cohort in the NHS tables:
Female cashiers working full-time - $22,344
Male cashiers working full-time - $26,396
Although this doesn't seem like much in terms of $ value; it amount to a 15% discrepancy in average pay.

 

Edited February 22, 2019 by Eternal optimist