The Gender Pay Gap

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

27 minutes ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

I think this makes sense to people who don't dismiss anything that doesn't fit their narrative or people who's rational thought is not hijack by their personal confirmation bias.

 

24 minutes ago, kelownabomberfan said:

Exactly.

 

My Goodness KFB- I had no clue you were that self-aware, good on you.

Now just go through and check out EO's posts as they are chalk full of facts and examples. If you are as self-aware about your confirmation bias and are as open minded as you claim to be, EO's facts and examples may convince you. He makes some solid points. .

Edited February 22, 2019 by wanna-b-fanboy

[Brandon]

wanna-b-fanboy and EO...   I would love to be a salesman in your presence...  I'd be able to retire early based on how easy it is to sell to you lol. 

 

[Eternal optimist]

43 minutes ago, Brandon said:

wanna-b-fanboy and EO...   I would love to be a salesman in your presence...  I'd be able to retire early based on how easy it is to sell to you lol.

Ah, but using your logic, provided I don't believe in retirement, it doesn't exist and thus you'd never be able to retire.

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

39 minutes ago, Brandon said:

wanna-b-fanboy and EO...   I would love to be a salesman in your presence...  I'd be able to retire early based on how easy it is to sell to you lol. 

 

I don't think you'd make too much off of me. I would tell you what i need, give you facts as to why i would need it and grow dismayed that you don't take the facts and reasons why I need this and then move on to the next salesperson who takes facts into consideration.

[Brandon]

My conscious would feel guilty for taking advantage      It would be on par to those older folks who get conned into giving money to strangers over the phone because they actually believe the CRA is after them and/or that I'm a long lost relative that needs to borrow money.    

All I'm saying is...  sometimes you need to keep an open mind.   Don't believe everything that you read.  

If you do work for a company that is exploiting females then go to the press immediately and expose them.   

[kelownabomberfan]

3 hours ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

 

 

My Goodness KFB- I had no clue you were that self-aware, good on you.

I'm aware that people base their decisions on their confirmation biases.  And that's why certain people believe in a gender wage gap that doesn't exist.

3 hours ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

Now just go through and check out EO's posts as they are chalk full of facts and examples. 

Chalk full? There was a talk about some dentists, and an old lawsuit against Walmart.  And I've provided columns and examples too, which due to confirmation biases, have just been ignored by those that want to keep the victimhood complex alive and well.

Quote

 

Tuesday is supposedly “Equal Pay Day,” but what does that mean?

Well, according to outdated, flawed, and incomplete statistics that say women make only 82 cents on the dollar, compared with men, Equal Pay Day signifies how long into the new year women have to work just to catch up to the earnings of their male counterparts from the previous year.

Equal-pay activists have declared April 10 as the approximate Equal Pay Day for 2018, but based on the 82-cent figure, the date should have been March 21.

Regardless of the actual “celebrated” date, if women actually had to work that much longer than men to make the same amount of money, women might as well pack their briefcases and go home. After all, who would really work an extra three months to earn the same pay for the same job as their male counterparts?

That level of pervasive pay gap simply doesn’t exist.

Statistics matter, and they can help households, businesses, and governments make informed decisions. But statistics—particularly selective and incomplete ones—can also be misleading, and even detrimental.

The pay gap is the perfect example of statistics gone awry.

For starters, the data cited in the gender pay gap looks only at the median earnings of full-time wage and salaried workers. It doesn’t differentiate really important factors, such as education, occupation, experience, and hours, which account for nearly all of the differential in earnings between men and women.

It turns out that accounting for all these factors eliminates all but an estimated 3 to 5 cents of the gender pay gap.

Data is also subject to human error. Comparisons between survey data and administrative records reveal substantially underreporting of income within some of the most widely used survey data.

Consequently, the data disregards substantial changes, such as large gains in women’s retirement incomes.

And finally, data isn’t the supreme indicator, because not everything comes with a price tag or pay stub. What is the value of a flexible work schedule; a job with huge upward-mobility potential; particular benefits packages; the ability to tap into flexible, sharing-economy labor platforms, such as Uber and Airbnb; or to access new business platforms, such as Etsy for additional income?

Workers who seek these job characteristics often do so despite lower pay. But those intentional choices don’t show up in the statistics.

If a woman has the exact same job title as a man, but works 30 hours a week instead of 40, and sets her own hours and telecommutes, her paycheck likely won’t match that of the man’s—nor should it.

One of the job qualities that women—particularly mothers—value most is flexibility. Flexibility is a difficult job feature to measure, but that’s exactly what a group of economists recently did using data from the Uber ride-hailing company.

After analyzing data from more than 1 million registered Uber drivers, the authors tagged the average value of being able to set one’s own work schedule on an hour-by-hour and minute-by-minute basis at $150 per week. That’s the equivalent of $7,800 per year, or almost 20 percent of the median earnings of women in the U.S.

In essence, this is the value of choice. It’s not the same value for everyone, but it shows that many workers are willing to sacrifice a lot in terms of pay for more flexibility and choice.

On the opposite side, some employers are willing to pay a high price for flexibility from their employees—to log long hours and to work day or night.

Economist Claudia Goldin has found evidence of “part-time penalties” in certain very high-income fields. This happens when certain companies—those in finance and law, for example—pay employees who work 80 hours a week more than twice as much as they pay those who work 40 hours per week.

This likely has to do with certain employers’ need for employees to respond at all hours or to log double or triple time when needed, coupled with employees’ demand for higher pay when sacrificing so much of their own time and flexibility.

Anecdotal evidence and the choices women and men make suggest that women value job choices more than men and that their preference for greater flexibility accounts for some—if not all—of the remaining pay gap between men and women.

But choice is what legislation such as the Paycheck Fairness Act would squelch. Equal pay for equal work is already the law of the land. Imposing further-reaching policies in an attempt to eliminate pay differences that have little or nothing to do with discrimination could actually backfire.

Pay regimes based on factors such as job titles or “equivalent work” would take away businesses’ freedom to determine the value of their work and undo decades of women’s progress by imposing one-size-fits-all jobs that take away women’s—and all workers’—freedom to negotiate pay in exchange for personal priorities.

 

 

[kelownabomberfan]

1 hour ago, Eternal optimist said:

Ah, but using your logic, provided I don't believe in retirement, it doesn't exist and thus you'd never be able to retire.

and by your logic, he would retire wealthy because he would only use female dentists and save a giant bundle of cash.  Geesh...so ridiculous.

Edited February 22, 2019 by kelownabomberfan

[Mark H.]

I feel like this could be a good thread.  I'm at a loss as to why relevant information can just be dismissed

I feel like people can learn something from this thread - if they read most of what is posted with an open mind

I'm going to lock it and leave it locked - there is no place left for this discussion to go