Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: A Dangerous Faggot


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: A Dangerous Faggot Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: A Dangerous Faggot - 3/28/2016 2:36:04 AM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ManOeuvre

I don't know that liberal and left really belong with each other, I have my doubts about religious and right sharing a bunk as well.

I think Milo is on the money when he says that the great political conflict of our age is not left vs right, but auhoritarian vs libertarian.

What do you think?


I have said close to that when I posted this article:

https://www.theobjectivestandard.com/2012/06/political-left-and-right-properly-defined/

(in reply to ManOeuvre)
Profile   Post #: 41
RE: A Dangerous Faggot - 3/28/2016 3:49:26 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: ManOeuvre

I don't know that liberal and left really belong with each other, I have my doubts about religious and right sharing a bunk as well.

I think Milo is on the money when he says that the great political conflict of our age is not left vs right, but auhoritarian vs libertarian.

What do you think?

think you should define your terms.

(in reply to ManOeuvre)
Profile   Post #: 42
RE: A Dangerous Faggot - 3/28/2016 3:55:47 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

So stopping the main british invasion in 1812,

Cite please

defending new orleans - means nothing.

After the war was over

Winning florida for the US?

Stealing at the point of a gun is not the same now is it?

Serving in the revolutionary war?

Lots of folks served in that war



He accomplished a lot for the US. The fact that he owned slaves - meh - quite a lot of democrats did.

About a third of southerners owned slaves.
For some punkassmotherfuckers being a rapist and a slaver is a kewel thing.


(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 43
RE: A Dangerous Faggot - 3/28/2016 6:16:59 AM   
ThatDizzyChick


Posts: 5490
Status: offline
quote:

the great political conflict of our age is not left vs right, but auhoritarian vs libertarian

I would agree, however the propaganda is all left/right even though both "sides" are increasingly authoritarian.

_____________________________

Not your average bimbo.

(in reply to ManOeuvre)
Profile   Post #: 44
RE: A Dangerous Faggot - 3/28/2016 6:17:09 AM   
Awareness


Posts: 3918
Joined: 9/8/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75


quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness
I know the gender wage gap is fucking bullshit,

Okay, but please tell me you have nothing against men and women who have the same capability and qualifications, doing the same type of job, getting equal pay right?

Absolutely no problem with this right?

None whatsoever.


_____________________________

Ever notice how fucking annoying most signatures are? - Yes, I do appreciate the irony.

(in reply to Greta75)
Profile   Post #: 45
RE: A Dangerous Faggot - 3/28/2016 6:26:06 AM   
Greta75


Posts: 9968
Joined: 2/6/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness
None whatsoever.

Well, that's all gender wage gap is about. Equal pay for equal type of work regardless of gender. Why do you say it's bullshit?

(in reply to Awareness)
Profile   Post #: 46
RE: A Dangerous Faggot - 3/28/2016 6:28:56 AM   
Awareness


Posts: 3918
Joined: 9/8/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwurde
Riiight, so we should all raise the level of discussion to that of this "dangerous faggot" that you dug out from under the carpet in order to save ourselves, then, is that it?
Inasmuch as he's shifting the conversation away from the false dichotomy of left and right and toward the cultural authoritarian/libertarian axis, yes.

quote:


You parrot the 30 year old term "political correctness" (which was actually originally coined by 'leftists,' which Republicans co-opted after they dropped it, so sorry to disappoint), and eagerly lap up the latest in derogatory dished out into your dog bowl, 'the regressive left,' (that's buying something at least 5 years after the 'sell by' date, BTW, but better than the 30 year past date of the previous, no?) and along with the 'dangerous faggot' thing ...
So the only good words are recent words, is that it? That's an idea so stultifyingly stupid, I could only expect it from a mind hopelessly compromised by dogma.

quote:


We're expected to take you seriously, right?
I really don't care. You could try, oh I dunno, engaging in reasoned and possibly spirited debate. Might be a new experience for you. You're open to new experiences, right?

quote:


So yeah, we can't thank you enough for raising the level of discussion, here.
Who's this 'we' you're speaking of? Are you claiming to speak for others here? Did anyone elect you as a spokesman? Or are you just trying to invest your invective with more authority than it actually possesses?

quote:

While on the subject of "Islamist supporters," why is it that the Bush supporters, who were and will always be supporters of the Saudi Wahabist terrorists, not involved in that discourse? OTOH, I see that from your perspective, those who don't shoot Muslims on sight are "Islamist supporters," just from the wrong side of it, in your world.
Bush is a figure of fun more than anything else, and the Bush family's corrupt association with the Saudis is fairly well documented. However there's a difference between state-level actors you engage with diplomatically (mainly because they've got a crapload of oil you want) and irrational terrorists who engage in ranting insane diatribes against the American lifestyle while blowing up as many innocent people as possible.

One is more predictable than the other, y'see. And I can't recall advocating the wholesale slaughter of Muslims, so I'm afraid you can keep your little strawman and yourself back in your box.

_____________________________

Ever notice how fucking annoying most signatures are? - Yes, I do appreciate the irony.

(in reply to Edwurde)
Profile   Post #: 47
RE: A Dangerous Faggot - 3/28/2016 6:35:04 AM   
Awareness


Posts: 3918
Joined: 9/8/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75


quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness
None whatsoever.

Well, that's all gender wage gap is about. Equal pay for equal type of work regardless of gender. Why do you say it's bullshit?

Because women already get equal pay for equal work. It's just that women:

A) Don't work as many hours as men do
B) Don't work in as many dangerous, high-paying occupations as men do
C) Don't possess as much experience as men do, because they take time off from their career for children (and NO, society should not fucking compensate them for this)
D) Don't negotiate as well as men do.
E) Don't possess the risk-taking appetite which men do. Consequently they're less likely to take chances with their career and higher risk generally leads to higher reward because much of the fears which hold us back are imaginary.
F) Prefer better conditions over more money.

When you control for all factors, the "gender pay gap" is around 5%. And that 5% is easily attributable to women's lesser negotiating skills and the fact that they tend to gravitate towards warm and fuzzy careers which don't pay as well as the engineering careers that men prefer.

The gender pay gap is a mathematical travesty. It is one of the most elementary statistical fallacies and - Peon will love this - is an example of the ecological fallacy. (Because women overall generally make less money than men, then individually all women must make less money than men).

In fact, unmarried young women under the age of 30 make 106% of what equivalent men do.

It's bullshit. The only way to close the gap would be to deliberately pay women MORE than men. Anyone pushing the gender pay gap as a real thing is either a fucking idiot or an unrepentant liar.

_____________________________

Ever notice how fucking annoying most signatures are? - Yes, I do appreciate the irony.

(in reply to Greta75)
Profile   Post #: 48
RE: A Dangerous Faggot - 3/28/2016 7:51:36 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: Awareness

Because women already get equal pay for equal work. It's just that women:

A) Don't work as many hours as men do
B) Don't work in as many dangerous, high-paying occupations as men do
C) Don't possess as much experience as men do, because they take time off from their career for children (and NO, society should not fucking compensate them for this)
D) Don't negotiate as well as men do.
E) Don't possess the risk-taking appetite which men do. Consequently they're less likely to take chances with their career and higher risk generally leads to higher reward because much of the fears which hold us back are imaginary.
F) Prefer better conditions over more money.

When you control for all factors, the "gender pay gap" is around 5%. And that 5% is easily attributable to women's lesser negotiating skills and the fact that they tend to gravitate towards warm and fuzzy careers which don't pay as well as the engineering careers that men prefer.

The gender pay gap is a mathematical travesty. It is one of the most elementary statistical fallacies and - Peon will love this - is an example of the ecological fallacy. (Because women overall generally make less money than men, then individually all women must make less money than men).

In fact, unmarried young women under the age of 30 make 106% of what equivalent men do.

It's bullshit. The only way to close the gap would be to deliberately pay women MORE than men. Anyone pushing the gender pay gap as a real thing is either a fucking idiot or an unrepentant liar.

So far all we have seen is your ignorant unsubstantiated opinion. Until you produce some verifiable facts it will remain ignorant unsubstantiated opinion worth the price of used shit paper.

(in reply to Awareness)
Profile   Post #: 49
RE: A Dangerous Faggot - 3/28/2016 10:23:07 AM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75


quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness
None whatsoever.

Well, that's all gender wage gap is about. Equal pay for equal type of work regardless of gender. Why do you say it's bullshit?



Because it is. When you adjust for work history and other factors, there is no gender wage gap.

In other words - you hear a lot of crap about a glass ceiling - women aren't corporate presidents. But when you look at most corporate presidents - most have more than 25 years of experience before getting the president's gig. Most women interrupt their careers to have children.

Who is more likely to work out well for a HR director? A sales man who has 5 years of continuous service, and a appropiately large sales clientele, or a female with three years?

Does that justify paying the man more. Yes, actually, it does.

(in reply to Greta75)
Profile   Post #: 50
RE: A Dangerous Faggot - 3/28/2016 11:30:21 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux




Because it is. When you adjust for work history and other factors, there is no gender wage gap.

In other words - you hear a lot of crap about a glass ceiling - women aren't corporate presidents. But when you look at most corporate presidents - most have more than 25 years of experience before getting the president's gig.

Get a clue

Bill gates
Steve jobs
Palmer luckey
Jan koum
Mark zukerberg
Elon musk
Nick d'aloisio
Pete cashmore
David karp
Evan spiegel
Sean kelly
Aaron bell
Ben kaufman

Jesus you are phoquing stupid.

Most women interrupt their careers to have children.

Most women, just like most men, do not have careers they have jobs.

Who is more likely to work out well for a HR director? A sales man who has 5 years of continuous service, and a appropiately large sales clientele, or a female with three years?

Does that justify paying the man more. Yes, actually, it does.

Only to mysoginist punks and those who are terminally stupid.


< Message edited by thompsonx -- 3/28/2016 12:17:39 PM >

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 51
RE: A Dangerous Faggot - 3/28/2016 2:10:54 PM   
PeonForHer


Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

Which is FUCKING ironic, because it looks just like the regressive left is using Peon's ecological fallacy (similar to feminism) as a justification for censorship. So I have to laugh when a certain unrepentant and unthinking lefty tries to pretend that political correctness is simply an artifact of viewpoint, rather than a poorly-justified power move by leftists with a lack of intellectual honesty.


*Sigh*. Drivel, Awareness. Go back to school.
Now that's a surprise. A left-wing academic unable to support his ideas with reasoned argument. How uncommon!



More like 'can't be bothered'. You didn't get it the first time, nor the second. It's clear from those few lines that you didn't have a clue what I was talking about then - and I can't be bothered to explain it to you yet again now. I don't know whether it's your ego, or your indoctrination, that gets in the way - and I don't care. You're not paying me for teaching you and I don't care what your parents think, either. Bliss!

_____________________________

http://www.domme-chronicles.com


(in reply to Awareness)
Profile   Post #: 52
RE: A Dangerous Faggot - 3/28/2016 2:19:35 PM   
Awareness


Posts: 3918
Joined: 9/8/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer
More like 'can't be bothered'. You didn't get it the first time, nor the second.
There's nothing to get. You don't outline principles and then use them to construct a reasoned argument, you postulate dogma and then wonder why it's rejected. The decline in British academic standards is no mystery.

quote:


It's clear from those few lines that you didn't have a clue what I was talking about then
Bullshit. You presented a poor argument and was stunned when your blase assertion of fact was questioned and subjected to actual examination instead of being blindly accepted. This tells me you expect your students to listen to your nonsense and take it all upon blind faith with nary a shred of actual thought or reason.

quote:

- and I can't be bothered to explain it to you yet again now. I don't know whether it's your ego, or your indoctrination, that gets in the way - and I don't care. You're not paying me for teaching you and I don't care what your parents think, either. Bliss!
Then why did you start? You're the one who has a real problem constructing a half-decent argument - your only contribution time after time, after fucking time, is the regurgitation of dogma which has no underlying foundation.






_____________________________

Ever notice how fucking annoying most signatures are? - Yes, I do appreciate the irony.

(in reply to PeonForHer)
Profile   Post #: 53
RE: A Dangerous Faggot - 3/28/2016 3:47:30 PM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness
Inasmuch as he's shifting the conversation away from the false dichotomy of left and right and toward the cultural authoritarian/libertarian axis, yes.


awareness, go take a peek at that article I linked above in post #41. I think there are aspects of it you will identify with.

(in reply to Awareness)
Profile   Post #: 54
RE: A Dangerous Faggot - 3/28/2016 4:06:46 PM   
Greta75


Posts: 9968
Joined: 2/6/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness
Because women already get equal pay for equal work.
This is not true.

quote:

It's just that women:

A) Don't work as many hours as men do
B) Don't work in as many dangerous, high-paying occupations as men do
C) Don't possess as much experience as men do, because they take time off from their career for children (and NO, society should not fucking compensate them for this)
D) Don't negotiate as well as men do.
E) Don't possess the risk-taking appetite which men do. Consequently they're less likely to take chances with their career and higher risk generally leads to higher reward because much of the fears which hold us back are imaginary.
F) Prefer better conditions over more money.

But none of those has anything to do with equal pay for equal work. For example, not working equal hours, isn't equal pay for equal work. We are talking about simply ensuring there is equal pay for equal work.

In all those scenerios, if a woman has lower experience, or want better conditions, or unable to take the risks required in the job scope, people should simply NOT employ her. Why would they get employed if they are not qualified? This isn't about pushing for employment of unqualified women for the respective jobs.

But simply IF the woman is as qualified as the man for the specific job, then she needs to have equal pay.


(in reply to Awareness)
Profile   Post #: 55
RE: A Dangerous Faggot - 3/28/2016 4:10:35 PM   
Greta75


Posts: 9968
Joined: 2/6/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
In other words - you hear a lot of crap about a glass ceiling - women aren't corporate presidents. But when you look at most corporate presidents - most have more than 25 years of experience before getting the president's gig. Most women interrupt their careers to have children.

Who is more likely to work out well for a HR director? A sales man who has 5 years of continuous service, and a appropiately large sales clientele, or a female with three years?

Does that justify paying the man more. Yes, actually, it does.

Your examples has nothing to do with equal pay for equal work. This isn't about employing lowly qualified women. It's defending equally qualified women who have the same qualification, same experiences, same large database of sales client, to make sure they get paid exactly the same. There are plenty of women who give up having kids to have a career.

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 56
RE: A Dangerous Faggot - 3/30/2016 8:39:31 AM   
Awareness


Posts: 3918
Joined: 9/8/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75

quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness
Because women already get equal pay for equal work.

This is not true.
I'm afraid it is.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness
It's just that women:

A) Don't work as many hours as men do
B) Don't work in as many dangerous, high-paying occupations as men do
C) Don't possess as much experience as men do, because they take time off from their career for children (and NO, society should not fucking compensate them for this)
D) Don't negotiate as well as men do.
E) Don't possess the risk-taking appetite which men do. Consequently they're less likely to take chances with their career and higher risk generally leads to higher reward because much of the fears which hold us back are imaginary.
F) Prefer better conditions over more money.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75
But none of those has anything to do with equal pay for equal work. For example, not working equal hours, isn't equal pay for equal work. We are talking about simply ensuring there is equal pay for equal work.


In all those scenerios, if a woman has lower experience, or want better conditions, or unable to take the risks required in the job scope, people should simply NOT employ her. Why would they get employed if they are not qualified? This isn't about pushing for employment of unqualified women for the respective jobs.

But simply IF the woman is as qualified as the man for the specific job, then she needs to have equal pay.


Greta I'm afraid you don't understand.


The gender pay gap math works like this:

You add up all the money which men earn, then divide it by the number of men working: This becomes the average income for a man.

You add up all the money which women earn, then divide it by the number of women working: This becomes the average income for a woman.

The liars whining about the gender pay gap claim that because the male average is higher than a female average that this is proof of a gender pay gap. It is a statistical fallacy.

Men work longer hours in riskier jobs which pay better. If you work longer hours, you make more money. That's how an hourly pay rate operates.

The gender pay gap is NOT based on comparing men and women with equal qualifications and experience. It is based upon comparing two averages which completely fail to account for the fact that women just don't work as hard as men do.

That is why it's bullshit.


_____________________________

Ever notice how fucking annoying most signatures are? - Yes, I do appreciate the irony.

(in reply to Greta75)
Profile   Post #: 57
RE: A Dangerous Faggot - 3/30/2016 10:03:36 AM   
tj444


Posts: 7574
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline
-- FR --

Women are totally screwed when they work for someone else, they need to work for themselves, imo... fuck being a wage slave (quite literally a slave in many jobs)..

As Women Take Over a Male-Dominated Field, the Pay Drops
Economic View
By CLAIRE CAIN MILLER MARCH 18, 2016
Women’s median annual earnings stubbornly remain about 20 percent below men’s. Why is progress stalling?

It may come down to this troubling reality, new research suggests: Work done by women simply isn’t valued as highly.

That sounds like a truism, but the academic work behind it helps explain the pay gap’s persistence even as the factors long thought to cause it have disappeared. Women, for example, are now better educated than men, have nearly as much work experience and are equally likely to pursue many high-paying careers. No longer can the gap be dismissed with pat observations that women outnumber men in lower-paying jobs like teaching and social work.

A new study from researchers at Cornell University found that the difference between the occupations and industries in which men and women work has recently become the single largest cause of the gender pay gap, accounting for more than half of it. In fact, another study shows, when women enter fields in greater numbers, pay declines — for the very same jobs that more men were doing before.

Consider the discrepancies in jobs requiring similar education and responsibility, or similar skills, but divided by gender. The median earnings of information technology managers (mostly men) are 27 percent higher than human resources managers (mostly women), according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data. At the other end of the wage spectrum, janitors (usually men) earn 22 percent more than maids and housecleaners (usually women).

Advertisement
Continue reading the main story

Once women start doing a job, “It just doesn’t look like it’s as important to the bottom line or requires as much skill,” said Paula England, a sociology professor at New York University. “Gender bias sneaks into those decisions.”

She is a co-author of one of the most comprehensive studies of the phenomenon, using United States census data from 1950 to 2000, when the share of women increased in many jobs. The study, which she conducted with Asaf Levanon, of the University of Haifa in Israel, and Paul Allison of the University of Pennsylvania, found that when women moved into occupations in large numbers, those jobs began paying less even after controlling for education, work experience, skills, race and geography.
Continue reading the main story

Advertisement
Continue reading the main story

And there was substantial evidence that employers placed a lower value on work done by women. “It’s not that women are always picking lesser things in terms of skill and importance,” Ms. England said. “It’s just that the employers are deciding to pay it less.”

A striking example is to be found in the field of recreation — working in parks or leading camps — which went from predominantly male to female from 1950 to 2000. Median hourly wages in this field declined 57 percentage points, accounting for the change in the value of the dollar, according to a complex formula used by Professor Levanon. The job of ticket agent also went from mainly male to female during this period, and wages dropped 43 percentage points.

The same thing happened when women in large numbers became designers (wages fell 34 percentage points), housekeepers (wages fell 21 percentage points) and biologists (wages fell 18 percentage points). The reverse was true when a job attracted more men. Computer programming, for instance, used to be a relatively menial role done by women. But when male programmers began to outnumber female ones, the job began paying more and gained prestige.

While the pay gap has been closing, it remains wide. Over all, in fields where men are the majority, the median pay is $962 a week — 21 percent higher than in occupations with a majority of women, according to another new study, published Friday by Third Way, a research group that aims to advance centrist policy ideas.

Today, differences in the type of work men and women do account for 51 percent of the pay gap, a larger portion than in 1980, according to definitive new research by Francine D. Blau and Lawrence M. Kahn, economists at Cornell.

Women have moved into historically male jobs much more in white-collar fields than in blue-collar ones. Yet the gender pay gap is largest in higher-paying white-collar jobs, Ms. Blau and Mr. Kahn found. One reason for this may be that these jobs demand longer and less flexible hours, and research has shown that workers are disproportionately penalized for wanting flexibility.

Advertisement
Continue reading the main story

Of the 30 highest-paying jobs, including chief executive, architect and computer engineer, 26 are male-dominated, according to Labor Department data analyzed by Emily Liner, the author of the Third Way report. Of the 30 lowest-paying ones, including food server, housekeeper and child-care worker, 23 are female dominated.

Many differences that contributed to the pay gap have diminished or disappeared since the 1980s, of course. Women over all now obtain more education than men and have almost as much work experience. Women moved from clerical to managerial jobs and became slightly more likely than men to be union members. Both of these changes helped improve wage parity, Ms. Blau’s and Mr. Kahn’s research said.

Yes, women sometimes voluntarily choose lower-paying occupations because they are drawn to work that happens to pay less, like caregiving or nonprofit jobs, or because they want less demanding jobs because they have more family responsibilities outside of work. But many social scientists say there are other factors that are often hard to quantify, like gender bias and social pressure, that bring down wages for women’s work.

Ms. England, in other research, has found that any occupation that involves caregiving, like nursing or preschool teaching, pays less, even after controlling for the disproportionate share of female workers.

After sifting through the data, Ms. Blau and Mr. Kahn concluded that pure discrimination may account for 38 percent of the gender pay gap. Discrimination could also indirectly cause an even larger portion of the pay gap, they said, for instance, by discouraging women from pursuing high-paying, male-dominated careers in the first place.

“Some of it undoubtedly does represent the preferences of women, either for particular job types or some flexibility, but there could be barriers to entry for women and these could be very subtle,” Ms. Blau said. “It could be because the very culture and male dominance of the occupation acts as a deterrent.”

For example, social factors may be inducing more women than men to choose lower-paying but geographically flexible jobs, she and Mr. Kahn found. Even though dual-career marriages are now the norm, couples are more likely to choose their location based on the man’s job, since men earn more. This factor is both a response to and a cause of the gender pay gap.

Some explanations for the pay gap cut both ways. One intriguing issue is the gender difference in noncognitive skills. Men are often said to be more competitive and self-confident than women, and according to this logic, they might be more inclined to pursue highly competitive jobs.

Advertisement
Continue reading the main story

But Ms. Blau warned that it is impossible to separate nature from nurture. And there is evidence that noncognitive skills, like collaboration and openness to compromise, are benefiting women in today’s labor market. Occupations that require such skills have expanded much more than others since 1980, according to research by David J. Deming at Harvard University. And women seem to have taken more advantage of these job opportunities than men.

Still, even when women join men in the same fields, the pay gap remains. Men and women are paid differently not just when they do different jobs but also when they do the same work. Research by Claudia Goldin, a Harvard economist, has found that a pay gap persists within occupations. Female physicians, for instance, earn 71 percent of what male physicians earn, and lawyers earn 82 percent.

It happens across professions: This month, the union that represents Dow Jones journalists announced that its female members working full time at Dow Jones publications made 87 cents for every dollar earned by their full-time male colleagues.

Colleen Schwartz, a Dow Jones spokeswoman said, “We remain absolutely committed to fostering an inclusive work environment.”

Certain policies have been found to help close the remaining occupational pay gap, including raising the minimum wage, since more women work at the lowest end of the pay scale. Paid family leave helps, too.

Another idea, Ms. Liner of Third Way said, is to give priority to people’s talents and interests when choosing careers, even if it means going outside gender norms, for instance encouraging girls to be engineers and boys to be teachers. “There’s nothing stopping men and women from switching roles and being a maid versus a janitor except for social constructs,” she said.

Correction: March 27, 2016
An Upshot article last Sunday about the gender pay gap misstated the percentage of the gap that two Cornell economists said could be attributed to pure discrimination. They determined it was 38 percent, not 9 percent.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/20/upshot/as-women-take-over-a-male-dominated-field-the-pay-drops.html?_r=3


_____________________________

As Anderson Cooper said “If he (Trump) took a dump on his desk, you would defend it”

(in reply to Awareness)
Profile   Post #: 58
RE: A Dangerous Faggot - 4/1/2016 6:39:03 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: Awareness



The gender pay gap math works like this:

You add up all the money which men earn, then divide it by the number of men working: This becomes the average income for a man.

You add up all the money which women earn, then divide it by the number of women working: This becomes the average income for a woman.

The liars whining about the gender pay gap claim that because the male average is higher than a female average that this is proof of a gender pay gap. It is a statistical fallacy.

That may be how you do the math but it is not the way that sane people do.

Men work longer hours in riskier jobs which pay better.

Which jobs would those be?


If you work longer hours, you make more money. That's how an hourly pay rate operates.

No the way that the hourly pay rate operates is that you work more people at less than full time so you don't have to pay overtime or provide benifits.

The gender pay gap is NOT based on comparing men and women with equal qualifications and experience.

Yes it is until you can prove otherwise.

It is based upon comparing two averages which completely fail to account for the fact that women just don't work as hard as men do.

That would be your ignorant unsubstantiated opinion which is worth the price of used shit paper.


(in reply to Awareness)
Profile   Post #: 59
RE: A Dangerous Faggot - 4/1/2016 4:27:34 PM   
respectmen


Posts: 2042
Joined: 8/28/2015
Status: offline
An interesting read in regards of paygap.

Lesbians earn more than straight women - but gay men are penalised

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/lesbians-earn-more-than-straight-women-but-gay-men-are-penalised-9934289.html

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: A Dangerous Faggot Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109