Let's just assume that a pay gap between men and women exists. I get that mad men policies are bad, but last time I checked it's already illegal to discriminate against women based on salary.

So, let's hear it. What is the actual policy you're going to use to close the wage gap?

Issue an executive order that women will be paid 10% more than men on federal contracts to rustle conservative jimmies.

I'm not doing anything because I am not a jerb creator.

Tip more at the strip club?

You're obviously kidding, but ftr obviously illegal.

http://archive lewrockwell com/block/block112.html

I gave several bits of evidence, or proof, or illustrations, of this. For one thing, when you compare not all men and all women, but only the never-marrieds, the wage gap between males and females virtually disappears. When you take only young people, aged 18—24, again the male-female wage gap cannot be found, since most of them have never been married. And this entirely reasonable. After all, while women's productivity on average may well have been lower than men's in past centuries, when physical strength was important in this regard, in the present century this is no longer true. For another thing, if (all) women really had the same productivity as men, nowadays (they don't, due to marriage), then there would be additional profits available to any firm that specialized in hiring females. Surely this is a situation that could not long endure.

tl;dr lol rockwell and etc

File EEOC actions against the writers of Mad Men.

Got as far as "Mises Institute"

You should check it out, Ikes. Bucco here is asserting that the reason why black people make less money is because they have lower IQs. Pretty great stuff.

Re: So what are you going to doing about the pay gap?

Organize with my sisters and take non-violent direct action, particularly industrial actions. That's really the only way that works... direct action gets the goods.

I thought that women earned about 98% of what men earn when comparing across the same profession and stipulating that the women hadn't had children. So before there is some long debate maybe we should find out what the consensus is on whether the gap exists or not.

If child birthing/rearing does explain the gap then we shouldn't do too much about it. We could mandate offering more paternity leave so that the impact of having a child is shared (more men will also lose their place so to speak) and that the woman isn't bearing as much of the cost to her career (she could go back to work sooner). But ultimately there is no getting around a few basic facts:

you have to make choices in life you can't have everything

there are differences between men and women

someone has to take care of the kids

6 months mandated paternity leave.

So..... really? That's it?

What would you do?

Nothing different that what's been proposed.... which ofc is nothing. It's just funny that there's so much blabber about the wage gap, saying the republicans are super terrible about the wage gap, and then having basically the same policy plan as the republicans have for the wage gap.

1. Research and education. If people think they're unbiased, they won't scrutinize their own biases. Cotton Hill still thinks the wage gap is explained by women choosing housekeeping and men choosing engineering.

2. State-mandated, paid, symmetric, parental leave for both parents.

3. Stronger private-sector unions, which can help reduce the current gap in negotiation skill/willingness between men and women.

4. Preserve the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which was vehemently opposed by the GOP.

You know how we were talking about what "concern trolling" means the other day? This is a splendid example of it.

So, bucco, are you going to come back and defend that neat and tidy little bit of white supremacy you shared with us?

You're going to mandate I take a parental leave, or that I have the option? I assume the latter. And let's be real here, research and education is essentially doing nothing. Will think on the other stuff.

Only one side even acknowledges there's a problem, which is a pretty big difference between the two parties to start with. And as Wookie said, Democrats have passed recent legislation to try to help solve it.

The mandate is that companies have to offer it to all employees who meet certain criteria. People don't have to use every day of it.

From the link:
After all, if black people had the same productivity as white people on average, but were paid less, then there would be profit opportunities available to all those who hired blacks and fired whites, and such a situation could never last.

Block already defends himself quite well.

From bucco's link

No it really isn't. It's #feelingsball. If you aren't actually changing things then you're just bitching and casting people as victims for your political advantage.