Just checking in. Has anyone done anything about the pay gap itt yet? Should be solved by now, given the number of posts.

Ok so maybe this is an appropriate place for this.

I know, from watching television and listening to public discourse, that "gaps" are bad. Gender gaps are bad. Race gaps are bad. I'm ok with that in general. I guess whats unclear to me is exactly WHY these gaps are bad, and what components of these gaps are valid.

Since this is a pay gap thread, lets talk about "The Gender Gap." Now, thats a pretty comprehensive term. There are probably thousands of ways in which there is a discrepancy between men and women. Some of these are a gap in outcome, some of these are a gap in opportunity. Some are quite literally a gap (or lack thereof). One of those is the "pay gap." Women are behind in some of these various sub-gaps, and are ahead in others.

How do we decide which of these "gaps" we should be working to eradicate? Whats the end goal of reducing all these gaps?

I assume its something like to increase happiness or decrease suffering? i.e. presumably things like inequality in the workplace or sexual assault statistics are things which lead to unhappiness or suffering, and so correcting them will increase womens happiness. Whereas, to use the trivial example, "all the free drinks you want" aren't things that actually lead to any real happiness differences and so arent worth focusing on.

If unemployment in general is 7% and black unemployment is 26%, do you see how that might be bad for the black community?

AFAICT gaps favoring women aren't that important, gaps favoring men are a travesty.

It's bad for the black community primarily because unemployment is 26% there. It would still be bad if unemployment overall was 26%. However, I think a big factor is resentfulness from perceived injustice, and so perhaps it would be worthwhile in this case to try to focus on relative unemployment somewhat at the expense of overall unemployment if it will increase social harmony.

I think this applies somewhat less to women, because women aren't segregated in the same way races often are. If the world systematically favours men, at least a woman's husband or father or brother might be gaining something from it, but if the world systematically disfavours blacks, then a black family may all be worse off for it.

Do you see the paternalistic/ male-centric attitude underlying this analysis? You're arguing that it's ok for women to make less because there will be some man in her life that can support her... But what if the woman is estranged from her father? Or maybe she has to wait to get married because she hasn't found the right guy (or, God forbid, she would like to marry a woman?

If, indeed a pay gap exists because of discrimination, isn't it much better to address the gap rather than handwaiving away the consequences of the gap through the questionable assumption that all women want and can have male support?

That's a much better critique than the "bahahahahahaha" I was going to respond with

Yeah, that was some pretty solid mansplaining.

It's because people generally see equality as morally a good thing worth striving for in and of itself... and since much inequality is in fact morally wrong (whites/men can vote and blacks/women can't, for instance), there is a tendency to see all of it as bad, even though some gaps are caused by factors that have nothing to do with being morally wrong.

Take for example the fact that statistically most preschool teachers are women. Does this "gap" need to be eliminated? Do we need a law to force schools to hire more male preschool teachers? Or is it possible that women by temperament or biology or whatever, are more drawn to working with young children as a career?

The gaps that should be eliminated are the ones of opportunity, not the ones of choice. Currently women have every opportunity to enter any high-paying profession they choose.

Yes, at the moment, gaps favoring traditionally disadvantaged groups aren't the end of the world. I know that makes conservative heads explode, but deal with it.

So women should be happy if they make less because societal harmony?

And you're just lost when it comes to the black unemployment thing. Unemployment is currently like four to five times higher in the black community compared to the population as a whole. That's a problem. In a non-discriminatory society, we would expect 6% unemployment to mean ~6% unemployment for whites! for blacks! for Hispanics, etc., not 2% for whites, 26% for blacks, etc.

Depends on why black unemployment is at 26%. If it is because of discrimination and lack of opportunity then it needs to be addressed. If black people simply chose not to work, then it doesn't. I am not talking abot the current real-life employment situation in the US. I am just saying that a gap isn't bad in and of itself, the reasons have to be determined.

Let's imagine the US was a utopia that was so wealthy the govt gave every US citizen a million dollars at age 18 to cover their basic needs for life. But more white people decide they want lots of extras like luxury goods and McMansions, and choose to work for them. On the other hand more black people choose to place more value on their leisure time than material things, and decide they'd rather spend time with family and live off the income from their million dollars. That is a gap of personal preference and trying to fix it would actually decrease happiness because you'd need to force people to go against their preferences to eliminate the gap.

lol revots. Like, we've been through this, and we all know, in no uncertain terms, that this isn't true. If women had equal opportunities as men in any profession, then in every profession, women and men with identical resumes but for gender would be hired at the same frequency and at the same salary. But we know for a fact that's not true. If women and men have equal opportunities, then women and men with the same education, experience, etc. working exactly the same job for the same number of hours would be paid exactly the same on average. But we know for a fact that's not true. And before you give me more of your "CORREDGE DERPGREEEEZ!" shtick again, that only matters if women and men with the same degree have the same opportunities afterwards. But we know for a fact that's not true.

Not necessarily unless you can prove any difference is caused 100% by discrimination.

Ya rly unless you can prove any difference is caused 100% by biology. Fun game!

how about we assume all people are equal and work backwards from that? Like, prove black people do inferior work, or that women want lower paying jobs so that their husbands can earn more.

Those are the only 2 possible reasons? Either discrimination, or black people do inferior work?

no, that's why i never said that

do you not understand how 'giving examples' works?

No differences can be cause by a whole myriad of social factors that have nothing to do with either biology or discrimination.

In the real world things often have a complex combination of causes, as fun as it is to put statistics like "77 cents on the dollar" on a bumper sticker, yell sex discrimination, rant against those women-hating republicans, etc.

Thus says the man who says "Women have equal opportunity!"

man, punctuation can really change the meaning of a sentence

The gap being caused by traditional gender roles doesn't really speak to the subset of men and women who don't conform to those gender roles, where we actually get into the "equal work" space (women who focus on career, men who take long leaves/gaps to focus on family)

So, to briefly recap,

Title of the thread:
ikes is just super super proud of this amazing gotcha, that the liberals don't have a plan to do with it, ergo... something? Blah blah blah, he never gets to a point, but he's 100% sure that
Is a real "gotcha" for them libruls.

Cut to the present, and
Senate schedules a vote on ACTUAL LEGISLATION DESIGNED TO ADDRESS THE PAY GAP:


LOL keep scoring those points for King and country, ikes. You're the realest hero. But did you really think we didn't have policy? What an amazing bit of projection that is. You're the chain email reading no-policy pure emotion side, kid. We have ****ing grownups on our team. K

Fyp

People do love themselves some political theater though, so I'm not arguing the effectiveness of the tactic. Well played dems!

Still arguing about how to measure it actually. Entertaining though.

So near to a good point then fell at the last hurdle.