Werthless wrote: Is it unfair that men feel more of a biological imperative to work 80 hour weeks to be the provider, and that women often feel an imperative to spend more time with their family? Maybe, maybe not.

This bullshit from the guy so quick to blast the "women make only 72% of what men make" falsehood

Werthless wrote:My wife makes more than me, but I predict that in 10-15 years, I'll earn more than her due to the choices that we'll make in raising a family.

I predict there's at least a 40% chance you're incorrect about you making more than your spouse in 10-15 years

drsmooth wrote:

Werthless wrote: Is it unfair that men feel more of a biological imperative to work 80 hour weeks to be the provider, and that women often feel an imperative to spend more time with their family? Maybe, maybe not.

This bullshit from the guy so quick to blast the "women make only 72% of what men make" falsehood

My wife would have eaten Werthless for lunch on this one. People have such entrenched, yet totally unresearched or backed up by any facts at all, opinions on gender and the "biology" of maleness and femaleness.

mozartpc27 wrote:

drsmooth wrote:

Werthless wrote: Is it unfair that men feel more of a biological imperative to work 80 hour weeks to be the provider, and that women often feel an imperative to spend more time with their family? Maybe, maybe not.

This #$!&@ from the guy so quick to blast the "women make only 72% of what men make" falsehood

My wife would have eaten Werthless for lunch on this one. People have such entrenched, yet totally unresearched or backed up by any facts at all, opinions on gender and the "biology" of maleness and femaleness.

You're married to a zombie?

pacino wrote:

mozartpc27 wrote:

drsmooth wrote:

Werthless wrote: Is it unfair that men feel more of a biological imperative to work 80 hour weeks to be the provider, and that women often feel an imperative to spend more time with their family? Maybe, maybe not.

This #$!&@ from the guy so quick to blast the "women make only 72% of what men make" falsehood

My wife would have eaten Werthless for lunch on this one. People have such entrenched, yet totally unresearched or backed up by any facts at all, opinions on gender and the "biology" of maleness and femaleness.

You're married to a zombie?

Quite the opposite, I assure you.

pacino wrote:these are not 'voluntary' factors that women just decided to use to lower their wages or their hours, or whatever.

What about when it is for this reason?? What about when it is women voluntarily leaving the workforce to raise kids for a few years, or switching to a lower paying job with better hours and benefits? My mom got an accounting degree, and she spent 12 years out of the workforce raising her kids. You think she got a well-paying job working long hours when she went back to work? Of course not. Her situation is hardly unique.

Check out the resources at the bottom of this link.

Although additional research in this area is clearly needed, this study leads to the unambiguous conclusion that the differences in the compensation of men and women are the result of a multitude of factors and that the raw wage gap should not be used as the basis to justify corrective action. Indeed, there may be nothing to correct. The differences in raw wages may be almost entirely the result of the individual choices being made by both male and female workers.

These deceptive statistics are informing public policy, and they're being abused by people who are smart enough to know better.

mozartpc27 wrote:

drsmooth wrote:

Werthless wrote: Is it unfair that men feel more of a biological imperative to work 80 hour weeks to be the provider, and that women often feel an imperative to spend more time with their family? Maybe, maybe not.

This bullshit from the guy so quick to blast the "women make only 72% of what men make" falsehood

My wife would have eaten Werthless for lunch on this one. People have such entrenched, yet totally unresearched or backed up by any facts at all, opinions on gender and the "biology" of maleness and femaleness.

Make no mistake Moz - I'm not disagreeing with W on the pay gap data. Pressed, he wouldn't insist there is NO gap - just that it isn't as large as often asserted.

My issue was with his "biological imperative" nonsense.

mozartpc27 wrote:

drsmooth wrote:

Werthless wrote: Is it unfair that men feel more of a biological imperative to work 80 hour weeks to be the provider, and that women often feel an imperative to spend more time with their family? Maybe, maybe not.

This bullshit from the guy so quick to blast the "women make only 72% of what men make" falsehood

My wife would have eaten Werthless for lunch on this one. People have such entrenched, yet totally unresearched or backed up by any facts at all, opinions on gender and the "biology" of maleness and femaleness.

People dont understand statistics, regression analysis, and interaction terms.

Feel free to forward to your wife the links I provided in my previous post, where a study commissioned by the Dept of Labor found no evidence of a paygap after controlling for other factors. Or the study which showed that single childless women outearn their single men couterparts by 8%.

Yes, there are undoubtedly employers that have discriminatory policies. But there is no widespread pay gap for equal work.

We've all known for a long time that women may not have the necessities, let's say, to be a president or CEO. And we learned tonight that the important thing is that they be given flex time so they can go home and make dinner.

none of that binder stuff is funny

drsmooth wrote:Make no mistake Moz - I'm not disagreeing with W on the pay gap data. Pressed, he wouldn't insist there is NO gap - just that it isn't as large as often asserted.

My issue was with his "biological imperative" nonsense.

I wouldn't call it an imperative. I would say that men, on average, will have different priorities than women when it comes to childraising. The average man works 6 hours per week more than a woman. A Rochester Institute study found that money is the primary motivator in their job for 76% of men and only 29% of women. Again, these aren't wrong or right; it's a matter of choices, and more men than women make decisions that lead to higher pay, like entering dangerous professions such as oil-drilling, or jobs that require a ton of travel such as consulting. And spending all your time trying to "correct" these decisions is a fruitless endeavor. And throwing out 72% as evidence that there needs to be special corrective action taken by the President of the United States is... not good.

Take lawyers at nice law firms. They make the same amount of money when they get hired. They get evaluated based on billable hours, a quantifiable measure of performance that makes it difficult to discriminate (and what law firm is going to open themselves open to discrimination lawsuits). And yet, many firms struggle to develop women partners, even from their top performers. Why do so many women not become partners? Because they leave before even getting to the point where they're being evaluated for partner. Why? They sometimes want a family before they are 40, and raising a family is tough while working 50+ hours per week. It is especially hard to retain these partner-candidate women when there are perfectly well paying jobs in the corporate world for 72% of the pay, and much better quality of life.

Werthless wrote:

mozartpc27 wrote:

drsmooth wrote:

Werthless wrote: Is it unfair that men feel more of a biological imperative to work 80 hour weeks to be the provider, and that women often feel an imperative to spend more time with their family? Maybe, maybe not.

This bullshit from the guy so quick to blast the "women make only 72% of what men make" falsehood

My wife would have eaten Werthless for lunch on this one. People have such entrenched, yet totally unresearched or backed up by any facts at all, opinions on gender and the "biology" of maleness and femaleness.

People dont understand statistics, regression analysis, and interaction terms.

Feel free to forward to your wife the links I provided in my previous post, where a study commissioned by the Dept of Labor found no evidence of a paygap after controlling for other factors. Or the study which showed that single childless women outearn their single men couterparts by 8%.

Yes, there are undoubtedly employers that have discriminatory policies. But there is no widespread pay gap for equal work.

In this case, what I meant my wife would eat you for lunch on was the premise that "men feel more of a biological imperative to work 80 hour weeks to be the provider, and that women often feel an imperative to spend more time with their family," not the existence or non-existence of a gender gap. Although I am sure she would be quite happy to take you up on that as well.

I think there might be a bit of slippage here, on the gender gap, between the question of equal pay for equal work - which is becoming more and more the standard, I suppose (although I am sure, as the Lilly Ledbetter case certainly demonstrated, that there are many exceptions still out there) - and the question of the overall wage gap. It cannot be denied that among boards of directors and CEOs of corporations, there continues to be an overwhelming bias towards men, which in turn produces the overall effect of men making more than women (because they dominate the top-of-the-foodchain jobs). Why that is, and what's to be done about it, is a bit of a separate question from "equal pay for equal work."

mozartpc27 wrote:In this case, what I meant my wife would eat you for lunch on was the premise that "men feel more of a biological imperative to work 80 hour weeks to be the provider, and that women often feel an imperative to spend more time with their family," not the existence or non-existence of a gender gap. Although I am sure she would be quite happy to take you up on that as well.

Surveys lie? I'm talking about averages, not your wife. I'd laugh if your wife tried to use herself as an example to argue against a statistical average. "Men are usually taller than women? Well, how come I'm taller than you? Ha, you're wrong!"

CalvinBall wrote:none of that binder stuff is funny

ffs

speaking of ffs, how about Romney and his "pension" tangent? strange, strange stuff

"President Obama, education is the gateway to future success. In recent years, women are 60% more likely to have earned an undergrad degree by age 23 than men, and single, childless women make 8% more money in their 20s than their male counterparts. What policies will you support to help men close this education gap?"

Can you imagine if some 25 year old guy asked this at the town hall, the outcry from liberals. This would be an absurd question, even though both facts are true. And now suppose they exaggerated the statistic to make it look like a bigger issue. Oh boy.

Huff post Linkto first fact.

True or not, people believe it is true.

CalvinBall wrote:True or not, people believe it is true.

Believe what is true?

That there is a gender gap. Obviously not all people.

Werthless wrote:

drsmooth wrote:Make no mistake Moz - I'm not disagreeing with W on the pay gap data. Pressed, he wouldn't insist there is NO gap - just that it isn't as large as often asserted.

My issue was with his "biological imperative" nonsense.

I wouldn't call it an imperative.

Uhh...you DID call it an imperative.

Werthless wrote: I would say that men, on average, will have different priorities than women when it comes to childraising. The average man works 6 hours per week more than a woman.

Is this average adjusted in the same fashion for age, etc as the pay gap data you've cited earlier? It would no doubt make sense to find figures adjusted in a similar way.

Werthless wrote:A Rochester Institute study found that money is the primary motivator in their job for 76% of men and only 29% of women. Again, these aren't wrong or right; it's a matter of choices, and more men than women make decisions that lead to higher pay, like entering dangerous professions such as oil-drilling, or jobs that require a ton of travel such as consulting. And spending all your time trying to "correct" these decisions is a fruitless endeavor.

People try to manipulate one another - ok, 'modify' one another's 'behavior' - every fucking waking minute of every day. "Correcting" decisions - modifying behavior - manipulating the less-guileful - is what practically everyone with a college degree, and many without one, spend most of every working minute doing. And that's been the case since like, ever.

A lot of what we regard as 'normal' and 'useful' and 'fruitful' economic activity is the product of a boatload of "decision correction" worked on us, and by us, and our parents, and their parents, that no one gives more than a second's thought to, if ever. But by your definition, most of all "knowledge work" is "fruitless"; most of what most people do, most of the time, is "fruitless".