Posted on 08/11/2022 6:20:18 AM PDT by karpov
On Monday, The Wall Street Journal published a report analyzing data from 1.7 million college graduates examining how the gender pay gap manifests itself in the first few years of college graduates' careers. They found that even for graduates with the same major, women often earned strikingly less than their male counterparts. For example, among Georgetown accounting majors, male graduates earned 55 percent more than female graduates just three years after graduation.
The data is "evidence that pay gaps between men and women often form earlier than is widely perceived," says the Journal, adding that "economists who have long examined pay gaps between men and women cite the so-called motherhood penalty—referring to the perception that mothers are less committed to their jobs—and say this affects hiring, promotions, and salaries. Determining why those gaps appear earlier isn't simple."
However, is this picture as dire as it seems? Among several explanations the Journal gives, including internalized sexism and outright discrimination, is worker preference.
Take, for example, the University of Michigan School of Law, where the median male graduate out-earns the median female graduate by $45,000. "The school said that in the classes of 2015 and 2016, 237 men took jobs at law firms, while 158 women did. Fourteen men headed into public-interest jobs, whereas three times as many women did. The classes those years had slightly more men than women." Women appear more likely to prefer notoriously low-paying public-interest law over a grueling job at a law firm. As one woman law grad, now a public defender, told the Journal, "With corporate law, I could make all the money in the world, but I'd rather get some kind of fulfillment from my job."
(Excerpt) Read more at reason.com ...
I was thinking, “Socially Valuable”...well sanitation is very socially valuable...yet I can’t say that I’ve ever seen a woman collecting garbage, or cleaning sewers.
As you say “Public interest law” are not socially valuable.
I viewed my career as a career. I was paid fairly. I worked they paid. I never checked anyone else’s pay stub. That is rude and fruitless.
Oddly enough in the sciences this doesn’t occur. The job is the job. You either can and will do it or you won’t
I once knew a guy who was a lawyer. All he did was sit back and wait for the court to assign him a defendant. He'd collect the minimum, work with the perp and DA to plea out the case and collect the minimum. He said it was the minimum amount of work he could do and he made a living at it. 9-5 seven days a week. He had no interest in busting his rump 12 hours a day to make big money that would get taxed away anyway.
You did not answer the question.
I bet your wife worked
If you had a wife
Repeated studies have shown the pay gap to be no more than 3-5%. The 70 vs 100 crappola is just that.
Women take lower risk jobs — so they take less pay home. Women work shorter hours — ibid.
The gap is because of choices they take, rational choices. Pay scale, $/time unit, are rigidly controlled.
Before I get into trouble, there is overlap in men’s and women’s interests and makeup. Statistically, there are more men than women that like things. That means there are some women.
Things scale. People do not. There is more value and profit by producing many things. Profit is limited in providing services to people. For instance, women dominate healthcare. It does not matter if the occupation is an aid, tech, nurse or doctor. It is a people business and a single person can only help a limited number of people. Healthcare does not scale. On the other hand, engineering and manufacturing things scales, particularly through automation. All of those areas are dominated by men, not because women are shut out, it’s because women are not interested in things. Women do not develop the spacial relations as children to cognitively deal with the engineering and building things. That also spills over into advanced mathematics and thusly most sciences because mathematics is the root language of science.
That is the major reason for difference in pay. Second to that is a woman’s desire to nurture and raise children. That is also biological and it takes women out of the workplace. They work fewer hours and gain less experience.
There is nothing good or bad in any of this. Women have the ability to provide value outside the workplace in ways men do not. Work isn’t the most important thing in life. Family is much more important. Work is simply one of the means required to keep families together.
There was no question for me to answer.
The reason why our darlings are part of Antifa and burning down cities is because they are part of the daycare generation, where their primary caretaker was the day care worker and the parental involvement involved dropping them off and picking them up just in time for bed.
What I do support, and I will stand by this regardless of your feminism, is that the primary carer of children between birth and the natural separation time that all children develop between 6 and 8 is the mother. The mother should be the primary care for children during this time period.
Afterwards, between 8 and 18, the father should be much more involved in the lives of the children. That is not to say that he shouldn’t be involved previously, but the mother is mostly needed at the earlier stages. When the father does become involved, the child should be spending as much of his/her time with the father so the child can learn how to function in the world.
If, to facilitate the mother staying home, I have to work 120 hours/week, I will do that. During that time, I have no problem with her taking whatever training she needs to prepare for a career after.
My position is not anti-woman, but pro-child development.
My position is not a slam against women.
But I support whatever I believe the best way to raise children.
Between birth and 8 years old, the primary care of children in the mother’s hands. Afterwards, the father becomes much more involved.
It’s a way of life to ensure the best outcome for children is possible.
It's almost like we became a bunch of commies.
I've been in management for over 30 years for major corporations and have always had access to the pay grades and salary ranges of the positions I am responsible for.
There has never once been a separate pay grade or salary range for men and a separate pay grade and salary range for women. The notion that women are paid less than men for the same job is a myth.
If it actually was the case that women got paid less for doing the same job as a man, than we would only hire women! Why pay the extra money for a man if a woman is willing to get paid less for doing the same work?
Actually there was a question.
But nevermind
Yes, women are wired to be caretakers. The only zoo here in Flagstaff is a bar, and Mrs. BCC and I don’t go to bars.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.