I’ve yet to get a coherent explanation from a liberal that refutes the following argument:
They claim that women get 77% as much as men for identical work. So, if I own a business and need an employee to write computer code or drive a cab or paint a house or shovel coal, and a woman will do the identical job for 23% less than a man, why wouldn’t I hire the woman? Every time.
In which case the demand for this identical, cheaper labor will be bid up, whereas the men would have to start offering their services cheaper or be priced out of the marketplace by women. It’s Economics 101, a course that Obama and his liberal cohort have avoided like the plague.
While women may earn only 77% of men, on average — the lie comes in adding “for identical work”. That’s demonstrably false — especially in the public sector, where everyone is on the same pay grid. The usual deceptive line is “for work of equal value”. That’s much harder to disprove, because “equal value” is whatever you say it is. If it were “equal market value”, the lie would be more apparent (although not as apparent as “for identical work”)
Man you totally nailed it, like UK’s 3-pointer yesterday.