4 ms·

> The 70 cents on the dollar thing has been debunked pretty thoroughly by now Not to my knowledge. Can you provide some reliable source that explains it? > ye

> The 70 cents on the dollar thing has been debunked pretty thoroughly by now Not to my knowledge. Can you provide some reliable source that explains it? > yet people just keep mindlessly parroting it ... or are people mindlessly parroting that it's been debunked? Let's try to treat each other with respect.

general_ai 10y ago
https://www.google.com/search?q=70+cents+on+the+dollar+myth&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari https://www.google.com/search?q=70+cents+on+the+dollar+myth&... Plenty of reputable sources right on the first page of results. I can't treat people with respect if they lack critical thinking skills, sorry.
- hackuser 10y ago
  > I can't treat people with respect You should try a different forum than HN.
- sanderjd 10y ago
  A generic search results page is your evidence? The internet is chock full of BS in all directions. If you want to convince me you're right, you need to pick out the sources you trust and convince me to trust them too.
srslack 10y ago
>reliable source that explains it You're going to have to elaborate on "reliable source." From an NPR interview concerning a report from the Association of University Women, a feminist organization: "After controlling for several relevant factors, they found that the wage gap narrowed to only 6.6 cents." http://www.scpr.org/programs/airtalk/2012/10/24/28990/study-one-year-out-of-college-women-earn-only-82-p/ http://www.scpr.org/programs/airtalk/2012/10/24/28990/study-... The study: http://www.aauw.org/GraduatetoaPayGap/upload/AAUWGraduatingtoaPayGapReport.pdf http://www.aauw.org/GraduatetoaPayGap/upload/AAUWGraduatingt... "How much of that is attributable to discrimination?" "We're still trying to figure that out." Do tell. In fact, according to data from Census Bureau, "unmarried women who've never had a child earn more than unmarried men" http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704421104575463790770831192.html http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870442110457546... From "An Analysis of Reasons for the Disparity in Wages Between Men and Women" prepared for the U.S. Department of Labor in '09: http://www.consad.com/content/reports/Gender%20Wage%20Gap%20Final%20Report.pdf http://www.consad.com/content/reports/Gender%20Wage%20Gap%20... >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. So, as with many good talking points, this is a game of statistics lacking important control factors. It's not exactly surprising that men are going to work on oil rigs, which is why the "77 cents" talking point is a brilliant piece of omission and great example of how statistics can be misused. The purported "women's wage gap" virtually vanishes, and in fact it's a male wage gap in certain demographics, when you have proper controls for career decisions. In summary: there is no wage gap when you compare apples to apples. If you are talking about women's career choices, then by all means encourage your daughter to be a professional in a high paying sector, as opposed to the low-paying education and health care sectors. Or you could encourage her to join the lucrative fields of logging, piloting, construction or roofing, steel mill work, trash collection, mining, etc. where there is a very clear and distinct gap. They pay well.
- hackuser 10y ago
  Is that copied and pasted from somewhere? consad.com is a parked domain at GoDaddy (or gives me a 404 testing from another route). That and the exaggerated, sarcastic tone make me wonder whether I'm going to gain much from reading and responding to that comment, and whether it's an attempt to inform or attack. Life is too short. For those interested in learning about the subject, here's a passable summary, though it relies too much on partisan sources: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/jul/15/politifact-sheet-gender-pay-gap/ http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/jul/15/... There is a pay gap in some places and not in others; there even is a reverse pay gap in places, but of course if you get into the weeds of any data then it's always a mess. For example, the pay gap in Hollywood between actors and actresses is well publicized (though not mentioned in the article). One argument they don't mention is that society and the economy are still structured around males working; that those are the norms we inherited and, like almost all norms, we accept them so fully we don't see them - like we are born and live underwater and don't realize that there is air and land. Think of the norm of a career: Get your first job at 18-24, steadily build your career, retire at 65-75. Taking a break to raise children is still a violation of the norm. But if women were the employed gender for centuries, then the expectations and norms for careers would be different; maybe we'd expect to have two careers, for example. That also may apply to the norms of what jobs are paid more highly; certainly in the past, men were paid more or given the better paying jobs because it was expected and necessary for their status as breadwinners; this was explicit. It may not be coincidence that we pay so poorly, for example, for teachers, a high-skill and high-value job to society but 'women's work'; they weren't the breadwinners.
  - Arizhel 10y ago
    >For example, the pay gap in Hollywood between actors and actresses is well publicized (though not mentioned in the article). Yeah, but who cares? I really don't. I honestly, truly don't care if female millionaires are paid less than male millionaires. Cry me a river. I only care about middle-class people and below, not a few ultra-lucky rich people. If some single mom is struggling to pay her rent on a modest apartment and has some crappy old car that's in danger of giving her unaffordable repair bills and she's getting paid less than her male coworkers, that angers me. But spoiled Hollywood actresses? Please.

general_ai 10y ago

https://www.google.com/search?q=70+cents+on+the+dollar+myth&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari https://www.google.com/search?q=70+cents+on+the+dollar+myth&... Plenty of reputable sources right on the first page of results. I can't treat people with respect if they lack critical thinking skills, sorry.

hackuser 10y ago
> I can't treat people with respect You should try a different forum than HN.
sanderjd 10y ago
A generic search results page is your evidence? The internet is chock full of BS in all directions. If you want to convince me you're right, you need to pick out the sources you trust and convince me to trust them too.

srslack 10y ago

>reliable source that explains it You're going to have to elaborate on "reliable source." From an NPR interview concerning a report from the Association of University Women, a feminist organization: "After controlling for several relevant factors, they found that the wage gap narrowed to only 6.6 cents." http://www.scpr.org/programs/airtalk/2012/10/24/28990/study-one-year-out-of-college-women-earn-only-82-p/ http://www.scpr.org/programs/airtalk/2012/10/24/28990/study-... The study: http://www.aauw.org/GraduatetoaPayGap/upload/AAUWGraduatingtoaPayGapReport.pdf http://www.aauw.org/GraduatetoaPayGap/upload/AAUWGraduatingt... "How much of that is attributable to discrimination?" "We're still trying to figure that out." Do tell. In fact, according to data from Census Bureau, "unmarried women who've never had a child earn more than unmarried men" http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704421104575463790770831192.html http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870442110457546... From "An Analysis of Reasons for the Disparity in Wages Between Men and Women" prepared for the U.S. Department of Labor in '09: http://www.consad.com/content/reports/Gender%20Wage%20Gap%20Final%20Report.pdf http://www.consad.com/content/reports/Gender%20Wage%20Gap%20... >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. So, as with many good talking points, this is a game of statistics lacking important control factors. It's not exactly surprising that men are going to work on oil rigs, which is why the "77 cents" talking point is a brilliant piece of omission and great example of how statistics can be misused. The purported "women's wage gap" virtually vanishes, and in fact it's a male wage gap in certain demographics, when you have proper controls for career decisions. In summary: there is no wage gap when you compare apples to apples. If you are talking about women's career choices, then by all means encourage your daughter to be a professional in a high paying sector, as opposed to the low-paying education and health care sectors. Or you could encourage her to join the lucrative fields of logging, piloting, construction or roofing, steel mill work, trash collection, mining, etc. where there is a very clear and distinct gap. They pay well.

hackuser 10y ago
Is that copied and pasted from somewhere? consad.com is a parked domain at GoDaddy (or gives me a 404 testing from another route). That and the exaggerated, sarcastic tone make me wonder whether I'm going to gain much from reading and responding to that comment, and whether it's an attempt to inform or attack. Life is too short. For those interested in learning about the subject, here's a passable summary, though it relies too much on partisan sources: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/jul/15/politifact-sheet-gender-pay-gap/ http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/jul/15/... There is a pay gap in some places and not in others; there even is a reverse pay gap in places, but of course if you get into the weeds of any data then it's always a mess. For example, the pay gap in Hollywood between actors and actresses is well publicized (though not mentioned in the article). One argument they don't mention is that society and the economy are still structured around males working; that those are the norms we inherited and, like almost all norms, we accept them so fully we don't see them - like we are born and live underwater and don't realize that there is air and land. Think of the norm of a career: Get your first job at 18-24, steadily build your career, retire at 65-75. Taking a break to raise children is still a violation of the norm. But if women were the employed gender for centuries, then the expectations and norms for careers would be different; maybe we'd expect to have two careers, for example. That also may apply to the norms of what jobs are paid more highly; certainly in the past, men were paid more or given the better paying jobs because it was expected and necessary for their status as breadwinners; this was explicit. It may not be coincidence that we pay so poorly, for example, for teachers, a high-skill and high-value job to society but 'women's work'; they weren't the breadwinners.
- Arizhel 10y ago
  >For example, the pay gap in Hollywood between actors and actresses is well publicized (though not mentioned in the article). Yeah, but who cares? I really don't. I honestly, truly don't care if female millionaires are paid less than male millionaires. Cry me a river. I only care about middle-class people and below, not a few ultra-lucky rich people. If some single mom is struggling to pay her rent on a modest apartment and has some crappy old car that's in danger of giving her unaffordable repair bills and she's getting paid less than her male coworkers, that angers me. But spoiled Hollywood actresses? Please.