You seem to have taken this post very personally instead of analytically. I suggested some reasons that would explain why companies that hire younger tend to be

You seem to have taken this post very personally instead of analytically. I suggested some reasons that would explain why companies that hire younger tend to be beating companies that hire older, i.e. that there clearly is an economic advantage. What's your explanation for the phenomenon? The secondary point I've brought up on this thread is that private employment discrimination is "absolute twaddle" to regulate in the first place, because it introduces the concept of a thought crime, which is quite Orwellian. That is, the employment decision (the action) is only a crime contingent on what the "perpetrator" was thinking while making the decision. This is completely different than normal laws, where the action is unequivocally a crime and it's a matter of whether it was committed by the defendant, with state of mind only taken into account as to alter the severity of the sentence. Even "conspiracy to commit" laws are in reference to actions which are crimes in and of themselves.