5 ms·
You realise that insurance is all about calculating the statistical incidence of events right? They don't make life insurance more expensive for alcoholics and
by willbw 8y ago
You realise that insurance is all about calculating the statistical incidence of events right? They don't make life insurance more expensive for alcoholics and smokers because they are evil but because they are more likely to pay out a claim earlier.
- skookumchuck 8y agoI am bemused by companies that allegedly pay men more because they are men. Companies pay as little as they can to everyone.
- willbw 8y agoI'm guessing this is supposed to be a sarcastic rebuttal to my point but I'm not entirely sure.
- klmr 8y agoAssuming you’re actually serious: Companies don’t pay men more, they pay women less — because they pay everyone as little as they can: it’s well established that women systematically under-estimate their own value, compared to equally-qualified men (and they’re also underestimated by their peers). This has a huge impact on salary negotiations: Women tend to negotiate less, and if they negotiate at all, they tend to ask for less than their male peers. And to get this out of the way: Most companies nowadays don’t do this intentionally. It just happens. The outcome is the same though.
- skookumchuck 8y agoIf women are being paid less for the same contribution, then there is an enormous market opportunity for women to start companies, hire away those women by offering better pay, and undercut the male run companies. I.e. if women are paid 80% of men for equal work, the women run company can offer 90%, and have labor costs 10% below the other company. This should translate to offering their product/service at 5% less, which is a huge deal.
- klmr 8y agoIf you’re refusing to hire men this would be illegal. If you hire men but pay them only 90% of their market value, then your company will be known as not paying competitive salaries and won’t attract candidates (not just men — any job applicants). But the situation is mostly hypothetical anyway because the real pay gap between men and women in the same position with same qualification is much smaller in junior positions (they only become bigger in senior positions, and, yes, companies actively try to fill these with women; which is hard because there are fewer applicants). In junior positions, the gap is too small to build a company on this business model. That said, of course some companies predominantly hire women to cut personnel cost and consequently lower product prices. Most sweatshops are based on this premise.
- carlmr 8y ago>If you’re refusing to hire men this would be illegal. If you hire men but pay them only 90% of their market value, then your company will be known as not paying competitive salaries and won’t attract candidates (not just men — any job applicants). You can just make your company seem unattractive to men. I once talked to a recruiting company that boasted that they were a company founded and run by women. This already seemed like a huge red flag to me as a man that I might not want to work with them.
- krageon 8y agoWhy was that a huge red flag to you?
- skookumchuck 8y agoIf you were the ambitious sort wanting a leadership position, would you want to join a company that boasted about being family-run?
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- skookumchuck 8y ago> Companies don’t pay men more, they pay women less Is it partly cloudy or partly sunny?
- eecc 8y agoWell I'm paying extra life insurance on my mortgage because I used to smoke. Ok fine, I quit, good riddance. But a paranoid conspirationist would argue that these studies help these mandatory policies as well as providing wriggle-room for health insurances to get off the hook or impose higher premiums for anything that's remotely "risky behavior" - which at this stage might be anything...