3 ms·
> Because the jobs are less valuable, not due to who's doing them but due to the market (i.e. all of us) seeing them as less valuable. It is a rather sad and n
by Ma8ee 5y ago
> Because the jobs are less valuable, not due to who's doing them but due to the market (i.e. all of us) seeing them as less valuable.
It is a rather sad and naive view of the value of work if you think that it is decided by market value. My work as a developer has a high market value because what I do is generating revenue for my employer. The work of the teacher who shapes the future of our children or the work of nurse that take care of our dying parents don't generate any revenue, and thus has a lower market value, but I, and I think we as a society should, value it much more.
Good teachers and good nannies aren't easier to replace than good carpenters or construction workers. But since many men who are in charge of setting salaries don't understand that they aren't as well paid.
> Have salaries gone down now that women make up a significant percent of the number of doctors?
Yes. I don't have the time to dig up the sources right now, and I don't remember seeing it specifically about doctors, but in many lines of work the relative salaries have gone down when traditionally male professions have been taken over more and more by women.
- kareemm 5y ago> Good teachers and good nannies aren't easier to replace than good carpenters or construction workers. But since many men who are in charge of setting salaries don't understand that they aren't as well paid. I'm not sure teachers and nannies are good examples. Public school teachers are largely unionized which would eliminate differences in pay between men and women. And many nannies are effectively small business people who set their own rates.
- the-alt-one 5y ago>Public school teachers are largely unionized which would eliminate differences in pay between men and women. No, it wouldn't. Why would it?
- kareemm 5y agoMaybe I misunderstand how unions work but my understanding is that unionized pay is based on experience levels and not gender.
- the-alt-one 5y agoBeing unionized doesn't mean that pay is non-negotiable or anything of the sort. Yes, the union typically establishes a baseline pay based on experience, but individuals can still negotiate their own wages.
- rajin444 5y ago> The work of the teacher who shapes the future of our children or the work of nurse that take care of our dying parents don't generate any revenue, and thus has a lower market value, but I, and I think we as a society should, value it much more. Teachers are glorified babysitters in the vast majority of instances due to many countries making truancy illegal. Yes, a great teacher is extremely valuable, but the vast majority of teachers are not great because there is not a high demand for great teachers. It’s even worse that we’re ruining the environment for both great teachers and great students by forcing students who have no interest in learning to be there.
- clairity 5y ago(good) teachers generate great value and positive externalities into the future, but are simply unable to capture that value generation because of the time factor. many teachers accept pride and esteem in lieu of economic gain, but they should get paid accordingly as well if we had a fair politicoeconomic system. economics in general has no answer for this differential temporal factor in value creation vs value capture. it's all predicated on immediate, atomic transactions, although the concept of externalities at least acknowledges the issue.
- _0ffh 5y agoWhen parents can freely choose who schools their children, the ones that place a premium on how well they are schooled are free to invest relatively more than those who do not. This gap between value creation and value capture can be bridged by foresight.
- YATA0 5y ago>Yes. I don't have the time to dig up the sources right now, and I don't remember seeing it specifically about doctors, but in many lines of work the relative salaries have gone down when traditionally male professions have been taken over more and more by women. No. I don't have the time to dig up the sources right now, and I don't remember seeing it specifically about doctors, but in many lines of work the relative salaries have gone up when traditionally male professions have been taken over more and more by women. "That which can be asserted without evidence..."
- Ma8ee 5y agoBroken_Hippo dug up some, so here you go: [0] and some of the research behind the article: [1] The article contains quite a few interesting links to research if you are interested to learn more. [0] https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/20/upshot/as-women-take-over-a-male-dominated-field-the-pay-drops.html https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/20/upshot/as-women-take-over... [1] https://academic.oup.com/sf/article-abstract/88/2/865/2235342 https://academic.oup.com/sf/article-abstract/88/2/865/223534...
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- _0ffh 5y agoSomeone posting a recent sociology paper behind a paywall in support of proposition p makes me update my beliefs closer to ¬p.