4 ms·

> When adjusted for factors such as lifestyle choices, women's salaries are on average 95-99% of men's Ignoring what lifestyle choices means and taking this cl

by ctvo 3y ago

> When adjusted for factors such as lifestyle choices, women's salaries are on average 95-99% of men's Ignoring what lifestyle choices means and taking this claim at face value: Can I have 5% of your lifetime earnings? Can I increase your taxes by 5% for no benefits? It's not a negligible difference even with your handwaving. It's someone else's money and not your problem is the tl;dr here.

giantg2 3y ago
"It's not a negligible difference even with your handwaving." So what are the root causes and fixes?
- ctvo 3y ago
  The handwaving is "lifestyle choices" make the gap closer than it's been documented elsewhere and is now "95-99%" vs. say 85%. Even at that rate it is not negligible. Does that clear it up for you or are you still beating your wife?
  - giantg2 3y ago
    "Does that clear it up for you or are you still beating your wife?" Please abide by the HN rules or leave. There are two separate rates and have been for a long time. Those rates are non-adjusted (in the 80)s and adjusted (95%+). Of one actually reads the BLS reports, you will find both. They are indicative of separate issues. The adjusted number measures fairness of pay. The unadjusted number measures essentially vocational distribution/choice. Many politicians misrepresent the unadjusted number and its meaning, including presidents in SOTU addresses, to evoke the kind of emotional response that you are displaying right now. All while their proposals will do little to nothing to close the unadjusted number (their proposals focus on pay fairness which is a much smaller number). Yes, 5% is significant. If you have suggestions for how to address either of the numbers, that would be great since that's what I asked for in the first place. Perhaps some of those things can even help me - people with my disability face a 30% (unadjusted) detriment to earnings.
riskable 3y ago
> Can I increase your taxes by 5% for no benefits? You know that's not how taxes work, right? If someone's taxes are increased by 5% that means there's more money available to do things (or pay off debt). Many or even most of those things might have no direct benefit to the person paying the taxes but "we live in a society" (haha) and hence, we all pay into a pool that helps everyone in our community, state, country, etc. Sometimes the benefits are obvious such as infrastructure but for most government spending it's indirect such as restoring wetlands or hiring more code inspectors so fewer buildings burn down or collapse.

by ctvo 3y ago

giantg2 3y ago

"It's not a negligible difference even with your handwaving." So what are the root causes and fixes?

ctvo 3y ago
The handwaving is "lifestyle choices" make the gap closer than it's been documented elsewhere and is now "95-99%" vs. say 85%. Even at that rate it is not negligible. Does that clear it up for you or are you still beating your wife?
- giantg2 3y ago
  "Does that clear it up for you or are you still beating your wife?" Please abide by the HN rules or leave. There are two separate rates and have been for a long time. Those rates are non-adjusted (in the 80)s and adjusted (95%+). Of one actually reads the BLS reports, you will find both. They are indicative of separate issues. The adjusted number measures fairness of pay. The unadjusted number measures essentially vocational distribution/choice. Many politicians misrepresent the unadjusted number and its meaning, including presidents in SOTU addresses, to evoke the kind of emotional response that you are displaying right now. All while their proposals will do little to nothing to close the unadjusted number (their proposals focus on pay fairness which is a much smaller number). Yes, 5% is significant. If you have suggestions for how to address either of the numbers, that would be great since that's what I asked for in the first place. Perhaps some of those things can even help me - people with my disability face a 30% (unadjusted) detriment to earnings.

riskable 3y ago

> Can I increase your taxes by 5% for no benefits? You know that's not how taxes work, right? If someone's taxes are increased by 5% that means there's more money available to do things (or pay off debt). Many or even most of those things might have no direct benefit to the person paying the taxes but "we live in a society" (haha) and hence, we all pay into a pool that helps everyone in our community, state, country, etc. Sometimes the benefits are obvious such as infrastructure but for most government spending it's indirect such as restoring wetlands or hiring more code inspectors so fewer buildings burn down or collapse.