4 ms·
Maddox put forward a interesting question about women getting paid less then men- He said "You know how I know that this is bullshit? Because if there was a way
by napoleond 11y ago
Maddox put forward a interesting question about women getting paid less then men- He said "You know how I know that this is bullshit? Because if there was a way companies could instantly save 30% of their wages and get the same output, who in their right minds wouldn't do it"
My thoughts on the actual issue are sadly ill-informed, but the logic here seems problematic: "People say X phenomenon occurs. You know how I know it doesn't? Because it seems like it would benefit the people in charge!"
Did I mis-understand the quote?
- gizmo686 11y agoThe implication is that companies would only hire women, as they are cheaper than men.
- mikeash 11y agoThat's the idea. The problem is that it ignores other consequences. A company might save 30% on wages by hiring only women, and then find themselves with no clients because all of the potential clients are sexist. For a more concrete example, consider the old South, and whether stores there unfairly discriminated against black people. The equivalent argument would be: this is obvious bullshit, because if there was a way companies could instantly expand their customer base by 30% (or whatever the proportion of black people living in the South was), who in their right minds wouldn't do it! This argument ignores the fact that a store which admits black people might lose a large portion of their white clientele. Of course, the 30% figure is wrong. Women do earn 30% less than men, but not for the same work. Most of the earnings gap is because women work different jobs than men. There is a wage gap for the same jobs, but it's substantially smaller. But the fact that the conclusion happens to be correct doesn't make the argument not nonsense.