Gender-Based Wage Disparities are Widening for Younger Workers

[Frodo]

When men make much more than women right after college

By Danielle Paquette
April 28 at 6:37 PM

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Lyin' Steve]

Show me wage disparities by job title and skill level or this means nothing.  Computer science and engineering majors are 80-90% male and the tech industry pays six figures right out of college, that's probably a large part of the increasing disparity.

[Derpist]

Show me wage disparities by job title and skill level or this means nothing.  Computer science and engineering majors are 80-90% male and the tech industry pays six figures right out of college, that's probably a large part of the increasing disparity.

What's depressing is that many of these majors are becoming MORE male because young women are much more inclined than their mothers to study worthless SJW crap, thus exacerbating everything.

It's like a feedback loop of cancerous feminism.

[dead0man]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Should be the first line in the article.  To me, this looks worse than all the other numbers.  Saying women make 77% of what men make is a pointless stat that doesn't really show anything.



and 97% of people that die at work are men.

[Higgs]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So they didn't control for amount of hours worked?

[dead0man]

Aye, probably not.  It's still greater than zero, and that's a problem that should be fixed.  Whinging about 77% (or 79% or whatever) is unhelpful and dishonest.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Aye, probably not.  It's still greater than zero, and that's a problem that should be fixed.  Whinging about 77% (or 79% or whatever) is unhelpful and dishonest.

     Indeed, the wage gap is something that SJWs harp on to justify complaining about being oppressed. A serious analysis of the situation reveals that they are way off-base. The problems that women face in this arena are entirely different ones from those claimed by modern feminists.

     As an aside, I would point out that if the 78% figure were true, it would entail a pretty significant benefit to women; no company would ever deign to hire a man over a woman if they could pay 22% less for the same work. We're talking about entities trying to turn a profit, after all.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

They are widening for young college graduates. What about non-college graduates?  Or on the whole?

[Badger]

Show me wage disparities by job title and skill level or this means nothing.  Computer science and engineering majors are 80-90% male and the tech industry pays six figures right out of college, that's probably a large part of the increasing disparity.

What's depressing is that many of these majors are becoming MORE male because young women are much more inclined than their mothers to study worthless SJW crap, thus exacerbating everything.

It's like a feedback loop of cancerous feminism.

Or, it's like people with A-hole opinions like you nevertheless reaching a position with hiring/promoting authority.

[Badger]

Aye, probably not.  It's still greater than zero, and that's a problem that should be fixed.  Whinging about 77% (or 79% or whatever) is unhelpful and dishonest.

     Indeed, the wage gap is something that SJWs harp on to justify complaining about being oppressed. A serious analysis of the situation reveals that they are way off-base. The problems that women face in this arena are entirely different ones from those claimed by modern feminists.

     As an aside, I would point out that if the 78% figure were true, it would entail a pretty significant benefit to women; no company would ever deign to hire a man over a woman if they could pay 22% less for the same work. We're talking about entities trying to turn a profit, after all.

Jesus Tapdancing Christ...

So wage discrimination is actually a benefit for women, because no profit-driven company (in PiT world) would ever hire a qualified talented candidate if they were also cursed with a vagina.

This may be the worst post you've made since you suggested the judicial system be reformed to enforce monetary reparations to rape victims instead of imprisoning the offender.

Jeez, most of the apologist posts in this thread. People recently wondered whether Atlas was being "invaded by girls". Posts like this prove it can't come soon enough, as unfortunately we've always been overrun with neckbeard libertards.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Aye, probably not.  It's still greater than zero, and that's a problem that should be fixed.  Whinging about 77% (or 79% or whatever) is unhelpful and dishonest.

     Indeed, the wage gap is something that SJWs harp on to justify complaining about being oppressed. A serious analysis of the situation reveals that they are way off-base. The problems that women face in this arena are entirely different ones from those claimed by modern feminists.

     As an aside, I would point out that if the 78% figure were true, it would entail a pretty significant benefit to women; no company would ever deign to hire a man over a woman if they could pay 22% less for the same work. We're talking about entities trying to turn a profit, after all.

Jesus Tapdancing Christ...

So wage discrimination is actually a benefit for women, because no profit-driven company (in PiT world) would ever hire a qualified talented candidate if they were also cursed with a vagina.

This may be the worst post you've made since you suggested the judicial system be reformed to enforce monetary reparations to rape victims instead of imprisoning the offender.

Jeez, most of the apologist posts in this thread. People recently wondered whether Atlas was being "invaded by girls". Posts like this prove it can't come soon enough, as unfortunately we've always been overrun with neckbeard libertards.

On the contrary, I was saying no profit-driven company would hire a qualified candidate cursed with a penis. The point is that these claims  that women are being shafted by large margins on their paychecks are wholly unrepresentative of reality. If these claims were true, then vastly higher unemployment rates amongst men would be an obvious consequence of this. This does not happen, which is yet another reason to doubt to the 78% figure.  Not that we didn't have enough reasons already, of course.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

I am not sure why people have this tendency to treat firms as if they were part of the "homo economicus" species. Firms are large organizations created for the purpose of coordinating economic behavior and, as such, hiring and firing decisions may not necessarily be guided by the profit motive. Are managers responsible for hiring and firing necessarily driven by profits? Sure but that isn't the only motive of managers. Because "labor is embodied in the seller", hiring decisions entail an ongoing human relationship in which workers have to interact with one another for long stretches of time and, as a result, there are many distinctly non-economic motives that can guide people's decisions.

Some issues to consider:
-there is a big "principal-agent" problem when it comes to the labor market. shareholders and corporate executives want profits, they hire human resources staff to skillfully sort out good employees from bad employees by looking at signals. however, these managerial employees may not benefit all that much from the profits of the firm or levels of production but they certainly benefit from hiring people they like or esteem.
-this might shock you but, in fact, gender-based wage disparities are a problem even if they're not the result of direct discrimination. for instance, if women are socialized to do things that are economic disadvantageous (working in professions that require little geographic mobility) and are punished socially for doing economic advantageous things (working in professions that require geographic mobility), that's a problem. social scientists have discovered that women who tend to work in fields that require migration decisions on a regular basis tend to have higher divorce rates and similar social problems. of course, fields that require frequent migration decisions also tend to be lucrative.
-when women have children, they're expected to be good mothers and good workers. there is no such expectation for men. even the most understanding/rational manager understands that this is an impossible expectation of women and this informs their decision-making. it probably doesn't make sense to promote women or to hire women if they're young and are going to have children because the choice to have a child will play a much bigger role in their decision-making than it would for a man. of course, if women tried to ignore social norms by acting as workers first and mothers second, they'd be punished outside of the workplace in various ways. there's way that women can navigate this thorny dilemma. it's inherently disadvantageous.
-oh, wait, there's more: when women have children, they are pregnant, a fact that can effectively incapacitate them for up to a month, taking them out of the workplace. even if women, the day after their child was born, went straight to work, they would be limited and disadvantaged by this fact. men telling women to suck it up and get over this biological disadvantage is pretty disgusting. after all, our mothers suffered for our own sake. if we cannot acknowledge that this is unfair and that our society could be more accommodating to women in a plethora of ways, we are being very uncharitable to our mothers, sisters, aunts and grandmas. this, in my view, is very disgusting.

basically, if you're a man and you're whining about feminists, you are probably a neck-beard and also a big pussy. man up and own up to the fact that we are advantaged instead of acting like a prissy oppressed loser.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Looking at the higher unemployment and lower educational attainment rates for young men vs women on the one hand, and the higher pay for college educated young men vs women on the other, I think the social environment of institutions are playing a role here.  Women often tend to be better, for whatever reason, at being team players and cooperating, and willing to conform as necessary to the institution for sake of getting and keeping a job or some other long term payoff.  Young men on the other hand may bristle more at often arbitrary structure and institutional rigidity, which may hurt them downscale, but be more ambitious and risk-taking, which can help them in more upscale professions.

[Derpist]

basically, if you're a man and you're whining about feminists, you are probably a neck-beard and also a big pussy. man up

I'm always amused by how much patriarchy and regressive gender norms you find when you peel off the veneer of popular feminism in the United States (and suppose the Anglophone world in general).

[Slander and/or Libel]

Jeez, most of the apologist posts in this thread. People recently wondered whether Atlas was being "invaded by girls". Posts like this prove it can't come soon enough.

The contributions of the few women in the forum are worth more than just about everybody else combined.

[dead0man]

Jeez, most of the apologist posts in this thread. People recently wondered whether Atlas was being "invaded by girls". Posts like this prove it can't come soon enough.

The contributions of the few women in the forum are worth more than just about everybody else combined.

You do know silly statements like that aren't going to get you laid right?

[Associate Justice PiT]

I am not sure why people have this tendency to treat firms as if they were part of the "homo economicus" species. Firms are large organizations created for the purpose of coordinating economic behavior and, as such, hiring and firing decisions may not necessarily be guided by the profit motive. Are managers responsible for hiring and firing necessarily driven by profits? Sure but that isn't the only motive of managers. Because "labor is embodied in the seller", hiring decisions entail an ongoing human relationship in which workers have to interact with one another for long stretches of time and, as a result, there are many distinctly non-economic motives that can guide people's decisions.

It's really neither here not there. If the corporate beancounters are somehow okay with spending $50,000 on a man rather than $40,000 on a woman, it doesn't change the fact that there are many concrete issues that contribute to the discrepancy. You do get into this.

Some issues to consider:
-there is a big "principal-agent" problem when it comes to the labor market. shareholders and corporate executives want profits, they hire human resources staff to skillfully sort out good employees from bad employees by looking at signals. however, these managerial employees may not benefit all that much from the profits of the firm or levels of production but they certainly benefit from hiring people they like or esteem.

     How much salary leverage do these HR employees actually have? When I was hired to my current position, my manager only had 10% of hiring leeway. I will admit, men have been shown to be more willing to negotiate salaries, and that is part of the reason why some pay gap does exist.

-this might shock you but, in fact, gender-based wage disparities are a problem even if they're not the result of direct discrimination. for instance, if women are socialized to do things that are economic disadvantageous (working in professions that require little geographic mobility) and are punished socially for doing economic advantageous things (working in professions that require geographic mobility), that's a problem. social scientists have discovered that women who tend to work in fields that require migration decisions on a regular basis tend to have higher divorce rates and similar social problems. of course, fields that require frequent migration decisions also tend to be lucrative.

     Women tend to have different priorities, yes. I encourage women to enter fields where they can find greater remuneration, as engineers or salespeople or sanitation workers. I don't know what we can do to combat this "socialization" when we have been actively encouraging women to go into math and science for some time now.

-when women have children, they're expected to be good mothers and good workers. there is no such expectation for men. even the most understanding/rational manager understands that this is an impossible expectation of women and this informs their decision-making. it probably doesn't make sense to promote women or to hire women if they're young and are going to have children because the choice to have a child will play a much bigger role in their decision-making than it would for a man. of course, if women tried to ignore social norms by acting as workers first and mothers second, they'd be punished outside of the workplace in various ways. there's way that women can navigate this thorny dilemma. it's inherently disadvantageous.

If someone doesn't want to promote a woman because she may have a kid in the future, then that is sex discrimination and needs to be reported as such. A woman may fall behind a male colleague as a result of having a kid, and while tragic that is basically irresolvable without significant social engineering. We are a sexually dimorphic species after all.

     As for punishing women for putting work ahead of family, that's a new one to me. I guess they do things differently in Idaho.

-oh, wait, there's more: when women have children, they are pregnant, a fact that can effectively incapacitate them for up to a month, taking them out of the workplace. even if women, the day after their child was born, went straight to work, they would be limited and disadvantaged by this fact. men telling women to suck it up and get over this biological disadvantage is pretty disgusting. after all, our mothers suffered for our own sake. if we cannot acknowledge that this is unfair and that our society could be more accommodating to women in a plethora of ways, we are being very uncharitable to our mothers, sisters, aunts and grandmas. this, in my view, is very disgusting.

     Maybe Idaho does need feminism.

basically, if you're a man and you're whining about feminists, you are probably a neck-beard and also a big pussy. man up and own up to the fact that we are advantaged instead of acting like a prissy oppressed loser.

     There are good feminists. There are also crazy ones. They have been around for a long time, but the latter bunch has become more odious, especially when the number of legitimate issues that feminists can point to are dwindling.

      The problem that they face is the same one that muslims face; if you can't control your extremists then people will start judging you based on your extremists. If you can't take your own people to task for trotting out misleading statistics that feed into a particular narrative, then other folks will.

[dead0man]

And doubly so if the non-extremists defend the extremists (and they almost always do).

[Slander and/or Libel]

Jeez, most of the apologist posts in this thread. People recently wondered whether Atlas was being "invaded by girls". Posts like this prove it can't come soon enough.

The contributions of the few women in the forum are worth more than just about everybody else combined.

You do know silly statements like that aren't going to get you laid right?

Classy.

[This account no longer in use.]

Jeez, most of the apologist posts in this thread. People recently wondered whether Atlas was being "invaded by girls". Posts like this prove it can't come soon enough.

The contributions of the few women in the forum are worth more than just about everybody else combined.

You do know silly statements like that aren't going to get you laid right?

Well, he's not completely wrong.

[dead0man]

Jeez, most of the apologist posts in this thread. People recently wondered whether Atlas was being "invaded by girls". Posts like this prove it can't come soon enough.

The contributions of the few women in the forum are worth more than just about everybody else combined.

You do know silly statements like that aren't going to get you laid right?

Well, he's not completely wrong.

Only if you cherry pick.

[Badger]

Jeez, most of the apologist posts in this thread. People recently wondered whether Atlas was being "invaded by girls". Posts like this prove it can't come soon enough.

The contributions of the few women in the forum are worth more than just about everybody else combined.

Word.

[dead0man]

33 country study finds pay gap of 1.6%

also, in a lesson on how stats can be deceiving, UAE and Russia are world leaders when it comes to women in the work force.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

basically, if you're a man and you're whining about feminists, you are probably a neck-beard and also a big pussy. man up

I'm always amused by how much patriarchy and regressive gender norms you find when you peel off the veneer of popular feminism in the United States (and suppose the Anglophone world in general).

I'm always amused by the fact that you chose a username that literally means "idiot." 

[Rules for me, but not for thee]

Show me wage disparities by job title and skill level or this means nothing.  Computer science and engineering majors are 80-90% male and the tech industry pays six figures right out of college, that's probably a large part of the increasing disparity.

Also amount of women hired vs men too. I work in IT and the women on my team get paid more.