lol

so good

We have actual statistics, you guys don't have to sit and constantly make up a worldview. We actually have things like statistics and empirical evidence

Maybe head on down to the community college and audit an economics class or something.

Here is another fun one:



You have to be a complete idiot to not see the trend, I like to think you guys are just playing dumb for the sake of political expedience. Like with climate change, aids, violent gun crime, etc, etc.

This post was edited by Skinned on Jul 10 2015 07:41am

Many of these jobs pay by commission. You also dont mention a standard deviation or p value so these pictures are unscientific.

went looking for some contrary evidence (stuff about how men are more likely to ask for a raise) and found it had been debunked

according to http://www.forbes.com/sites/brycecovert/2012/11/15/breaking-women-do-ask-for-higher-pay/

The study found that it is true that men ask for more money when there’s no formal indication that employees can negotiate. But when employers explicitly stated that salary was negotiable, women stepped up, and with zest. They were more likely than their male counterparts to haggle over pay.

TribeHR, a human resources software vendor, analyzed salary and “workplace recognition” data from 20,000 employees at 2,200 companies in 2012. It found two telling data points: one is that more women received raises than men, 7.4 percent to 6.2 percent.
Men got much higher pay when they received their raises. Of 5 percent raises or higher, 60 percent went to men, while just 38 percent went to women. And men were three times more likely than women to get a raise of over 25 percent.


well you might just be flat out right. i'm no longer a firm denier at least

Certain industries are egalitarian and not completely male-biased. But we're talking about PhD level mathematicians and economists.

I know for a fact I'll earn at least $5k more than my female counterparts upon finishing our graduate degrees and around $10k more in 10+ years than 95% of them. Some professions are better, some are worse, depending who you are

It is funny that the people who overwhelmingly arguing against the data are middle class white males who are hellbent on thinking they're exceptional.



Nobody has ever had to cite peer reviewed academic journals to prove a point on PaRD before. You and I both know that they're out there in spades proving this exact thing, because it is a well documented phenomenon that everybody at the grown up table is taking seriously. If you want some journals I can link to sources that are acceptable, not mises.org or Subversive Heritage Group or whatever.

They're not out there in spades until you actually find and verify one.

The quality of american peer reviewed articles is at an all time low imo. Ill look but I doubt any do what would be necessary to prove the point: ie consider cost of living, compare to actual work produced, see how competently one negotiates for their salary, and most imprtantly do a statistical test of the hypothesis in all categories.

So I have to do homework on PaRD now.

http://ac.els-cdn.com/S0165176515000142/1-s2.0-S0165176515000142-main.pdf?_tid=f654dfaa-2712-11e5-b23c-00000aacb35e&acdnat=1436539990_9695099f3daa1988e02548ff01437453

http://media.proquest.com.proxy.libraries.uc.edu/media/pq/classic/doc/64979645/fmt/pi/rep/NONE?hl=&cit%3Aauth=Blau%2C+Francine+D%3BKahn%2C+Lawrence+M&cit%3Atitle=Gender+differences+in+pay&cit%3Apub=The+Journal+of+Economic+Perspectives&cit%3Avol=14&cit%3Aiss=4&cit%3Apg=75&cit%3Adate=Fall+2000&ic=true&cit%3Aprod=ProQuest&_a=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&_s=Ebo1Hdja73wI7JI3GR%2FLVaUyozI%3D#statusbar=1&zoom=110

You may not be able to open them without the right cookies/web credentials and pasting them probably wouldn't be fair use but maybe they'll work.

There are thousands more in the university library search queue.

It gets so exhausting arguing that up is up and down is down so often with you people.

Congratulations, you've shown raw data. You know what else is raw data? The increasing number of children who've been diagnosed with autism and the number of vaccinations given. Boy howdy, vaccinations must cause autism then! No one has ever denied that a gap exists nor have they denied the data you posted. Now, you and the other knuckle-draggers, claim that if a woman puts in equal hours, the equal amount of work, etc. they will only get 77 cents on the dollar. You believe that employers will look at equal candidates outside of sex and intentionally pay the woman less. You're free to believe that, much like how 9/11 conspiracy theorists are free to believe that nano-thermite brought down the towers. But don't act butt hurt when you're shown the door.

Now, us skeptics want to look into the WHY. Do they work less hours? Do they take more time off? Are they less educated compared to men in the respective fields? Do they have less work experience? Does age come into play? Is there a trend where women take more time off? The list goes on. Now, when you control for a lot of these things, the gap closes pretty rapidly (to less than 10%). There are multiple studies that support that claim. Do you need me to hold your hand and cite them?

Yawn. You sound like Cam these days. First I was told the pay gap was imaginary, then showed one journal demonstrating one exists and the other one demonstrating why part of it exists, and am told that it does exist, but for reasons that should be there (in your opinion).

Again, many journals have controlled for those same apologetics, in studies they're called variables, and the conclusions stand up in all except a couple of professions, which I mentioned a couple posts ago.

It is like you people have some collective learning disability. You ask for evidence, get it, and are like NO U. You guys haven't posted shit justifying the existing gender pay gap and just systemically reject all evidence that says anything opposite to your worldview.

Your truths are formed by political expedience. You can strawman me all you want but you're still going to be a hack at the end because you are going to believe the same thing no matter what data and facts you are presented with. When the only place you can find data to substantiate your opinion is the Reddit men's rights subreddit you know you've gone full blown.

No, we claimed that the talking point is imaginary (though, even you admitted to purposely lying about it for political expedience). That's a big difference. Also, again, I never denied that gap exists. Hell, in the past TWO posts that I made, I said that it's less than 10%. I don't know if you know this, but less than 10% does not mean zero. Unlike you, I'm not afraid to have my worldview turned upside down. I ENJOY learning and forming new opinions. Now, what I DID say is that I consider it insignificant. To me, it's not a big deal at all. I can see why it matters to you though given that you have a vagina and all.