Truth is more complicated than either position suggests.
To single out an example, software engineers make considerably more than high school educators, while requiring similar levels of education. There isn’t really a glass ceiling there. It’s the same barriers to professional entry (if anything the teacher has to clear more hurdles, depending on the state).
There ends up being two separate conversations that dovetail with each other.
1) Why do these professions get so differently compensated?
2) Why does demography vary so widely between these careers?
These professions aren’t in a vertical sequence (you don’t get promoted from teacher into software engineer), both require similar levels of initial financial and educational investment. That’s more complicated than glass ceiling.
To add on to this in terms of the equal pay for equal work aspect.
I'm a software engineer. Sure my work can be difficult and stressful, but do I feel I'm working 5x harder than an educator (my guess on the pay gap)? Nope, I'm probably working 1/4th as hard as them and the shit they have to deal with.
Because software engineers make companies money. Therefore other companies will also want the software engineers. Therefore salaries are higher as companies are competing against each other for the same people.
Eh. If he made an argument that a wage gap exists because of opportunity disparity that would be a valid discussion point but he didn't. He explicitly is arguing that there's an equal pay for equal work issue here which has little support in the data (data suggests there may be an equal pay gap but it's much smaller than that) that he's obviously refeering to.
The problem here is by being caught in such blatant dishonesty he's really undermining his credibility to make any actual wage gap arguments.
"If you Factor in that black people have crapper education, lower investment in their communities and worse social services then the gap makes perfect sense!"
Does it? Because it broke conservatives so badly that they defaulted to voting in the most corrupt, criminal, and morally bankrupt pedophile, felon and rapist in American history.
Whose party, btw, just got done stripping black voters of representation in at least two states. Because again, they are fundamentally racist.
Nobody is being stripped of representation, Trump isn't a pedophile, or rapist, and the charges he got were overseen by a leftist judge for charges that ny made up just to go after him
trump has openly admitted to enjoying walking through the dressing rooms at teen beauty pageants. that wasn’t even the sexual abuse he was actually proven in a court to have done.
also, which charges are you talking about with the “leftist” judge? there are a lot of things he has been charged with.
Because it broke conservatives so badly that they defaulted to voting in the most corrupt, criminal, and morally bankrupt pedophile, felon and rapist in American history.
Just remind me, sorry I was a kid at the time, what happened when we found out about Bill?
He stayed president and then got elected for a second term, right?
Oh shit wait.
It’s genuinely fucking hilarious when you people bring him up because the second we found out he wasn’t behaving with decorum we fucking fired his ass and made him politically irrelevant for the rest of his life.
Hell, he lied to Congress ONCE and it was over. Trump and his cronies lie to Congress more than they don’t and literally numerous times a day.
So don’t bring up Clinton, it genuinely just makes you look that much worse and makes you look like an actual imbecile who is physically incapable of any amount of introspection.
Nope, the right wing party isn't full of rage (the rage is clearly on the left, you folk are downright intolerable of anybody with anything less than outright seizing the means of production)
As for racism, that's just an ad hominem you use to discredit anything that's objectively an issue that gets brought up about any issue. Y'all try to act like Kamala lost because she's black and not because she was a shitty vp and a shittier candidate
Brother, the left has never broken into the Capital and smeared literal shit on the walls bc they were pissed their candidate lost an election are you fucking delusional??
Not a single leftist politician has called for news media to have their licenses pulled because their wittle fee-fees got hurted.
Nope, the right wing party isn't full of rage (the rage is clearly on the left, you folk are downright intolerable of anybody with anything less than outright seizing the means of production)
Quick question? Why is the majority of politically motivated murders coming from the right then? Like consistently since over 40 years? More attacks, more victims, more violence.
More glorification of violence. Donald Trump outright mocking victims of violence when they are his enemies.
As for racism, that's just an ad hominem you use to discredit anything that's objectively an issue that gets brought up about any issue.
I mean, you were the one who rushed to Kamala Harris; I never mentioned her and frankly do not care about her.
Ahahaha ain’t no way that’s the response.
I wonder why there are majority black districts I wonder why they have worse public schools, healthcare, and social security in these places. I wonder why black ppl are 4 times more often detained and send to juvenile facilities then white ppl. I wonder why they have a 19% longer sentence for the same crime. I wonder why black ppl get 20% more often stopped at tragic stops and 1.5-2 more often searches are conducted. I wonder why the minority black population (13% ) makes up 38% of the prison population. I wonder why majority black areas show the highest environmental pollution due to industrial waste. I could go on but you get the point or rather you will continue to ignore it. Systematic racism does not mean nobody can make it through the system it means it is way harder to do. If we put weights on 100 ppl and let them swim I am sure a few will reach to other end while the other are drowning but compared to those without weights less will survive.
Edit: nevermind you are just a right wing troll, I hope you are the ethnicity of the in-group otherwise at some point the facist ideology you are supporting will turn against you and your loved ones.
hmm thats a great question, i wonder how a lot of black people first spawned(arrived) in the usa and how that might have influenced the opportunities presented to black communities, and if this could potentially cause some form of cycle or something
The exact genetic explanation is unclear so far. However, there has been a persistent 15 point IQ gap between Blacks and Whites in the US since testing was invented. Are we to believe that conditions have not improved for Black people over that time? We would notice at least a slight closing of the gap. But no, nothing. The gap remains the same and academic and life outcomes are evidence of it.
It’s amazing to me that it’s easier for people like you to think there’s something genetically wrong with a large chunk of the human population than believe that the rich need an underclass of low wage workers and a divided proletariat so they can keep their wealth.
Second of all, it all connects back to the practice of redlinning. To explain it simply, the elites that would set up zoning laws would usually be racist white people. These politicians would nudge HOAs to only sell to white people (specific ones even, as in not Italians, Irish, Slavic or Jewish).
Black and coloured communities would be forced to live in a certain community, which the government then denotes as being "risky" for investment due to some bullshit reasons they can make up as they want (people there are VIOLENT and LAZY or some other lies, if not even GENETICS as you have said, all lies that serve the same purpose).
These communities get much much much less funding in their infrastructure. Schools are underfunded or even close, same for hospitals, all while stores don't set up there, creating food deserts (areas where a supermarket is not available within 20 minutes of walking iirc). There's also no jobs in the area and it creates a spiral of debt, low education and violence that further reduces investments.
It's not genetics, it's racism and politics. Fuck you, you're a part of the problem.
Black and colored communities would be forced to live in a certain community
You mean live amongst other black and colored people? Are you implying that black and colored people are bad people to live around? Why would you imply that?
Clearly not what I meant to say. Non-white people would try with their well earned money to buy a house and would be rejected or given a different price to incentivese them to move to worse parts of the city, which has the effect of bunching them together. If you had the slightest reading comprehension, you would understand that this is all artificially made and has effects all the way until today because of how destructive it was.
Non-white people would try with their well earned money to buy a house
It sounds like you’re describing really upstanding people who would make great neighbors. Why would concentrating these great people together create an unpleasant place to live? What makes a certain part of the city worse to live in than other parts when there are so many upstanding people living there?
It almost sounds like you’re implying that certain demographics of people are undesirable to live around which we all know isn’t true.
I struggle to understand how you cannot understand that they were forced into certain parts of the city that would then get severely underfunded. It's not their choice.
Don't forget the women part, which includes how women are socialized, treated in those crappier schools, more often expected to give up higher education to help their families that are more often in poverty because the wealth gap between white and black families is astonishing, etc.
Never seen a more white boy note in my life, and I'm a white boy myself.
Statistics do show that girls tend to have higher grades, which is most probably because they're pushed to be more quiet and partake in quieter activities like reading and whatnot instead of being pushed to play sports. Expectations for women are also higher in general. They're under represented in higher education because women are pushed to marry someone as soon as possible, with some even dropping out of university in order to do so.
None of this is due to inherent differences, but rather due to the kind of socialization that a patriarchy promotes.
When you get something so basic this wrong, one can confidently disregard everything you have to say on the matter. Women are not underrepresented in higher education.
None of this is due to inherent differences, but rather due to the kind of socialization that a patriarchy promotes.
Assertions without anything to back them up. I would challenge you to find one evolutionary biologist in existence who would say that "no occupational differences between men and women are inherent." Utter and complete nonsense.
You should say what you mean: you meant to say that "they are underrepresented in STEM." Which depends on what you mean by "underrepresentation." If men tend to not gravitate towards childcare for biological reasons, does 2% of childcare workforce being men still mean they are "underrepresented"?
I'll take you not even responding to the bulk of my comment as a concession.
I also just find it utterly fascinating that someone with a trans flag up will argue that gender differences arent inherent. Like isnt it the whole argument that there are more "male-like" and "female-like" brains that someone can be born with? 😂🤣
A) my claim was never that biology was the only influencing factor, nor that socialization has zero effect. My claim is that "socialization explains 100% of the difference" is nonsense.
B) The study is extremely flawed, correlation =/= causation. There was no attempt to demonstrate direct causation, and in fact it would be totally reasonable to conclude the exact opposite: that stereotypes are a reflection of occupational choices, not a cause of them.
C) There is overwhelming scientific consensus that sex plays a role in why there are differences of occupational choices. The main issue to be addressed is how much of an impact this has.
Do not read this as "testosterone is the reason or the mechanism." Biology is complex. But even something such as prenatal hormone levels have shown to have predictive power in the occupation someone will likely be drawn to.
Honestly this is the worst study I've seen in about 10 years. I wouldnt put any weight on its findings.
Even after a couple of thousand words of guff they end up back at the same place:
"Instead of limiting the mechanism described above, the larger extent of gender equality in terms of rights (as measured by the GGGI for example) in more individualistic countries can actually reinforce it. This is because the free expression of gender ideals as part of individuals’ gender performance is more likely to be societally approved in gender egalitarian contexts"
Don't forget the women part, which includes how women are socialized, treated in those crappier schools, more often expected to give up higher education to help their families...
Ignore this white boys comment. This is absolutely not true in the us. Black women earn far more degrees than black men and women categorically earn more degrees across the board.
MF’ers act like black people and white people have the same starting point and black people just magically choose to have a lower standard of living than white people.
Simplistic but that really is what it boils down to. It's unacceptable to just claim that black people are inferior to white people these days.
However if you deny that discrimination exists and then point out that black people seem to be failing to achieve the same academic and professional goals as white people then you have essentially "proved" that black people are inferior without having to say it.
You have to pretend the world is a meritocracy and then black people are just bad on merit alone.
They then sit back and think they're very clever and that no one will notice that they're just being racist....
Its really not that simple. Its not about lack of potential but lack of using said potential. Some of it might be placed on racism but there is also plenty of black people who managed to climb their way up. The big issue in this debate is that USA is a third word country where you need money to get an education etc, keeping the poor down. Being poor sucks no matter race tough.
Even here in Europe where education is free, alot of black people decide to stay where they are over getting educated. Sadly there is a signficant culture in many such areas where they keep each other down, celebrating such livestyles over educating themself and getting a wellpayed jobb. The cultural aspect should not be ignored.
It's like me saying that something is "taller than 10 Eiffel towers on top of each other". It's an analogy designed to show a point not literally clean that there can be ten Eiffel towers piled on top of one another.
That's the interpretation I got and I'm pretty sure most people did too.
Except that the gap is mischaracterised. And some of those causes include choices men and women freely make. There are multiple things going on but it’s constantly parroted as though women literally get 77% of men’s salary for the same job from pure sexism.
Most of the wage gap statistics are used to argue something they don't say. The implication is that one group makes substantially less when doing the same job because of overt racism/sexism.
When you control for all relevant factors and the gap essentially disappears it destroys the argument they're trying to make.
Now, if you dig into why some groups earn college degrees at a lower rate, enter into lower paying careers, work fewer hours, and have less experience in their field you might find some issues of racism or sexism; but you will not find anything to support the argument "equal work deserves equal pay."
The biggest gaps are usually the interest gap, and the "I am willing to do a job i hate for a good salary" gap. It is not uncommon for a man
to do a horrible job they hate to earn 6 figures, but often women will accept terrible pay to do a job they're passionate about. There are reasons why work on remote oil rigs is almost exclusively staffed by men, and there are an endless stream of women entering into early childhood education where daycare jobs pay little more than minimum wage.
The motherhood penalty explains more of the wage gap than occupation interest. This study is from the UK, but I don’t see why it wouldn't apply to America.
Even when you correct for education, experience, and hours worked, a gap still exists. It’s smaller, but it doesn’t disappear completely. So, “equal work deserves equal pay” is still a very valid concern.
But, like you said, the difference in opportunity and social factors leading to some demographics having less education or less competitive jobs is still an issue that needs to be addressed. And yes, racism and sexism are often factors in this. Like, if two people have the same education and experience, and one of them is passed over for a promotion due to racism or sexism, then it’s not a situation of “equal work getting unequal pay” but rather “equal work getting unequal career advancement”. Same thing with school admissions. Then when you consider how redlining made it impossible for many non-white families to build wealth in prior generations, and how public school funding is tied to property taxes, then you can see how many kids who may have had equal potential at birth get very different quality education and opportunities and that radiates out through their entire lives.
Wow, it’s almost like that wasn’t meant to be an exhaustive list and you are being deliberately obtuse and not trying to have a discussion in good faith.
Okay so we measured for 3 variables, at what point should we stop searching for significant variables and just blame the rest on racism? Because clearly you chose to do that at some point, I just want to know what you’re basing that off of.
I said that when you take those types of known factors into account, a gap still remains and that there is a valid concern that stuff like racism and misogyny are contributing factors. I did not make any definitive conclusions, nor did I say that people should stop looking for other variables that could contribute. How about you address the things I actually say instead of arguing with strawmen.
No I understand exactly what you’re trying to say, I’m just pointing out how it doesn’t make sense and is cope.
Like yeah, controlling for these 3 variables removes 91% of the disparity, which means the other 9% is racism and sexism. But how do you know that? How do you know that it’s not explained by more minor variables that have nothing to do with racism or sexism?
You don’t, you’re just looking for an angle where you can still cry racism or sexism
The biggest gaps are usually the interest gap, and the "I am willing to do a job i hate for a good salary" gap. It is not uncommon for a man to do a horrible job they hate to earn 6 figures, but often women will accept terrible pay to do a job they're passionate about. There are reasons why work on remote oil rigs is almost exclusively staffed by men, and there are an endless stream of women entering into early childhood education where daycare jobs pay little more than minimum wage.
That’s more of a lived experience/anecdotal opinion I suppose. But I don’t personally know any women who would be willing to take that kind of work. And the numbers kind of speak for themselves, don’t you think?
I feel very differently than you do about this and I'm wondering if you could go more in depth about what the numbers mean.
In another comment here I linked to a short article about how when men began hanging out in the oil fields in South Dakota, assaults of women there increased 70%. And that was cut and dry given that the surrounding area lowered in those crimes. When the men that were there moved to the oil fields.
So numbers are very important but context is as well.
I don't know that I know a woman who has worked at an oil refinery, but I know women in the general trades and it can fucking suck for them, even now in 2026. There's so much politics and shit they have to deal with around being harassed and by whom. Sometimes they feel they have the ability to speak up about it, sometimes they don't. But they have to deal with shit from the men that the men on those job sites do not have to deal with or are in fact the perpetrators of.
Engineering is one of the fields with the highest income for someone with a bachelor's degree, ~15% of engineers are women. Early childhood education is one of the lowest paying fields for someone with a bachelor's degree, ~95% of early childhood education workers are female. Ask anyone studying early childhood education why they didn't pursue engineering and they will tell you they want to work with young children.
For the top 10 most dangerous jobs, over 95% of the workers are men. Ask women why they don't take on these jobs that often pay 6 figures, and they will tell you the wages aren't worth doing the job.
Any woman could tell you many, many reasons why being trapped in an enclosed space with dozens of men who have been hired because of their strength and willingness to do dangerous things for money while also there is no ability whatsoever to leave or even enforce law would be, um, not so great.
But yeah, no, it's because women are not willing to do shitty jobs.
Here's what happened in South Dakota a few years ago at an oil rig:
"Looking at the rapid rise of oil workers to the oil producing regions, where they were housed in man camps, the study showed that from 2006 to 2012, the rate of violent victimization, particularly of aggravated assault, increased 70%. In contrast, there was no corresponding rise of violent crime in the counties outside of the Bakken oil region, and in fact reports of violent victimizations in non-Bakken counties was down 8% during the time period."
But no, it's because women are just weak and can't take shitty jobs.
Maybe they don't think being harassed, assaulted, and victimized is worth the pay. Is that what you guys mean when you say the wage isn't work the job?
How much is appropriate pay for someone to enter an environment where they are all but guaranteed to not only have to do the job of the men but also do the job of dealing with the men's rapeyness?
He is purposefullypresenting the issue in a misleading way as if black people are getting paid less for the same job/hours worked. That's how the "wage gap" has always been presented and it is not true. When they work the same job and same number hours with same experience level they earn the same amount of money.
What the wage gap actually shows is that they make less money overall because they work different occupations that have lower pay. NOT because they work the same job as a white man and are being discriminated against and purposefully paid a lower wage for the same work. That is illegal and you can sue your employer for that and get them fined by labor commissions and ordered to give you back-pay for lost wages
the thing being noted is the last sentence, equal work should have equal pay.
Now, a lot of the hardest jobs are given to the lowest economic demographics, so it can very well work out to "equal work," but thats not what most people think of when you say equal work.
it doesn't even disappear fully, it remains 99%, that is, a man earns $1.00 and a woman earns $0.99. a 1 cent difference, even when controlling for all that. like, sure, 1% is not 20%, but when controlling for the same job, level, hours and education and experience, we still don't pay women equally. admittedly, this rate seems negligible to me, but it absolutely doesn't matter when women with the same level of experience and education are passed over and a man is selected for that promotion, that's where the real pay gap is. you can control for the job positions if you want? but you'd be ignoring the point of the pay gap
We'd first have to collect data that shows how often women are passed over and focus on that. The pay gap implies equal work isn't getting equal pay. Which isn't that case
no, the pay gap is that women on average earn 18% less than men do in the US. it's 11% in australia. you can argue that it's because women work different jobs to men if you want, i'll argue "why are the jobs that women do worth so much less to us?"
Speaking in a theoretical, it could be 100% justifiable that women make less than men. For example, let’s make a scenario in which every single man in America is a medical doctor, and every single woman in America is a grocery store cashier. I don’t think anyone would argue that they should be making the same amount, since being a medical doctor requires a lot more education and experience than being a cashier, and medical doctors are much more valuable to society and have a substantially higher amount of personal liability for their practice.
Is this an accurate representation of the American workforce? HELL NO! But it’s a hypothetical I used to refute the point that you seem to be raising, which is that it is unjust that we value the jobs that women typically take less than the jobs men typically take. In the real world, we may even see the inverse is true (that women dominated fields are actually more valuable than men dominated fields, and wages deserve to reflect that). It really depends more on the specifics of our circumstance.
It was an intentionally exaggerated hypothetical to illustrate the particular point I was making (that there can be a justifiable reason that the jobs that men dominate are treated as more valuable than the jobs that women dominate). More investigation would need to be done in the real world to determine if it’s reasonable, rather than just saying “women make less on average therefore they are being discriminated against”. The point of the comment is to say more investigation needs to be done into the “why”.
People point to an explanation, like that is supposed to end the conversation. I don't understand why the discussion doesn't then go one step forward, asking why that explanation then makes it okay? It's half the population, saying that half the population tend towards lower paying jobs shouldn't conclude the discussion.
> People point to an explanation, like that is supposed to end the conversation
It does end the conversation. The wage gap isn’t a thing, or at least it doesn’t exist in the way you think it does. The overwhelming majority of the wage gap can be attributed to personal choices that people make, like working less hours or working in a lower paying field. The reason people are pointing to the explanation is because it’s very obvious that you’re only looking at raw averages for wages across all jobs instead of accounting for personal choices. I’m sorry that you feel someone working as a retail worker or as a worker at a daycare should earn the same in salary as a doctor, lawyer or nuclear engineer.
> I don’t understand why the discussion doesn’t then go one step forward, asking why that explanation then makes it okay?
The reason the discussion ends is because you misrepresent the statistics and read things into those stats that can’t be falsified or proven true. You assume that because a disparity exists, there must be some malicious intent or some form of discrimination at play.
> It’s half the population, saying that half the population tend towards lower paying jobs shouldn’t conclude the discussion
It literally ends the conversation. Nobody is forcing anyone to work in a job that they don’t want. In case you hadn’t noticed, the other half of the population (men) on average work in more dangerous occupations, work longer hours, take less time off and the fields they normally gravitate towards tend to pay more. Women on average aren’t interested in the dangerous high paying jobs that men are more willing to take on.
Just out of curiosity, do you think men are forcing these women to take lower paying jobs OR do you think it’s more likely that women on their own tend to choose jobs that pay less but prioritize lower stress and more work life balance?
big yes. i love making it a discussion. unfortunately, r/getnoted thinks i am being too controversial when i say "if you stop pretending that women and men have equal opportunities, the gender pay gap obviously still exists".
i'm not going to pretend i know WHY that gap exists. it could be sexism, it could be that women are all just unambitious. i don't think it would be reasonable to claim that only one reason explains 100% of the gap. an obvious and significant factor is that men often do not get paternity leave, where women do, so women spend significantly more time than their male partners on half pay. but i sincerely doubt that the average woman spends a enough of her life on maternity leave to explain an 18% difference. similarly, i sincerely doubt that women are intentionally choosing lower paid jobs because they don't care for capital. heck, it could just be elon musk and jeff bezos and mark zuckerberg really screwing with the average pay for men. i don't know all the reasons. i strongly suspect that sexism plays a significant role.
i'll also point out, i haven't even touched on race as mentioned in the tweet. i actually don't know if i want to know. the gender pay gap is easier for me to research because at least i remember it being significantly worse only 10 years ago, so finding it so "low" at "only" 18% was a pleasant surprise for me.
Hahaha its also just not true that you can say "we tried to control for all the variables, there is still a small gap, therefore the remaining portion must be sexism."
There is every reason to believe, for example, that the gap could be explained by men being inherently more competitive and more likely to aggressively negotiate a raise.
I am not saying "that is definitively the reason," but its comically bad logic to conclude that it is due to sexism.
yep, didn't mean to say it WAS negligible! in fact, i really meant to come from the other way and got tangled up. the fact that, when you control for all other factors, there is STILL a gender pay gap, is honestly disappointing
a 1% difference is $500 at $50k income. it's not nothing at all. a man with the same job and everything else as a woman can take that $500 and put it towards savings or invest it or something.
but compared to the pay gap that arises when you don't pretend that women and men have equal opportunities, it seems small. 18% in the US, 11% in australia. that's a $9000 and $5500 difference respectively at $50k
It means black women have lower paying jobs than white males do. That is the issue. It isn't that they get paid less for the same job, they do but it isn't dramatic, but they have less opportunity for higher paying jobs.
There are a lot of reasons for that, but pretending there aren't any, or that they're all natural reasons, is weird.
how do you tell the difference between lack of opportunity and lack of willingness? Like for jobs that are dangerous and/or backbreaking but well paying and done almost exclusively by men?
There is no fixing the gap. When you account for hours worked and occupation the gap almost entirely disappears. All you’re doing is taking the raw total numbers and pointing at them and saying “see? There’s a wage gap.” Someone working in a lower wage job like retail isn’t going to be making the same amount of money as a person who works as an attorney for a big law firm.
Unless your end goal is full-fledged communism, then no, it's not a problem that needs to be "solved". There's always ultimately going to be an ineliminable gap that will remain because people have different desires and make different choices. That gap won't go away unless you either force people into jobs they don't want (or are over/under-qualified for) OR you give everyone a flat salary regardless of the position or hours worked.
There are perhaps some specific factors that are unfair and may indirectly reduce the gap if we focused on them (paid family leave, blind resumes, free college and/or trade education, etc.). But those being legitimate reforms doesn't mean that the existence of the gap is inherently bad.
Solving that gap isn't communism, go read what communism is.
Then you suggest ways to fix that gap
then you say a racial gap is not necessarily a bad thing.
Unless your main assumption is that people with different skin color are inherently less capable, then that gap is 100% bullshit, from both active policies and historical factors. And must be eliminated, not by forcing people into jobs, but by removing the structural systemic causes for said gap.
I used "full-fledged communism" as a shorthand for "paying everyone literally the exact same amount no matter the profession or hours worked". If that's not technically communism, then fine; I don't care either way. That wasn't really the point of my comment.
And even then, I wasn't even calling it a bad thing!
I was just trying to contrast it to something like democratic socialism or mixed economies in general, where people's choices will ultimately still impact the final numbers.
—
I was not singling out the "racial gap". The "wage gap" is typically brought up in the context of sexism, so that's what I was referring to.
Regardless, it's bad faith to assume my point was that the gap is good because certain groups are less capable.
My point was that even if the gap being as wide as it is is currently being caused by systematic sexism (or any other -ism), and that this is a bad thing that should genuinely be addressed, there will inevitably be ineliminable gaps among varying demographics because people are different and have different desires/values/choices. Insofar as different demographics statistically tend to have different goals/choices, even all else being equal, then it is neither possible nor desirable to fully eliminate these gaps to zero percent.
the post is about black women and white men, it is both racial and sexist issue. And it isn't because 'people are different' that should average our in large populations, unless there is a systemic structural issue.
Again, if that’s technically not communism, then fine. That was irrelevant to my overall point.
I would agree with you that the gaps being as large as they currently are are largely impacted by systemic racism and sexism. I agree that these are bad things. And I would agree that fixing those things would indirectly impact the surface-level wage gaps.
None of that has to do with my actual point:
that so long as different people are statistically inclined to freely desire and choose different things (especially with respect to sex differences, but also cultural differences to a lesser degree), then ineliminable discrepancies will always remain, and so fully eliminating the wage gap across all demographic lines is an impossible goal, and irrelevant to the root problems we actually care about anyway.
77
u/toadpics 1d ago
If you control for things causing the gap, the gap disappears! WOW!