Women STILL get paid less for the same work. How in the hell would a free-market be any better if there is no protection for them?
if a women could be hired for less than a man, then a man would not be hired. if a man could be hired for less than a women, the woman would not be hired. equality of man and women.
Really? Pay scales is what you are worried about? I think your priorities are a little screwing.
I think the real question is:
Who is going to protect you when people like Todd "legitimate rape" Akins, can run for a seat in power?
'Men do not change, they unmask themselves' - Germaine de Stael
I wonder if that was his nickname in high school.
When Todd was on the playground:
"Abolish gambling! Prohibit it! Destroy the slot machines like the whiskey barrels in the 20s!"
"Shut up, legitimate rape."
I have a feeling the guy was like he is now his whole life.
what do we have
a male that wants 20% commision getting the job over a female that want's 15% commision?
a male that wants 100% of tips getting the job over a female that wan't 77% of tips?
in a free market, companies can advirtise compensation methods and that will show companies that give good compensation plans that consumers respond to.
does this work with capital investment as well?
a male charging 10% gets chosen over the female charging 7% interest?
Of course, you use a biased source.
In another thread JJ pointed out something about this argument. It's a dis-appeal to authority. It's the research behind the study that makes the argument invalid, not where the info/funding came from. Show what's wrong with the research.
How will the free market protect women?
Effectively.
“Since people are concerned that ‘X’ will not be provided, ‘X’ will naturally be provided by those who are concerned by its absence.""The sweetest of minds can harbor the harshest of men.”
http://voluntaryistreader.wordpress.org
http://consad.com/index.php?page=an-analysis-of-reasons-for-the-disparity-in-wages-between-men-and-women here is one study with research on pay gap. i have not read it but it says a gap of about 5-7% .
4.0 Summary and Conclusions Economic research has identified many factors that account for portions of the gender wage gap. Some of the factors are consequences of differences in decisions made by women and men in balancing their work, personal, and family lives. These factors include their human capital development, their work experience, the occupations and industries in which they work, and interruptions in their careers. Quantitative estimates of the effects of some factors, such as occupation and industry, can most easily be derived using data for very large numbers of workers, so that the detailed groupings of employees or employers that existing research indicates best describe the effects of the factors are adequately represented. Conversely, quantitative estimates of other factors, such as work experience and career interruptions, can most readily be obtained using data that describe the behavior of individual workers over extended time periods. The longitudinal data bases that contain such information include too few workers, however, to support adequate analysis of factors like occupation and industry; whereas the cross-sectional data bases that include enough workers to enable analysis of factors like occupation and industry do not collect data on individual workers over long enough periods to support adequate analysis of factors like work experience and job tenure. As a result, it has not been possible to develop reliable estimates of the total percentage of the raw gender wage gap for which all of the factors that have been separately found to contribute to the gap collectively account. In this study, an attempt has been made to use data from a large cross-sectional database, the Outgoing Rotation Group files of the 2007 CPS, to construct variables that satisfactorily characterize factors whose effects have previously been estimated only using longitudinal data, so that reliable estimates of those effects can be derived in an analysis of the cross-sectional data. Specifically, variables have been developed to represent career interruption among workers with specific gender, age, and number of children. Statistical analysis that includes those variables has produced results that collectively account for between 65.1 and 76.4 percent of a raw gender wage gap of 20.4 percent, and thereby leave an adjusted gender wage gap that is between 4.8 and 7.1 percent. Additional portions of the raw gender wage gap are attributable to other explanatory factors that have been identified in the existing economic literature, but cannot be analyzed satisfactorily using only data from the 2007 CPS. Those factors include, for example, health insurance, other fringe benefits, and detailed features of overtime work, which are sources of wage adjustments that compensate specific groups of workers for benefits or duties that disproportionately affect them. Analysis of such compensating wage adjustments generally requires data from several independent and, often, specialized sources. For many of the factors that have been identified, estimates of the proportion of the raw gender wage gap that is attributable to the factor have been developed. If the statistically estimated proportions were statistically independent of each other, their sum would represent the total proportion of the observed gap that is attributable to all of those factors collectively. The sum of the estimated proportions for all of the factors with estimates is, however, much greater than one. The estimates clearly are not statistically independent. Rather, the separately estimated proportions are, in effect, attributing some portions of the observed differences in wages to two or more explanatory factors. Summing the individual estimates therefore involves multiple counting of some portions of the wage differences. - 35 - In principle, the multiple counting could be eliminated by estimating the various proportions concurrently within a single comprehensive analysis that considers all of the factors simultaneously. Such an analysis is not feasible to conduct with the available data bases. Some factors, such as occupation and industry, require data for very large numbers of workers to represent adequately the detailed groupings of employees or employers that existing research indicates best describe the effects of the factors. Other factors, such as work experience and job tenure, require data that describe the behavior of individual workers over extended time periods. The longitudinal data bases that contain such information include too few workers, however, to support adequate analysis of factors like occupation and industry; whereas the cross-sectional data bases that include enough workers to enable analysis of factors like occupation and industry do not collect data on individual workers over long enough periods to support adequate analysis of factors like work experience and job tenure. Further, analysis of compensating wage adjustments generally requires data from several independent and, often, specialized sources. As a result, it is not possible now, and doubtless will never be possible, to determine reliably whether any portion of the observed gender wage gap is not attributable to factors that compensate women and men differently on socially acceptable bases, and hence can confidently be attributed to overt discrimination against women. In addition, at a practical level, the complex combination of factors that collectively determine the wages paid to different individuals makes the formulation of policy that will reliably redress any overt discrimination that does exist a task that is, at least, daunting and, more likely, unachievable.
In inequality and discrimination:
http://candlemind.com/projects/progclub/file/michael/getEducated.php?listID=14
In case you actually meant protection as in police, I can offer you
http://candlemind.com/projects/progclub/file/michael/getEducated.php?listID=16
Kylio27,
There is no entitlement within a free society, so even if it was shown that some subsection of society was discriminated against would mean very little. The point is that markets have defense mechanisms that at least makes those who wish to engage in their racism/sexism/etc pay for it. If I refuse to hire more-productive women at decent wages, I have given my competitor an advantage. He can hire more-productive women and steal market share from me.
The point is of course that companies are paying women less for the same work in response to legislation that forces them keep a women's position for multiple weeks if they become pregnant. Thus, women workers pose a higher risk for a company and the market responds. There is nothing inherently evil about this. There is no intolerant, prejudiced, chauvinistic manger to blame. Companies are simply responding to their buyers decisions to pay less for their products.
Markets would at least offer solutions to this problem.
--Female workers could, for example, check off whether their intentions for the next 12 months were to become pregnant, not become pregnant, or undecided. Companies could then base their salary package around their future intentions.
--Some women may choose to not have their position be held if the become pregnant, meaning their companies can safely pay them more.
--Some women may choose to give up a week of vacation per year, or work a 41 hour work week, in order to have the same pay as their male counterparts while still allowing the company to hedge their risks.
--For jobs that allow their female workers to work while at home after their pregnancy, there may be no pay difference at all
Of course, some companies may disregard this discrimination all together and pay their workers the same regardless. This may even be a strong selling point to their consumers. The point is you can't legislate this. You cannot force this. It is a consequence of free individuals make free decisions.
Read until you have something to write...Write until you have nothing to write...when you have nothing to write, read...read until you have something to write...Jeremiah