Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Study shows salaries of young women 8% higher than men in peer group (2010)

content.time.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 280 posts

Re: Study shows salaries of young women 8% higher than men in peer group (2010)

#101

Post by crusso »

carlmr wrote: post #17
J-dawg wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it's making exactly the same mistake as studies that compare the average salary of all working-age women with the average salary of all working-age men, and then declare a "gender pay gap" of 20% (or whatever).

I was thinking the same. The study is stupid, but for the same reason any of the women's pay gap studies in the last few years fall short. Comparing apples and oranges is the new science.

Yep. In a world of such pervasive intellectual dishonesty, what's the best course of action? While I admire the people and arguments that have the most intellectual integrity, it seems that demagoguery just works better when it comes to shaping public policy.

At the end of the day, the problem is that most people (voters) wouldn't even begin to understand or appreciate the distinction between demagoguery and intellectual integrity.

Re: Study shows salaries of young women 8% higher than men in peer group (2010)

#102

Post by kareemsabri »

Malarkey73 wrote: post #7

"He attributes the earnings reversal overwhelmingly to one factor: education. For every two guys who graduate from college or get a higher degree, three women do." It's interesting itself that more women graduate than men. But equal pay means equal pay for people with similar qualifications doing similar jobs. This comparison means nothing to me.

It should probably mean something to you that women are collecting advanced degrees at a rate significantly higher than that of men.

However, given the "women earn ~70 cents for every dollar a man earns" rhetoric we traditionally hear about unequal pay, which compares female earnings to male earnings outright without controlling for education, qualifications, or the "same job"[1], it would seem this comparison is done in the same spirit.

1. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2014/jan/...

Re: Study shows salaries of young women 8% higher than men in peer group (2010)

#103

Post by fyi1183 »

crusso wrote: post #83
mcny wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What we should mandate is transparency. We all think we are expert negotiators but we are all idiots. We will all be better off if all salary and all compensation information is public and easily accessible. Sadly, a lot of people think they have something to lose and will never support it.

It would be an interesting experiment. Has it been done before? That could lead to some unpleasant things: * A lot of unavoidable angst as people of less worth to the business are proven to be paid less in no uncertain terms. * More internal strife as people jockey for identifiable rank within the organization based upon their salaries. "Why is Sue paid $10k more than I am? Sue wasn't at her desk all week last week w…

In certain Nordic countries (Sweden at least, I believe), all tax data is public. By extension, everybody's income is public as well. It doesn't seem to be an issue.

Re: Study shows salaries of young women 8% higher than men in peer group (2010)

#104

Post by apercu »

mrweasel wrote: post #10
Malarkey73 wrote: post #7

"He attributes the earnings reversal overwhelmingly to one factor: education. For every two guys who graduate from college or get a higher degree, three women do." It's interesting itself that more women graduate than men. But equal pay means equal pay for people with similar qualifications doing similar jobs. This comparison means nothing to me.

Sadly "equal pay" means whatever you want it to mean. At some point the nurses union in Denmark argued that their education was roughly the same length as that of an engineer, so they should be paid the same on that basic. Completely ignoring that engineers spend five years at the university vs. the 3.5 years for nursing school and that engineers are pay wildly different salaries bases on their field of work. In my m…

> In my mind, equal pay is for people doing the exact same job, and the exact same number of hours, but that just my interpretation.

I find that hard to quantify in many professional settings. Say Sally and Tim are both project managers. They have basically the same education and experience levels. But Sally has more tact and is more organized. So she gets all the complicated and risky projects. Should Tim and Sally make the same? I'd argue, no.

Re: Study shows salaries of young women 8% higher than men in peer group (2010)

#105

Post by PurpleBoxDragon »

jwfxpr wrote: post #30
fwdpropaganda wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sadly "equal pay" means whatever you want it to mean. Exactly this. At a fundamental level every individual has an infinite number of "dimensions" (in ML parlance) associated with him, and "equal pay" people or groups will try and convince you that expected pay should be the same over a certain subset of dimensions while ignoring all the others. Invariably they will pick the most beneficial to that particular perso…

You cannot dismiss rigorous statistical analysis by arguing it can never encompass the full dimensions of the data. Of course it can't. The map is not the territory; it is a useful way to find our way around it. Ignoring the map is perilous, if not arrogant, even though it is merely a flawed representation of the real truth. You might argue that a specific study or meta-analysis contains a bias or misinterpretation,…

>You cannot argue that all studies of complex topics are invalid simply because their topics are complex.

If you take a random sample of studies you can make a statistical analysis. You don't need to examine every cow to make an argument that there are no pink cows, but you do need to do a random sample. And that's if you only want to meet the highest standards of evidence. Much lower standards can be far easier to meet.

Re: Study shows salaries of young women 8% higher than men in peer group (2010)

#106

Post by freehunter »

PunchTornado wrote: post #82
ShadowFaxSam wrote: post #53

"Applies only to unmarried, childless women under 30 who live in cities" This is a trend that I have personally witnessed since joining the corporate workforce as a recent college graduate living in a major city. In general I saw my female colleagues getting promoted faster and moving up faster than their male counterparts. In no way do I think it was favouritism, I just believe our senior management thought these yo…

I don't think you can justify your position "these young women were better prepared and organised than their male counterpart in their 20's". You say that women in their 20s are better at something than men in their 20s. I believe you know this is indefensible and if you would say the reverse you would get kicked out of your job.

>You say that women in their 20s are better at something than men in their 20s

I don't know what comment you read, but the comment I read said nothing remotely close to this. If you want to paraphrase what they said, it'd be more like "the very small sample of women I was exposed to in a small amount of time at one single professional workplace were better prepared for the job than the very small sample of men I was exposed to in a small amount of time at one single professional workplace".

That says absolutely nothing about men and women in general, no matter how much baseless controversy you want to drum up.

Re: Study shows salaries of young women 8% higher than men in peer group (2010)

#108

Post by crusso »

Gerardo1 wrote: post #85
nerdymanchild wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

Writing off people you disagree with as ignorant doesn't really help anything. And even if you're right, I'm not interested in a society devoid of compassion.

I'm not interested in a society devoid of compassion

That's a straw man, right? That's not what the poster to whom you were responding said.

Re: Study shows salaries of young women 8% higher than men in peer group (2010)

#109

Post by PurpleBoxDragon »

carlmr wrote: post #17
J-dawg wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it's making exactly the same mistake as studies that compare the average salary of all working-age women with the average salary of all working-age men, and then declare a "gender pay gap" of 20% (or whatever).

I was thinking the same. The study is stupid, but for the same reason any of the women's pay gap studies in the last few years fall short. Comparing apples and oranges is the new science.

It seems in this case we are comparing apples and apples for their ability to be made into orange juice.

Re: Study shows salaries of young women 8% higher than men in peer group (2010)

#110

Post by cdmcmahon »

cm2187 wrote: post #41
verbify wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If men or women are choosing different career paths, that too is notable and worth reporting. Papers can report the gap without going into underlying causes.

Except that most newspaper are jumping to conclusions, saying that there are discriminations, women not getting the same chances, etc. That might be the case but these studies do not allow to establish that.

If women aren’t having the same access to more lucrative positions or fields that men are, then that is discrimination — in education or the workplace or both. Unless you believe that something about women drives them away from such positions/fields or makes them less qualified in such positions/fields, in which case you are in the Damore camp.
Post reply on HN