When all job differences are accounted for, the pay gap almost disappears • Hacker News Board

Re: When all job differences are accounted for, the pay gap almost disappears

#321

Post by solidsnack9000 » Thu, Aug 03, 2017, 6:11 AM UTC

belorn wrote: post #241

oldboyFX wrote: post #11

Still not sure what to believe on this issue. Some points of discussion are (unrelated to article): 1. If women were 25% cheaper than men while being as competent, wouldn't white/male capitalists trip over themselves to only hire women to increase their profits? 2. Women are less likely to negotiate salary and assert themselves, as women in general are more agreeable than men. Is this behavior based in biology or is…

I currently find an explanation based on incentives to be best in resolving why there is gender segregation in the work place and a strong correlation to pay grades. The way women selects men is heavily weighted towards how much the man earns. According to dating statistics from dating sites, its the biggest single strongest attribute to predict if a message sent from a man will give positive response. This can also…

It doesn't take much to see adverse selection at work, here. Men who accept lower salaries -- as salary equality more or less requires, during a certain interim period -- will disproportionately find themselves without mates, esteem, &c. Their influence will be correspondingly less. The men who figure out how to maintain higher salaries -- relative to other men, and to women -- will be the ones who most shape the communities they are a part of.

Re: When all job differences are accounted for, the pay gap almost disappears

#322

Post by darawk » Thu, Aug 03, 2017, 6:11 AM UTC

burkaman wrote: post #314

darawk wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know. There are many possible explanations. One is sexism. Another is that women are less likely to negotiate. Another is that maybe women tend to be CEOs of companies that are less valuable, or that rely less on the expertise of their CEO.

Ok, so why are they less likely to negotiate, why are they more likely to ascend at less valuable companies, etc. The whole point of talking about the wage gap is figuring out why it exists. And inevitably, there are only two possible ends to this investigation. Either there are inherent biological differences that cause women to be less effective and valuable in our economy, or some societal manifestation of sexism…

Yep, that's correct. And it's almost certainly a mixture of the two. I'm not saying there isn't sexism involved, i'm just saying that it's more likely to be on the side of socializing young girls into choosing less remunerative professions.

Re: When all job differences are accounted for, the pay gap almost disappears

#323

Post by blei » Thu, Aug 03, 2017, 7:06 AM UTC

micahbright wrote: post #285

gertef wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does "women pay no taxes" mean? On its face, that's trivially false. More people sharing a larger total benefit doesn't imply that the average individual receives a larger benefit. Raising a child alone is a privilege?

Supported by research FYI http://judgybitch.com/2016/08/16/reblog-research-find-that-a...

Holy shit is that reblog of a blog post facetious. Have you looked at the original research cited?

Curiously enough, that blog post doesn't bother to post the charts of the immensely high market income gap and consumption gap between men and women in New Zealand. Those wholely explain the tax gap, because well, men are earning and spending much more, 50%-75% more for most cohorts.

As for the income support gap, the authors themselves explain that the gov income support is for poorer women who need the money to supplement their own or their spouses' incomes, especially during child-rearing years.

You seem to be correctly noticing some symptoms, but you're misdiagnosing all the problems at hand.

Re: When all job differences are accounted for, the pay gap almost disappears

#324

Post by mpweiher » Thu, Aug 03, 2017, 7:31 AM UTC

eloary wrote: post #310

mpweiher wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Social construct. Look at Asian countries > that by all accounts have less gender quality > than the west but have more women science > graduates. India is double the U.K. on that metric. How do you conclude "social construct" from that data? When external pressures are greater, gender differences equalize. When external constraints fall away, gender differences are allowed to express themselves. So it is no surpris…

No such correlation exists.

"Gender differences in personality tend to be larger in gender-egalitarian societies than in gender-inegalitarian societies"

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010....

"Most importantly and contra predictions, we showed that economically developed and more gender equal countries have a lower overall level of mathematics anxiety, and yet a larger national sex difference in mathematics anxiety relative to less developed countries."

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal....

"Previous research suggested that sex differences in personality traits are larger in prosperous, healthy, and egalitarian cultures in which women have more opportunities equal with those of men. In this article, the authors report cross-cultural findings in which this unintuitive result was replicated across samples from 55 nations (N = 17,637)."

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18179326

"What might be surprising to most people, as we shall see, is the specific pattern of cross-national variation in the gender gap in authority. To cite just one example, in the United States, the probability of a man in the labor force occupying an "upper" or "top" management position is 1.8 times greater than the probability of a woman occupying such a position, whereas in Sweden, the probability for men is 4.2 times greater than for women."

https://www.ssc.wisc.edu/~wright/Published%20writing/CC-C9.p...

Your move.

Re: When all job differences are accounted for, the pay gap almost disappears

#325

Post by adamlett » Thu, Aug 03, 2017, 8:18 AM UTC

klipt wrote: post #183

adamlett wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference is that it is generally easier to swap money for fulfillment and satisfaction than the other way around.

Most men may agree with you because they're socialized to think that way. Most women may not.

I think you're misunderstanding me.

If I have a high income, I have many options to swap that for fulfillment and satisfaction. I can buy stuff, I can go on interesting vacations, I can have expensive hobbies, I can donate to charities, and I can partake in a large number of experiences that are only available to those who can afford it. And finally, I can give it all up and pursue a life of simpler pleasures. Those are all options I have.

If I have a low income, I might still feel satisfied and fulfilled, but that could change. What options do I then have?

Re: When all job differences are accounted for, the pay gap almost disappears

#326

Post by emsy » Thu, Aug 03, 2017, 8:47 AM UTC

Quanttek wrote: post #232

ringaroundthetx wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HIRED has a report out which reveals demographics on what the employees themselves ask for, and what employers offered them. It reveals, as in a piece of data that wasn't typically part of the conversation, that some groups ask for less to begin with while the employer offers them more. But this 'more' amount is still less than employees that asked for more than that to begin with. The average of black candidates, an…

> Much of the discussion seems to place a blame squarely on employers, describing a cabal of shadowy prejudiced men in the board room ensuring someone gets 30% less or 30% more just because Nobody says that. It's the larger society, which also teaches black people and women to ask for less

Genuine question: Where does that happen?

Re: When all job differences are accounted for, the pay gap almost disappears

#327

Post by emsy » Thu, Aug 03, 2017, 8:53 AM UTC

lkbm wrote: post #268

oldboyFX wrote: post #11

Still not sure what to believe on this issue. Some points of discussion are (unrelated to article): 1. If women were 25% cheaper than men while being as competent, wouldn't white/male capitalists trip over themselves to only hire women to increase their profits? 2. Women are less likely to negotiate salary and assert themselves, as women in general are more agreeable than men. Is this behavior based in biology or is…

> 1. If women were 25% cheaper than men while being as competent, wouldn't white/male capitalists trip over themselves to only hire women to increase their profits? Here's another claim I've heard many times and never seen refuted (or even challenged): Tall men are paid more than short men (extending into non-physical work such as programming.) A company that recognizes this should hire a bunch of short programmers a…

This is such a poor comparison. Do you understand how averages work?

Re: When all job differences are accounted for, the pay gap almost disappears

#328

Post by OJFord » Thu, Aug 03, 2017, 8:57 AM UTC

sheepmullet wrote: post #281

OJFord wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd have thought that would be easier to do for teachers than for (the implicit comparison) software engineers.

Not at all. As a parent I have limited choice in who my kids teachers are. Where I lived I didn't even get a choice of schools. But the market is clearly there - plenty of people here pay $25-$30k/year for private school. With a small class size of 10-15 students that's $250k-$450k/year. On top of that most people here pay maybe $10-$15k to schools via property tax. So that's another $100k-$150k.

But that's a different issue, I replied to a comment about compensating performance.

There are already metrics for teacher performance (at its crudest: What's the average grade going in and out of the teacher's class?) which could be used to determine salary. (And maybe it is in some places.)

Re: When all job differences are accounted for, the pay gap almost disappears

#329

Post by OJFord » Thu, Aug 03, 2017, 8:59 AM UTC

rhizome wrote: post #271

OJFord wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not an inversion, it's the same point: apparently it can't.

Either I don't understand or I disagree. GP's point was not that a true capitalist would reduce the overall compensation.

The point GGP is making is that the difference does exist, but wouldn't if the same job was being done; therefore it is not.

Re: When all job differences are accounted for, the pay gap almost disappears

#330

Post by beaconstudios » Thu, Aug 03, 2017, 9:36 AM UTC

Quanttek wrote: post #232

ringaroundthetx wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HIRED has a report out which reveals demographics on what the employees themselves ask for, and what employers offered them. It reveals, as in a piece of data that wasn't typically part of the conversation, that some groups ask for less to begin with while the employer offers them more. But this 'more' amount is still less than employees that asked for more than that to begin with. The average of black candidates, an…

> Much of the discussion seems to place a blame squarely on employers, describing a cabal of shadowy prejudiced men in the board room ensuring someone gets 30% less or 30% more just because Nobody says that. It's the larger society, which also teaches black people and women to ask for less

it seems to me that if you spend all your time telling people they are oppressed, they'll believe you. There are certainly aspects of society that are unfair on women and racial minorities but hammering the idea of privilege and that as a person of group X you'll never be as successful as a white male you're just teaching people to accept and expect less.