Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

TheDiano t1_j782flz wrote

Reply to comment by aussie_punmaster in W-2 Wage Distribution by Tax Bracket & Gender [OC] by takeasecond

Agree to disagree, it absolutely matters

4

aussie_punmaster t1_j7a67cl wrote

What are you even disagreeing with that I’m saying? You don’t think that on its own it’s useful to understand that there’s a significant difference in the income distributions of women and men? That it’s useful to be aware of that in considering certain policies regardless of the drivers?

1

TheDiano t1_j7b4s63 wrote

Correct, It’s not useful without context

−1

aussie_punmaster t1_j7cgumf wrote

Well we will have do agree to disagree then, because I think that’s a ridiculous position.

Do you also say the same when someone plots the CPI over time? It is only useful breaking into the different sectors to better understand which areas are driving inflation?

1

TheDiano t1_j7cxsah wrote

Do you by any chance understand the words causation and correlation? Because I’m not sure you do

−1

aussie_punmaster t1_j7ex3u0 wrote

I do, do you understand English? Because I’m not sure you do.

What if I’m developing a policy for a discounted medical treatment which is gender specific and will apply to those on incomes below X? I don’t really care why there’s a difference, I just need to know that there’ll be one in the supplies that I’ll need.

I’d wager your great concern is because you’re fixated on the use/conclusion of the data you have in mind.

2

TheDiano t1_j7fv5xf wrote

Exactly, at that point you look at the data and distribute accordingly. The data is what it is, it doesn’t mean it’s discriminatory

0

aussie_punmaster t1_j7gw4cv wrote

You just told on yourself. I never said anything about it being discriminatory.

As I suspected, you’re so worried that someone might conclude it’s discrimination you’re jumping at shadows.

1

TheDiano t1_j7h8f7g wrote

Then I misinterpreted what you said, my apologies.

2