Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Kesshh t1_jahcx57 wrote

Reply to comment by inorout00 in Gender pay gap difference in select geographies [OC] by Ok_Acanthisitta5799

That’s like a completely false simplification. Employment has a large number of factors that affect the supply and demand. Proximity to the work location affects available workers. Skill/experience affects available workers. Need for income affects tolerances in pay gap. Lack of choices affects tolerances in pay gap. Just to name a few.

−3

Autistom t1_jahdyxd wrote

True, that was not the best argument. But calling this a pay gap is intentionally missleading, since it takes averages over all professions for both genders and then implies that the difference means women get paid less for the same work. The truth is though, that almost all pay gap is due to different carreer prefferences between the genders - to use the most cliche example the technological faculties have majority of men while social faculties have majority of women. Once you count in the prefferences, the pay gap shrinks almost to zero.

14

Ian_ronald_maiden t1_jahfh1n wrote

> The truth is though, that almost all pay gap is due to different carreer prefferences between the genders

Why are critical industries dominated by women paid less on average in the majority of circumstances though?

4

Autistom t1_jahg0o0 wrote

Well its sad but it is econnomically impossible (unless you are rooting for communism) to pay a person who helps generate huge profits such as IT specialist or financial analyst the same wage as to someone who is a social services worker. I am not saying that its not an honourable and important profession, but generates much smaller financial value.

3

Ian_ronald_maiden t1_jahgro3 wrote

It’s interesting that you chose social worker as an example. The gender pay gap has always been observed in bureaucratic jobs that are among the many, many critical functions in society that aren’t measured on income generating ability.

> Well its sad but it is econnomically impossible (unless you are rooting for communism) to pay a person who helps generate huge profits such as IT specialist or financial analyst the same wage as to someone who is a social services worker.

And don’t you think it’s remarkable that all over the world it’s the female dominated gigs that we just can’t seem to justify paying more for. Can’t possibly pay the nurses more even in the midst of a labour shortage … but the IT guy needs a competitive package without question. Isn’t it weird that that situation always seems to replicate along gender lines all over the world?

Forget the justice off it or any ideas about changing it, don’t you just find that phenomenon interesting? One hell of a coincidence, right?

1

Autistom t1_jahim73 wrote

No I dont really find that remarkable. On average, men are more interrested in things and women in people. Thats why the prefference difference is mostly the same acrost the world and why the female preffered professions pay less - you sell things easier than you sell empathy.

As to the IT guys vs Nurses example - there is no person deciding these things. No evil patriarch setting the wages. I would guess that there is greater demand for IT professionals (as they generate more profit) than for nurses on the market or that there are less people capable of becoming IT professionals than those capable of becomming nurses in the population. It has nothing to do with gender.

2

Ian_ronald_maiden t1_jahj1y6 wrote

I can’t help but feel like you still have a pretty basic misunderstanding of what the words “gender pay gap” describe.

An evil overlord is not really part of it.

−3

Autistom t1_jahn7er wrote

Oh I think we agree on the fact that women preffered professions are paid less, even though not intentionally and that can be a meaning of these words.

But what most people take of the “pay gap” is that women are somehow paid less regardless of the profession and that is wrong and has severe consequences in the society.

8

Ian_ronald_maiden t1_jahp9nt wrote

> Oh I think we agree on the fact that women preffered professions are paid less, even though not intentionally and that can be a meaning of these words.

That is literally the meaning of those words. Anything else is just a failure to understand what the term was even referring to.

−2

Kingkyle18 t1_jal3xg6 wrote

The term is literally used over and over for “women get paid less for doing the same thing a man does”…..it’s wrong and only gullible people fall for it

2

Kingkyle18 t1_jal3s1k wrote

You have it ingrained in your head that businesses are so greedy but they only want to pay men….both can’t be true

−1

Ian_ronald_maiden t1_jalbcoc wrote

You don’t seem to understand what the term gender pay gap describes

3

Kingkyle18 t1_jalcscn wrote

Haha you again saying that no one understands “gender pay gap”….glad you have your own understanding of words unique to yourself

2

Ian_ronald_maiden t1_jaljfdo wrote

Most people understand it. You and the others who think it’s an attack on men clearly don’t

2

Pressed_Thumb t1_jaivern wrote

I think the problem in your understanding is assuming any salary should be measured or "justified" by anything other than the income generated by the employee.

In capitalism, prices come from the market process: supply and demand, that's it.

−1

Ian_ronald_maiden t1_jajep1t wrote

You think all jobs generate income?

Nurses? Teachers? Police? Firefighters?

2

Pressed_Thumb t1_jam0i2k wrote

Yes, I do. All those services are useful and are paid for, they add value to people in society.

Just because you relate those jobs with public services (that you don't pay directly), it doesn't mean they couldn't be priced properly by the market.

0

Ian_ronald_maiden t1_jam0qku wrote

So you seem to acknowledge that a gender pay gap exists, you just don’t think it’s something that needs addressing then, even when you’re talking about jobs specifically paid for with tax dollars

2

Pressed_Thumb t1_jannixx wrote

I'm not well acquainted with the data and I don't think the data presented in this graph is useful at all to understand the issue (as I discussed in other comments). So I can't say I acknowledge that it exists.

I would say this is something that needs to be addressed if it was clear that women make less than men when performing exactly the same job, out of sheer discrimination.

By looking at this data alone, there could be so many different phenomena skewing the average. It could be that women prefer professions that make less money. It could be that women have a greater chance of stopping their careers to take care of their families. If that's the case, then the gap in the average is not an issue, IMO.

1

Ian_ronald_maiden t1_jaokytd wrote

There are indeed many different phenomena that skew the average male. Women choosing professions that make less money is among them.

The question is, of course, why is it that professions chosen by women almost always seem to be valued less monetarily, even when they’re among the most important and in demand jobs in society.

Taking care of families is another part of it.

And, while it’s not an issue for you, it is an issue for women and the government who have to plan and account for the personal and community impacts of an enormous section of society being less prepared for an independent and healthy retirement

1

Pressed_Thumb t1_jaqm5gt wrote

What do you mean you say a profession is valued less? Do you want to suggest that it's done deliberately by someone or something?

The value of each profession is always a reflection of the market, that is, supply and demand. The employee always wants to be paid more and the employer always wants to pay as little as possible (regardless of the employee's gender).

If women were universally valued less as employees, that would just create a massive opportunity for companies hiring only women to have margins greater than their competitors. In a short time, many other companies would seize the same opportunity, increasing the demand for women's labor and thus normalizing the wages across gender.

My speculative take on this is that the biological differences between genders reflect on their average personality traits, making them choose jobs differently.

For being more competitive, men tend to pursue high-income careers and positions. Also, men have a predilection for things instead of people, which is a driver for choosing STEM careers. On the other hand, women gravitate more toward the humanities and don't focus so much on increasing their income. Of course there are plenty of exceptions, but on average, this seems to be the case.

1

Autistom t1_jan9qay wrote

On the contrary - its precisely because these jobs dont generate direct income that the have to be paid from your taxes and therefore are paid less than positions in the free market where you can increase salaries of the most valuable positions to attract better employees and generate more profit.

But, as the others have probably realised by now, you will just rewert to your ultimate “you dont understand the term” or “your opinion is just incorrect” argument again. Alas this is my last comment in this pointless crusade - try to be thankful that the system works even though you dont fully understand it is my final advice (othervise the people working these unfarly underpaid social services but we doing manual labour by now).

0

Ian_ronald_maiden t1_jao50hc wrote

What a complete load of high school rubbish

0

Autistom t1_jao6dfw wrote

And again - thats not an argument. You are not capable of defending your believes so you resort to insults.

1

Kingkyle18 t1_jal2sj6 wrote

Can’t explain economics to psychology majors…..

4

Pressed_Thumb t1_jahfjpa wrote

Very insightful. Considering what you said, would the next step in the analysis be to normalize all salaries by dividing by the profession average?

3

Riegler77 t1_jahw8a6 wrote

One's profession is not just affected by one's preference. If women are less likely to be promoted to higher-paying positions regardless of their abilities this will cause an unfair pay gap that will not show up once you normalize by position.

Anyway, even after accounting for position there is still a pay gap.

4

Pressed_Thumb t1_jaicifl wrote

If that's the case, the gap would show up when normalizing for industry or sector. Actually, there might come nice insights from those normalizations.

2

Autistom t1_jahhne3 wrote

Yeah that sounds like a way to do it. I would just take the pay difference in each profession separately and then made an average of that.

2

TheDiano t1_jak5m1y wrote

I didn’t read your comment but starting with “That’s like a” doesn’t really help whatever point you’re trying to make

−1