Support NeoGAF

[Flying_Phoenix]

I would like a graph that breaks down the pay over a variety of fields, namely time spent on the job, total pay divided by total hours worked, specialization or training certifications, and so on.

If there is a wage gap because more men than women work in fields that have a higher degree of specialization/degrees/danger, and those are the main reasons that men make more than women, then the point is moot.

If men make more than women factoring in the time that women take off for maternity leave, child care, and so on, ditto.

But, taking all those factors together, and equalizing the playing field, if women who work the same time, duration, have the same amount of degrees, training and so on don't make as much as their male counterparts, then that is a problem we need to address.

Its a pretty complicated issue that would have me linking you multiple things.

But I think you'll find this interesting.

 

[cartoon_soldier]

The thing is, the report Maddow cites does compare the pay between men and women by occupation. Link is in TPM story:

http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2...re-is-no-pay-gap-for-women.php?ref=fpnewsfeed

 

[AlteredBeast]

I know that there is a wage gap, but I would like to see correlation based on hours worked, certification, experience within the workplace, etc.

I am sure even after taking into account those factors, discrimination will still exist in some/several/most? fields, but then we can know where we need to work to eliminate such discrimination.

If women are earning less because they don't go for as many high-level degrees, don't work as much overtime, or take more vacation time, or whatever, then they can't blame their pay differences on a stacked deck.

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

I know that there is a wage gap, but I would like to see correlation based on hours worked, certification, experience within the workplace, etc.

I am sure even after taking into account those factors, discrimination will still exist in some/several/most? fields, but then we can know where we need to work to eliminate such discrimination.

If women are earning less because they don't go for as many high-level degrees, don't work as much overtime, or take more vacation time, or whatever, then they can't blame their pay differences on a stacked deck.

To put it short, those things do contribute to an extent but in no way close the gap.

 

[AlteredBeast]

To put it short, those things do contribute to an extent but in no way close the gap.

data. data. data. I need to see the data.

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

data. data. data. I need to see the data.

Its 12:30 AM and I have to go to bed. I'll PM it to you tomorrow or something. Or perhaps someone else could take control of the wheel.

 

[AlteredBeast]

I would appreciate it.

 

[Oblivion]

I'm okay with this!

Love that article but serious question: Isn't the whole point of the senate that it provides smaller states a voice in congress?

 

[NullPointer]

Love that article but serious question: Isn't the whole point of the senate that it provides smaller states a voice in congress?

I always thought it was to give the monied class veto power over the mob popular representation.

 

[GhaleonEB]

I always thought it was to give the monied class veto power over the masses.

I think his explanation is the pretext for yours, which is the reality.

 

[Atilac]

Love that article but serious question: Isn't the whole point of the senate that it provides smaller states a voice in congress?

The point of the senate is to act as an obstacle and prevent the momentary majority from forcing monistic decisions through congress. The framers were terrified of an all powerful legislator, which is why it is split between the house and the senate (bicameral congress).

If you seek to know more, look up Federalist paper 10 written by James Madison.

 

[Atilac]

I always thought it was to give the monied class veto power over the mob popular representation.

This is a cynical view. It was done to divide power and prevent tyranny.

 

[thatbox]

This is a cynical view. It was done to divide power and prevent tyranny.

Yeah. Even though Congress isn't really functioning, this system has still at least prevented the nutjob House from running amok post-midterms.

 

[speculawyer]

The point of the senate is to act as an obstacle and prevent the momentary majority from forcing monistic decisions through congress. The framers were terrified of an all powerful legislator, which is why it is split between the house and the senate (bicameral congress).

There was also some stupid idea about the 'state' getting representation as opposed to the people (who are represented by the House) . . . and hence each state getting an equal 2 Senators each. But that turns out to just be fucking stupid. It just ends up as two separate bodies that each vote on things wherein one has relatively proportional representation and the other massively over-represents the views of very small states and large rural areas.

The senate is shit. And I don't mind the filibuster so much . . . just the massively undemocratic nature of the senate.

 

[Black Republican]

Gallup showed tightening again sunday with Obama 47 Romney 46

 

[Measley]

http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2...re-is-no-pay-gap-for-women.php?ref=fpnewsfeed

Destroyed

That guy actually said that there is no wage gap between men and women? WTF?

And Dick Gregory moving on without settling the issue is what's wrong with the modern media today. You're a moderator dude. Do your damn job.

 

[empty vessel]

The point of the senate is to act as an obstacle and prevent the momentary majority from forcing monistic decisions through congress. The framers were terrified of an all powerful legislator, which is why it is split between the house and the senate (bicameral congress).

If you seek to know more, look up Federalist paper 10 written by James Madison.

This is a cynical view. It was done to divide power and prevent tyranny.

Madison specifically mentions class and the need to protect the wealthy from the masses. Yes, this is a fear about "popular representation," but because of the threat it represents to the landed gentry:

In England, at this day, if elections were open to all classes of people, the property of landed proprietors would be insecure. An agrarian law would soon take place. If these observations be just, our government ought to secure the permanent interests of the country against innovation. Landholders ought to have a share in the government, to support these invaluable interests, and to balance and check the other. They ought to be so constituted as to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority. The Senate, therefore, ought to be this body; and to answer these purposes, they ought to have permanency and stability. Various have been the propositions; but my opinion is, the longer they continue in office, the better will these views be answered.

http://books.google.com/books?id=nF...y of the opulent&pg=PA450#v=onepage&q&f=false

(Also, keep in mind that the founders did not fear the legislative branch nearly as much as the executive branch--King George. They very intentionally created a very powerful Congress and a weak, albeit not impotent, president.)

 

[Tim-E]

In 2008, the slogan was "Change;" in 2012, it's "Forward." Here's a nice video that hits on pretty much everything he plans to run on.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WbQe-wVK9E&feature=g-all-u

 

[The Librarian]

Another salient endorsement of Mitt Romney's leadership:

Grover Norquist, the Republican strategist who heads Americans for Tax Reform, said in an interview that he did not expect Mr. Romney to lead as president. He just wants him to sign the bills that put Mr. Ryan’s vision into practice.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...s-the-problem/2012/04/30/gIQAK7kUrT_blog.html

 

[cartoon_soldier]

In 2008, the slogan was "Change;" in 2012, it's "Forward." Here's a nice video that hits on pretty much everything he plans to run on.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WbQe-wVK9E&feature=g-all-u

But but he hasn't done anything...lol

 

[PantherLotus]

Goddamn it. Was watching MTP, and Gregory was doing a good job with republican hack Ed Gillespie, when he asked why the Bush tax cuts didn't work throughout 8 years, and he let him get away with it by saying that there was 52 months of straight job growth. Not fucking pointing out that while that may be true, it was the SLOWEST growth we've had since the Bureau of Labor Statistics was created! And the total amount of jobs created were the worst since then as well.

So close, Greggers. So close.

Don't forget the moment where he let Castellanos pretend that the basic fact of women's lower pay wasn't true. Maddow was out there alone, and Gregory didn't have the spine to say, "c'mon, we know the facts."

edit: i see this was covered above.

 

[PantherLotus]

Holy fuck, guys, do you know how statistical studies work? You're asking about degrees and hours worked and pretending that sleeze has a point? Please get an education, thanks.

 

[Tim-E]

But but he hasn't done anything...lol

Hopefully this will put a stop to the "He's not going to run on his record! He's going to distract you with silly things like women's health!" lines that have been coming from republicans.

 

[Arde5643]

Hopefully this will put a stop to the "He's not going to run on his record! He's going to distract you with silly things like women's health!" lines that have been coming from republicans.

It's Republicans, they'll just double down on it.

 

[AlteredBeast]

Holy fuck, guys, do you know how statistical studies work? You're asking about degrees and hours worked and pretending that sleeze has a point? Please get an education, thanks.

I am trying to base my belief in reality. If women are getting paid less mainly because of choices they make in the workplace, a lack of higher-end masters and doctorates, less hours worked per week/year, and so on. Then the issue isn't a serious one in that field that merits a hard look.

I don't believe that those things are always the issue, though. I am sure that some of it has to do with workplace discrimination and a lack of seniority (due to enforced stereotypes that prevent them from working their way up the ladder in many fields), and that is what needs to be addressed.

 

[cartoon_soldier]

http://money.cnn.com/2012/04/30/news/economy/income-spending/

Good and Bad News. Economic recovery slowing though, unemployment numbers on Friday I think will be very good for Romney...

A Commerce Department report showed that personal spending increased 0.3% in the month, well down from the 0.9% jump in spending the month before. That was much weaker than the 0.5% gain in spending forecast by economists surveyed by Briefing.com.

Income rose though

Income increased a little faster, rising 0.4%, which was an improvement from the 0.2% gain the previous month. It was the first time since December that income growth outpaced spending increases, as consumers dipped into savings the previous two months in order to deal with rising prices, such as increases in gasoline prices.

 

[teruterubozu]

Hopefully this will put a stop to the "He's not going to run on his record! He's going to distract you with silly things like women's health!" lines that have been coming from republicans.

LOL, yeah right.
The new video already has plenty of criticism this morning from republicans, saying that there is nothing "forward" about the video and that it's all about "the past", mainly all the stuff he inherited from Bush.

 

[Invisible_Insane]

I am trying to base my belief in reality. If women are getting paid less mainly because of choices they make in the workplace, a lack of higher-end masters and doctorates, less hours worked per week/year, and so on. Then the issue isn't a serious one in that field that merits a hard look.

I don't believe that those things are always the issue, though. I am sure that some of it has to do with workplace discrimination and a lack of seniority (due to enforced stereotypes that prevent them from working their way up the ladder in many fields), and that is what needs to be addressed.

Have you been paying attention to the news at all?

 

[Arde5643]

LOL, yeah right.
The new video already has plenty of criticism this morning from republicans, saying that there is nothing "forward" about the video and that it's all about "the past", mainly all the stuff he inherited from Bush.

Haha, basically all the things Bush didn't do?

 

[AlteredBeast]

Have you been paying attention to the news at all?

You mean about the very recent trend of women gaining more masters and doctorates than men?

 

[PantherLotus]

I am trying to base my belief in reality. If women are getting paid less mainly because of choices they make in the workplace, a lack of higher-end masters and doctorates, less hours worked per week/year, and so on. Then the issue isn't a serious one in that field that merits a hard look.

I don't believe that those things are always the issue, though. I am sure that some of it has to do with workplace discrimination and a lack of seniority (due to enforced stereotypes that prevent them from working their way up the ladder in many fields), and that is what needs to be addressed.

The study accounts for education, AB. Please follow along. These are direct comparisons that take education, field of study, discipline, experience, and careers into account.

 

[AlteredBeast]

The study accounts for education, AB. Please follow along. These are direct comparisons that take education, field of study, discipline, experience, and careers into account.

Can you link me to the data that shows these demographics breakdowns?

And cut the condescending attitude. I am not arguing with you, I am just interested to see how things stack up.

 

[VanMardigan]

The study accounts for education, AB. Please follow along. These are direct comparisons that take education, field of study, discipline, experience, and careers into account.

If you're a student, you can view a lot of other studies and articles that discuss the same things, but delve into specific industries. Its crazy, I'm reading an article now about the pay gap in the hotel and catering industry, which is dominated by women and still has a pay gap when you account for education, experience, etc.

Can't link to these because they are research journals, but if you are a student, a cursory search for "women, men, pay" will yield a ton of papers covering all angles of the disparity in pay.

 

[AlteredBeast]

If you're a student, you can view a lot of other studies and articles that discuss the same things, but delve into specific industries. Its crazy, I'm reading an article now about the pay gap in the hotel and catering industry, which is dominated by women and still has a pay gap when you account for education, experience, etc.

Can't link to these because they are research journals, but if you are a student, a cursory search for "women, men, pay" will yield a ton of papers covering all angles of the disparity in pay.

Is this available through Lexus Nexus or ERIC? I would love to delve through this stuff.

 

[VanMardigan]

I'm using a multi-database tool called Thoreau. ERIC will yield some stuff, but specific to education, which isn't broad enough. Should still suffice to get you started since all articles will likely talk about other relevant research and probably provide stats as well.

 

[AlteredBeast]

I'm using a multi-database tool called Thoreau. ERIC will yield some stuff, but specific to education, which isn't broad enough. Should still suffice to get you started since all articles will likely talk about other relevant research and probably provide stats as well.

I appreciate the helpful response. Courtesy is so much better than asshole responses.

 

[Chichikov]

So cracked (I know, I know) has his article that might relevant to this thread -

5 Ways to Spot a B.S. Political Story in Under 10 Seconds

#5. The Headline Contains the Word "Gaffe"
#4. The Headline Ends in a Question Mark
#3. The Headline Contains the Word "Blasts"
#2. The Headline Is About a "Lawmaker" Saying Something Stupid
#1. The Headline Includes the Phrase "Blow To"​

I agree wholeheartedly.
Well written too.

 

[PantherLotus]

Can you link me to the data that shows these demographics breakdowns?

And cut the condescending attitude. I am not arguing with you, I am just interested to see how things stack up.

Don't pretend you haven't been a complete cunt to me throughout this thread. Just because I don't respond doesn't mean I'm not reading.

 

[AlteredBeast]

Don't pretend you haven't been a complete cunt to me throughout this thread. Just because I don't respond doesn't mean I'm not reading.

The difference being that I meant no offense, while you obviously do. Well done bringing informed discussion the thread rather than merely calling everybody idiots who disagree or who merely wish to see more information.

 

[MrPliskin]

I appreciate the helpful response. Courtesy is so much better than asshole responses.

You don't think suggesting that everyone's beliefs are based in fantasy is an asshole response? You literally said "I try to base my beliefs in reality", suggesting others don't. Also, your short responses of "data data data" dismissing any discussion is equally as condescending. Just saying.

 

[Opiate]

You don't think suggesting that everyone's beliefs are based in fantasy is an asshole response? You literally said "I try to base my beliefs in reality", suggesting others don't. Also, your short responses of "data data data" dismissing any discussion is equally as condescending. Just saying.

I don't agree. He asked for statistical data -- which is the best form of evidence -- and got a response with no data. He then repeated his request for data more emphatically ("data data data") and got a hostile response. He asked, again, for data, and got another hostile response.

To be quite frank, in most cases when I am confronted by someone who behaves in such a manner, I assume they don't actually have the evidence, or the evidence is not on their side after all. In this situation it didn't happen to be the case, but that's always my suspicion when people state things as facts and then become overtly hostile when asked to support those facts with citations and evidence.

 

[AlteredBeast]

You don't think suggesting that everyone's beliefs are based in fantasy is an asshole response? You literally said "I try to base my beliefs in reality", suggesting others don't. Also, your short responses of "data data data" dismissing any discussion is equally as condescending. Just saying.

Just my quest for knowledge. Like I said before, I don't disbelieve that there is discrimination going on, but I would like to know specifics to the field, the reasoning behind it, and what can be done.

Everyone slapping themselves on the back and saying "wage gap!" doesn't help anything, but if we can use data and demographics to determine where the problem areas are, we can seek to help and improve those areas. I always use informed statistics to improve my positions. Simply knowing something isn't enough. Why is better.

 

[GhaleonEB]

Josh Marshall has a good take on the way the Obama administration has - unexpectedly - gone on the offense against Romney RE: Bin Laden.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/04/inside_the_mitt_laden_smackdown_1.php?ref=fpblg

 

[balladofwindfishes]

I've seen this going around Facebook

Is that actually a real quote? Where did it come from?

Because it's hilarious.

 

[Arde5643]

Oh shit, Romney's the real xsibit?

 

[cartoon_soldier]

Josh Marshall has a good take on the way the Obama administration has - unexpectedly - gone on the offense against Romney RE: Bin Laden.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/04/inside_the_mitt_laden_smackdown_1.php?ref=fpblg

Must Read:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...iled-account-from-showdown-by-david-corn.html

It was entirely possible—arguably probable—that Obama might never recover from such a failure. So much had to go exactly right for the raid to succeed; one accident or screwup (well beyond Obama’s control) could sink the operation—and his presidency. Obama was on the verge of taking the ultimate political risk.

It was time to decide. Obama asked his national security team for their individual recommendations. Vice President Joe Biden and Gates each counseled waiting for more intelligence. “Don’t go,” the vice president said. Several of the participants still opted for a missile strike. Panetta and the president’s chief counterterrorism adviser, John Brennan, backed the helicopter assault. There was no consensus.

The raid was not supported by a majority—and Obama’s most experienced advisers, his vice president and defense secretary, were wary of proceeding with this mission.

Romney's response today was he would have said Yes to the mission to, that even Jimmy Carter would have said yes.

 

[Atilac]

There was also some stupid idea about the 'state' getting representation as opposed to the people (who are represented by the House) . . . and hence each state getting an equal 2 Senators each. But that turns out to just be fucking stupid. It just ends up as two separate bodies that each vote on things wherein one has relatively proportional representation and the other massively over-represents the views of very small states and large rural areas.

The senate is shit. And I don't mind the filibuster so much . . . just the massively undemocratic nature of the senate.

Which was intended

 

[AlteredBeast]

Which was intended

It is definitely working with the filibuster in place.

 

[empty vessel]

Which was intended

Which shouldn't be mistaken for an argument that it is good. (Also, the founders intended the Senate to be a simple majoritarian institution, not one requiring super majorities, so if we're equating intentions to goodness....)

 

[PhoenixDark]

Anyone have contact info forPantherLotus? I'm assuming he's perm'd