Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

For discussion of religion and politics

Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 42239
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by GreenGoo »

noxiousdog wrote: I'm not convinced the cost of education is an actual inhibitor to college. Is it an inhibitor to going to a private school? Yes. Is it an inhibitor to a four year degree? No. Not with the amount of needs and loans programs that exist.
Fair enough, and I don't disagree. I'd have to be a poor kid trying to get into college to do the research as to what's available, what's easily/reasonably available and such.

We've also discussed how a degree is not the only factor in finding employment, but reputation has an identifiable factor as well. I'm just mentioning it because there is a whole slew of factors involved that make it more complicated than free/not free education = positive or negative.

We can't solve this problem with a sound bite, but then I never thought "free education" in a campaign promise would actually result in a no strings attached free education.

There's room for a more comprehensive nation-wide program to help youth achieve an education than the haphazard, maze-like multi-system currently being navigated by our kids.
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82093
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by Isgrimnur »

Has no one brought up Death Subject Major Panels yet?
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
noxiousdog
Posts: 24627
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by noxiousdog »

The employment rate for college graduates is 97.5%. After your first job, it's mostly irrelevant what school you went to.

My wife is getting a four year degree now, and I've been paying attention to it for both my kids.

My boss is on one of the curriculum boards for the state of Texas.

Fwiw, at some point, I will change my mind, but a much, much greater problem are the people who aren't right for college, but have no clear way to develop marketable skills. Mechanics, welders, plumbers, etc. That is where the major gap can be fixed and for a lot less money.



Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
Black Lives Matter

"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82093
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by Isgrimnur »

noxiousdog wrote:The employment rate for college graduates is 97.5%. After your first job, it's mostly irrelevant what school you went to.
...
Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
97.4% for adults aged 25 and over. Rates for under 25 are not tracked.

And turn off your Tapatalk signature.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 42239
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by GreenGoo »

noxiousdog wrote:The employment rate for college graduates is 97.5%. After your first job, it's mostly irrelevant what school you went to.

My wife is getting a four year degree now, and I've been paying attention to it for both my kids.

My boss is on one of the curriculum boards for the state of Texas.

Fwiw, at some point, I will change my mind, but a much, much greater problem are the people who aren't right for college, but have no clear way to develop marketable skills. Mechanics, welders, plumbers, etc. That is where the major gap can be fixed and for a lot less money.



Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
I don't follow Isgrim's employment numbers that closely (sorry grim) but his numbers don't match yours. In any case, the specific number doesn't matter, if we're simply discussing employment, it just matters that it's high.

I could also take about less tangible benefits of having an educated population that aren't related to employability and economics, but if it's hard to get Americans to agree that paying someone's way so they can make the economy grow later, I sure as hell ain't taking on the task of explaining why education is beneficial just for education's sake. If dollars don't move the typical american, other reasons don't stand much chance.

In any case, my vision (as blurry and unfocused as it is) of "free education" includes trades, so that doesn't change things. Now I realize some people are just...well, not suited to being part of society. They choose crime or lethargy or whatever. People aren't identical so any solution will never encompass everyone. A free education won't mean crime disappears, or welfare programs in general can be closed due to lack of need.

For the people who are "lost causes", I think by definition, can't be "solved". That's a shame, but so what? We're not going to make them fight lions in an auditorium for our amusement, so...you solve what you can and move on. If we managed to make a 50% dent in the population of unproductive or underproductive people through major tax payer outlay into a nation-wide education finance system, would that be worthwhile? I don't know. Maybe?
User avatar
noxiousdog
Posts: 24627
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by noxiousdog »

My number was an estimate and was within a tenth of a percent of his.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
Black Lives Matter

"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 43688
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by Kraken »

Combustible Lemur wrote:
Defiant wrote:(Stealing the idea from the West Wing)

If scholarships for students who do well isn't in the cards, how about a GI bill for Teachers? Get a free education, but you're required to teach in high schools in lower income areas for several years. For those people who don't want to be at risk of being shot at in order to get a college education. Well, shot in a different country, anyway.
Not a good idea, teach for America while very good in intent was not so good in product. Inundating schools with apprentice teachers with no expectactation of then ever becoming journeymen?
I'm agnostic on that particular idea, but would not be averse to requiring some form of public service requirement relevant to their education from those who take advantage of the free ride. Those who shun that obligation would still be free to pay their own way, with or without private loans.

Bernie's free-for-all proposal should be seen as the opening gambit in a negotiation. I doubt that he expects that an unfettered no-strings-attached version would be the end result.
User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 70101
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by LordMortis »

Kraken wrote:Bernie's free-for-all proposal should be seen as the opening gambit in a negotiation.
The popularity of Bernie's proposal was born in Occupy, which wants free-for-all and loan forgiveness.

If I thought it was an opening gambit, I'd be on board. I'm open to ideas about making higher education more available to everyone willing to work for it/putting in the effort to make the States better/willing to fill holes in our employment needs/etc (and things that haven't come up yet). The rhetoric has never been about possibility though. It's been about demands. As to Bernie, specifically, this is where Defiant and company have it right. His campaign has been about stubborn rhetoric. While he may be able to come up with money by high frequency taxing stock trades, he doesn't have me on board that this is the right thing to do and through his eyes there's no seeing another side.
User avatar
Chaz
Posts: 7381
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 7:37 am
Location: Southern NH

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by Chaz »

I went to a state school, studied film, then went through a depression period in my senior year, so wound up six credits short of graduating. I had a job, so didn't get around to finishing those credits until a few years ago. During that time, I fell into a different field than film, but getting callbacks on job applications was consistently hard. I had a good resume (it said I attended four years of college, but didn't say I had the degree), plenty of relevant experience, and I usually got an offer if I got an interview. I just almost never got calls for interviews, and most of my jobs were gotten through personal references.

I finally finished the degree and updated my Linkedin profile with nothing else except that. Suddenly, I started getting cold calls from recruiters. Anecdotal, sure, but literally the only thing that changed was that I'd officially gotten the degree in a completely unrelated field. Should it have mattered? Nope. Did it? Seems like.
I can't imagine, even at my most inebriated, hearing a bouncer offering me an hour with a stripper for only $1,400 and thinking That sounds like a reasonable idea.-Two Sheds
User avatar
gbasden
Posts: 7664
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:57 am
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by gbasden »

Fitzy wrote:Unlike high school, college is about choice. What do you want to do? What do you want to be?

You have the freedom to make the wrong choice.

If the public is fully paying where does the choice line move to?

Does the public fully pay for everyone who wants a history degree? Or do we limit the number of history degrees to a reasonable amount?

The other question I'd have is are we going to subsidize the student or the institution? Is the government going to pay for little Timmy's Harvard degree? Or does the government get to say, sorry Timmy you have to go to a community college.

Making college "free" isn't a magic wand. It would require a massive change in the way we think about college.
From what I've seen, more and more jobs simply want a degree - any degree - to be eligible for employment. I am pretty much the living embodiment of your example. I graduated college with a double major in history and political science with an emphasis in the Soviet Union, a system that ceased to exist a few years after I graduated. That degree should be the most useless thing in the world to me. Yet I'm working as a systems engineer for Microsoft, a job I would not have been able to get without being able to check that box that said I had a college degree. I've also found that those four years of experience in research, writing and composing thoughts on paper has been more useful than I would have ever imagined in a technical field. While I freely admit I'm biased, I don't think what degree a person wants really makes a tremendous amount of difference and I wouldn't use it as a filter.

I personally would not push to make college free, but I would want to make it very affordable, especially at a state school. If we gave say, $10,000 a year in loan forgiveness for a successful graduate, that would subsidize approximately 65% of the cost of attending college in a public school in California. If one wished to go to Stanford or Harvard, however much more it cost per year would be on you. At least, that would be the system I favor.
User avatar
gbasden
Posts: 7664
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:57 am
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by gbasden »

noxiousdog wrote:
Fwiw, at some point, I will change my mind, but a much, much greater problem are the people who aren't right for college, but have no clear way to develop marketable skills. Mechanics, welders, plumbers, etc. That is where the major gap can be fixed and for a lot less money.
I completely agree with this as well. Our high schools have been under increasing pressure to make every child a college prep students and many have dropped their vocational classes. We need to help people get into decent trade schools and remove the stigma of that path being lesser than college.
User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 42239
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by GreenGoo »

noxiousdog wrote:My number was an estimate and was within a tenth of a percent of his.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
I'm going by memory and that number may be correct today, but it wasn't consistent from 2008 to today.

In any case, it only matters that it's high, which should come as no surprise. Pretend I didn't say anything.
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82093
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by Isgrimnur »

Median Salary by Education level, age 25 and up.

Being a male is the way to go. Not too sure how the Bureau of Labor Statistics would go about marketing that.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 42239
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by GreenGoo »

Isgrimnur wrote:Median Salary by Education level, age 25 and up.

Being a male is the way to go. Not too sure how the Bureau of Labor Statistics would go about marketing that.
Stop having uteruses and get a job, you bums.
User avatar
noxiousdog
Posts: 24627
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by noxiousdog »

GreenGoo wrote:
Isgrimnur wrote:Median Salary by Education level, age 25 and up.

Being a male is the way to go. Not too sure how the Bureau of Labor Statistics would go about marketing that.
Stop having uteruses and get a job, you bums.
The gender wage gap is also a myth.
Black Lives Matter

"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
User avatar
Defiant
Posts: 21045
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:09 pm
Location: Tongue in cheek

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by Defiant »

gbasden wrote:
Fitzy wrote:Unlike high school, college is about choice. What do you want to do? What do you want to be?

You have the freedom to make the wrong choice.

If the public is fully paying where does the choice line move to?

Does the public fully pay for everyone who wants a history degree? Or do we limit the number of history degrees to a reasonable amount?

The other question I'd have is are we going to subsidize the student or the institution? Is the government going to pay for little Timmy's Harvard degree? Or does the government get to say, sorry Timmy you have to go to a community college.

Making college "free" isn't a magic wand. It would require a massive change in the way we think about college.
From what I've seen, more and more jobs simply want a degree - any degree - to be eligible for employment.
This is true, and I'd still want to give people the choice, but I do think there should be some incentivization towards degrees that are more in demand (eg, STEM degrees over basket weaving, I mean philosophy).
User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 42239
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by GreenGoo »

noxiousdog wrote:
GreenGoo wrote:
Isgrimnur wrote:Median Salary by Education level, age 25 and up.

Being a male is the way to go. Not too sure how the Bureau of Labor Statistics would go about marketing that.
Stop having uteruses and get a job, you bums.
The gender wage gap is also a myth.
We've been over this and I was one of your pseudo allies. But a) it's hardly a myth, it's very clearly true. b) the reason it exists is more complicated than simply what genitals you have.

My uterus comment was supposed to be a funny response to Isgrim's rhetorical question, not an actual solution.
Last edited by GreenGoo on Thu Apr 14, 2016 3:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
noxiousdog
Posts: 24627
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by noxiousdog »

Kraken wrote:
Combustible Lemur wrote:
Defiant wrote:(Stealing the idea from the West Wing)

If scholarships for students who do well isn't in the cards, how about a GI bill for Teachers? Get a free education, but you're required to teach in high schools in lower income areas for several years. For those people who don't want to be at risk of being shot at in order to get a college education. Well, shot in a different country, anyway.
Not a good idea, teach for America while very good in intent was not so good in product. Inundating schools with apprentice teachers with no expectactation of then ever becoming journeymen?
I'm agnostic on that particular idea, but would not be averse to requiring some form of public service requirement relevant to their education from those who take advantage of the free ride. Those who shun that obligation would still be free to pay their own way, with or without private loans.

Bernie's free-for-all proposal should be seen as the opening gambit in a negotiation. I doubt that he expects that an unfettered no-strings-attached version would be the end result.
I would totally be on board with a public service for college tuition program.
Black Lives Matter

"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 42239
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by GreenGoo »

noxiousdog wrote:
I would totally be on board with a public service for college tuition program.
A guaranteed job post graduation? Hellzya. Not many would argue against that. When I considered Military college, one of the main pros was the guaranteed work afterwards.

Then again, first we give them an education, then we give them a job? Why not cut out the middle men and just send them dump trucks full of cash?!

Damn socialists.
Last edited by GreenGoo on Thu Apr 14, 2016 3:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82093
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by Isgrimnur »

GreenGoo wrote:
noxiousdog wrote:
GreenGoo wrote:
Isgrimnur wrote:Median Salary by Education level, age 25 and up.

Being a male is the way to go. Not too sure how the Bureau of Labor Statistics would go about marketing that.
Stop having uteruses and get a job, you bums.
The gender wage gap is also a myth.
We've been over this and I was one of your pseudo allies. But a) it's hardly a myth, it's very clearly true. b) the reason it exists is more complicated than simply what genitals you have.

My uterus comment was supposed to be a funny response to Isgrim's rhetorical question, not an actual solution.
I'm going to take the government's word over a podcast. It might not be 77%, but it's there based on the education level numbers.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
noxiousdog
Posts: 24627
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by noxiousdog »

Isgrimnur wrote:
GreenGoo wrote:
noxiousdog wrote:
GreenGoo wrote:
Isgrimnur wrote:Median Salary by Education level, age 25 and up.

Being a male is the way to go. Not too sure how the Bureau of Labor Statistics would go about marketing that.
Stop having uteruses and get a job, you bums.
The gender wage gap is also a myth.
We've been over this and I was one of your pseudo allies. But a) it's hardly a myth, it's very clearly true. b) the reason it exists is more complicated than simply what genitals you have.

My uterus comment was supposed to be a funny response to Isgrim's rhetorical question, not an actual solution.
I'm going to take the government's word over a podcast. It might not be 77%, but it's there based on the education level numbers.
Do what you will. It's still a myth.
Black Lives Matter

"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
User avatar
noxiousdog
Posts: 24627
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by noxiousdog »

So, here's the magic trick.

Almost all of the wage gap is explained by experience, hours, job choice, and education. What is left unexplained is about 7%. This is a widely agreed upon number. One theory is that women aren't willing to negotiate as hard as men. Claudia Golden, a professor of economics at Harvard, postulates that the remaining 7% is due to women's choices for flexibility rather than pay. Men are much more likely to travel. Women are more likely to want time to take care of parents or kids.

She has the evidence to back it up.

So, yes, there is a nominal gap, but it isn't discrimination. It's choices that are both cultural and likely genetic.
Black Lives Matter

"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
User avatar
Fitzy
Posts: 2030
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:15 pm
Location: Rockville, MD

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by Fitzy »

gbasden wrote: I personally would not push to make college free, but I would want to make it very affordable, especially at a state school. If we gave say, $10,000 a year in loan forgiveness for a successful graduate, that would subsidize approximately 65% of the cost of attending college in a public school in California. If one wished to go to Stanford or Harvard, however much more it cost per year would be on you. At least, that would be the system I favor.
It's not $10,000 a year, but anyone in a wide variety of public service jobs can get their loans forgiven after 10 years. The first round begins next year!

I believe that before we start handing out money, there really needs to be a control on spending. If people are going to be given $10,000 I suspect the cost of college will rise to absorb that.

This is probably outlandish, but I'd be interested in looking at a system where the schools are on the hook for a good portion of any defaults at their school. Say give each school up to a 5% default rate (2012 national average was 11.2%), after that the school repays the government. I suspect there'd be a rush to find ways around it and they'd probably just raise prices to cover it. However, ideally it could encourage schools to help students with job placement and for the schools to take a really hard look at how their programs are doing.
User avatar
Fitzy
Posts: 2030
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:15 pm
Location: Rockville, MD

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by Fitzy »

noxiousdog wrote:So, here's the magic trick.

Almost all of the wage gap is explained by experience, hours, job choice, and education. What is left unexplained is about 7%. This is a widely agreed upon number. One theory is that women aren't willing to negotiate as hard as men. Claudia Golden, a professor of economics at Harvard, postulates that the remaining 7% is due to women's choices for flexibility rather than pay. Men are much more likely to travel. Women are more likely to want time to take care of parents or kids.

She has the evidence to back it up.

So, yes, there is a nominal gap, but it isn't discrimination. It's choices that are both cultural and likely genetic.
If society is paying higher wages to jobs that men pick, isn't that a gender gap?

I know the argument is about scarcity so say a football player should make 20 times what a teacher makes, but I would argue that society favoring male dominated careers (for compensation) over female dominated ones is a form of gender discrimination that needs to be looked at and discussed. Though I don't think there is remotely a chance in hell the government can fix this one.
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82093
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by Isgrimnur »

Professional sports aren't payed higher wages because of scarcity, it's because of a skills gap. Not like finding scabs for a labor dispute in the pros would be difficult.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
Defiant
Posts: 21045
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:09 pm
Location: Tongue in cheek

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by Defiant »

Fitzy wrote: I know the argument is about scarcity so say a football player should make 20 times what a teacher makes, but I would argue that society favoring male dominated careers (for compensation) over female dominated ones is a form of gender discrimination that needs to be looked at and discussed. Though I don't think there is remotely a chance in hell the government can fix this one.
One thing that would help would be making sure that those areas are more welcoming of women. Both addressing instances of misogynistic cultures and breaking glass walls, as well as having organizations that can provide support for them until things are closer to parity (rather than having one women for every ten men)
Last edited by Defiant on Thu Apr 14, 2016 4:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
noxiousdog
Posts: 24627
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by noxiousdog »

Fitzy wrote: If society is paying higher wages to jobs that men pick, isn't that a gender gap?

I know the argument is about scarcity so say a football player should make 20 times what a teacher makes, but I would argue that society favoring male dominated careers (for compensation) over female dominated ones is a form of gender discrimination that needs to be looked at and discussed. Though I don't think there is remotely a chance in hell the government can fix this one.

Society pays wages based on supply and demand. It's not about who does the role.

Certainly there are some things we can do as a society to increase men's role as caretakers, and encourage women to do science and engineering (though even then women are more likely to work pediatrics and men are more likely to work surgery). But that puts the onus on us as a society, not on employers.
Black Lives Matter

"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
User avatar
noxiousdog
Posts: 24627
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by noxiousdog »

Defiant wrote:
Fitzy wrote: I know the argument is about scarcity so say a football player should make 20 times what a teacher makes, but I would argue that society favoring male dominated careers (for compensation) over female dominated ones is a form of gender discrimination that needs to be looked at and discussed. Though I don't think there is remotely a chance in hell the government can fix this one.
One thing that would help would be making sure that those areas are more welcoming of women. Both addressing instances of misogynistic cultures and breaking glass walls, as well as having organizations that can provide support for them until things are closer to parity (rather than having one women for every ten men)
While there's certainly a critical mass kind of thing, some of it is wiring. I know it's anecdotal, but my co-worker is one of the most brilliant computer people I know. She's a woman. Her husband also works in IT. So I know it was a very encouraging household for women in technology. One daughter is going to be an environmental lawyer, the other wants to go into medicine.
Black Lives Matter

"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
User avatar
Defiant
Posts: 21045
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:09 pm
Location: Tongue in cheek

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by Defiant »

noxiousdog wrote:So, here's the magic trick.

Almost all of the wage gap is explained by experience, hours, job choice, and education. What is left unexplained is about 7%. This is a widely agreed upon number.
Actually, looking it up it looks like that's the gap right after graduation, not among all women.
A study from the American Association of University Women showed there is a 7% wage gap between male and female college grads a year after graduation, even controlling for college major, occupation, age, geographical region and hours worked.
"It starts early and it accumulates over time," said Caroline Ghosn, founder and CEO of millennial-focused career startup Levo. "There's very low awareness that this is still an issue."
(You do raise the issue of negotiating raises and flexibility, but my point is that it seems that's where it starts, not where it ends)
User avatar
noxiousdog
Posts: 24627
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by noxiousdog »

Defiant wrote:
noxiousdog wrote:So, here's the magic trick.

Almost all of the wage gap is explained by experience, hours, job choice, and education. What is left unexplained is about 7%. This is a widely agreed upon number.
Actually, looking it up it looks like that's the gap right after graduation, not among all women.
A study from the American Association of University Women showed there is a 7% wage gap between male and female college grads a year after graduation, even controlling for college major, occupation, age, geographical region and hours worked.
"It starts early and it accumulates over time," said Caroline Ghosn, founder and CEO of millennial-focused career startup Levo. "There's very low awareness that this is still an issue."
(You do raise the issue of negotiating raises and flexibility, but my point is that it seems that's where it starts, not where it ends)
Right. The question is why that 7% exists. If it's by choice, then it's choice and I don't really care. If it's discrimination, then I care. If it's culture, I might care, but there's an awful lot of moving parts in that.
Black Lives Matter

"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 70101
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by LordMortis »

noxiousdog wrote:
GreenGoo wrote:
Isgrimnur wrote:Median Salary by Education level, age 25 and up.

Being a male is the way to go. Not too sure how the Bureau of Labor Statistics would go about marketing that.
Stop having uteruses and get a job, you bums.
The gender wage gap is also a myth.
I saw some hype about the wage gap in the Clinton office and I looked this up and thought it was interesting.

http://www.factcheck.org/2015/04/gender ... te-office/
Defiant wrote:This is true, and I'd still want to give people the choice, but I do think there should be some incentivization towards degrees that are more in demand (eg, STEM degrees over basket weaving, I mean philosophy).

That's my degree! But I paid didn't take a loan out to get it. But school and the cost of living were much cheaper then.
Isgrimnur wrote:Professional sports aren't payed higher wages because of scarcity, it's because of a skills gap. Not like finding scabs for a labor dispute in the pros would be difficult.
Thought this was interesting

http://thinkprogress.org/sports/2015/07 ... ns-sports/

http://www.ksdk.com/syndication/faceboo ... /132258134
Last edited by LordMortis on Thu Apr 14, 2016 5:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Defiant
Posts: 21045
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:09 pm
Location: Tongue in cheek

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by Defiant »

noxiousdog wrote:
Right. The question is why that 7% exists. If it's by choice, then it's choice and I don't really care. If it's discrimination, then I care. If it's culture, I might care, but there's an awful lot of moving parts in that.
I don't see how the 7% is by choice if that study takes into account majors and job choice and hours worked.

There's also an issue in how much or little does it grow, and whether that growth is based on a choice of flexibility (taking time off to have a baby, etc) or whether it's based on stuff like being passed up for promotions.
User avatar
Defiant
Posts: 21045
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:09 pm
Location: Tongue in cheek

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by Defiant »

LordMortis wrote: That's my degree!
I'm sure you weave the very best baskets. :wink:
User avatar
Defiant
Posts: 21045
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:09 pm
Location: Tongue in cheek

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by Defiant »

LordMortis wrote:
I saw some hype about the wage gap in the Clinton office and I looked this up and thought it was interesting.

http://www.factcheck.org/2015/04/gender ... te-office/
So I skimmed through (cause that is long). It does highlight the complexity of even trying to compare salaries in one (fairly small) organization. Although I guess the tl/dr version is that the beacon missed out on salaries of people that were only working part year, and that when those are included, the median wage between the genders (regardless of position(!)) was about the same. Not including Clinton's salary herself.
User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 13682
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by Max Peck »

noxiousdog wrote:Society pays wages based on supply and demand. It's not about who does the role.
That's another fine myth you've gotten us into! ;)

But what if "supply and demand" factors gender into the equation?
The Straight Dope, [i]circa 2002[/i] wrote:Fifty years ago it was common for women to make less than men for the same job. Among the rationales: women required "extra services" (tampon dispensers in the johns?), didn't want to work overtime, needed help with heavy physical labor, etc. But the real reason, as a 1939 pay-policy manual noted, was "general sociological factors" — testosterone-speak for "That's just the way it is, honey." This sort of discrimination was outlawed by the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and similar statutes passed by the states. Some employers subsequently attempted to weasel out of them along the lines suggested above, arguing that wage differentials for similar jobs were justified by the fact that the guys occasionally had to lift heavy items and so on. Never mind the incidentals, said the Supreme Court. If the jobs are substantially equal (not identical), the law requires equal pay.

Usually, anyway. Four "affirmative defenses" permit unequal pay for the same work: seniority, merit, performance-based incentive systems, or other nondiscriminatory business reasons. (I'm taking this from the new book Compensation by George T. Milkovich and Jerry M. Newman, with the assistance of Carolyn Milkovich — one wonders what she got paid.) The last item offers a fair amount of wiggle room. For example, in Kouba v. Allstate the plaintiff said the minimum salary she earned as a sales rep was less than males typically got. Allstate admitted this but said minimum salaries were individually set so they'd be: (a) high enough to attract applicants, but (b) low enough that reps would want to make sales and earn commissions. Since women usually had been paid less in their previous jobs, it took a smaller minimum salary to attract them to Allstate. OK by us, said the court.
"What? What? What?" -- The 14th Doctor

It's not enough to be a good player... you also have to play well. -- Siegbert Tarrasch
User avatar
noxiousdog
Posts: 24627
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by noxiousdog »

Defiant wrote:
noxiousdog wrote:
Right. The question is why that 7% exists. If it's by choice, then it's choice and I don't really care. If it's discrimination, then I care. If it's culture, I might care, but there's an awful lot of moving parts in that.
I don't see how the 7% is by choice if that study takes into account majors and job choice and hours worked.

There's also an issue in how much or little does it grow, and whether that growth is based on a choice of flexibility (taking time off to have a baby, etc) or whether it's based on stuff like being passed up for promotions.
Women are more likely to work non-profits.
Women are more likely to work in the public sector.

Same skills. Same job. Different pay.

Promotions aren't just skills though. It's often about being able to donate more time, and odd hours, to the job.
Black Lives Matter

"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
User avatar
Rip
Posts: 26891
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:34 pm
Location: Cajun Country!
Contact:

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by Rip »

http://dailycaller.com/2016/04/12/pay-g ... han-women/
Pay equity at The Clinton Foundation, however, doesn’t quite meet those standards.

The foundation’s highest paid executive is Frederick Post, director of “sponsor and marketing,” who has built the foundation’s assets to $247 million. He received $484,000 in annual compensation.

The highest paid woman is CEO Virginia Ehrlich. Her pay is only $201,000, less than half that of Post’s.

The second-highest paid male is long-time Clinton associate Bruce Lindsay, who received $395,000 in annual compensation.
All eight male foundation execs earn $200,000 or more. Only one woman earned $200,000, while Stephanie Streett, its executive director, received a paltry $169,000.






:ninja:
User avatar
noxiousdog
Posts: 24627
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by noxiousdog »

Max Peck wrote:
noxiousdog wrote:Society pays wages based on supply and demand. It's not about who does the role.
That's another fine myth you've gotten us into! ;)

But what if "supply and demand" factors gender into the equation?
Women also tend to go into lower-paying lines of work, shunning higher-paying technical fields. It's easy to caricature this view (dirndls versus Visigoths, etc), but there may be some truth in it. Some research suggests that when women behave as men do — not having babies, mainly — the income gap largely disappears. If so (I won't claim the matter has been definitively settled), the question facing women is a stark one: What do you want, kids or cash?
Black Lives Matter

"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 13682
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by Max Peck »

noxiousdog wrote:
Max Peck wrote:
noxiousdog wrote:Society pays wages based on supply and demand. It's not about who does the role.
That's another fine myth you've gotten us into! ;)

But what if "supply and demand" factors gender into the equation?
Women also tend to go into lower-paying lines of work, shunning higher-paying technical fields. It's easy to caricature this view (dirndls versus Visigoths, etc), but there may be some truth in it. Some research suggests that when women behave as men do — not having babies, mainly — the income gap largely disappears. If so (I won't claim the matter has been definitively settled), the question facing women is a stark one: What do you want, kids or cash?
Which brings us all the way back to:
GreenGoo wrote:Stop having uteruses uteri and get a job, you bums.
:)

Still, "largely goes away" and "doesn't exist" are not the same thing, and there are established cases where employers will pay women less than men for the same job, for no better reason than that they can get away with it.
"What? What? What?" -- The 14th Doctor

It's not enough to be a good player... you also have to play well. -- Siegbert Tarrasch
User avatar
noxiousdog
Posts: 24627
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

Post by noxiousdog »

Max Peck wrote: Still, "largely goes away" and "doesn't exist" are not the same thing, and there are established cases where employers will pay women less than men for the same job, for no better reason than that they can get away with it.
"largely goes away" was your article. The actual studies treat it differently and get into the causes.

Employers will pay ANYONE less money if they can get away with it. Also, there's no such thing as the "same job."
Black Lives Matter

"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
Post Reply