Twelve Statements - Agree or Disagree?

Originally posted by Kurk
7. What would constitute as violation of gender equality pay? How would different qualifications and responsibilities be taken into account for?

A man and woman doing the same job with similar qualifications** and length of employment should make very similar wages; within 1-2% percentage points. If it can be shown that the one received less to start and/or increased less per year despite competitive performance scores, that would/could be grounds for a fine.

**Though qualifications is a moot point after the person's been hired. If two people are doing the same job; at the same level of performance , they should be earning the same, it shouldn't matter if one has a college degree and the other is a HS dropout. The job being done at the expected (or greater) level is what [should] matters

ps Is your overbearing mother still berating you? I can speak to her and set her straight if you need

Originally posted by Robtard
A man and woman doing the same job with similar qualifications** and length of employment should make very similar wages; within 1-2% percentage points. If it can be shown that the one received less to start and/or increased less per year despite competitive performance scores, that would/could be grounds for a fine.

**Though qualifications is a moot point after the person's been hired. If two people are doing the same job; at the same level of performance , they should be earning the same, it shouldn't matter if one has a college degree and the other is a HS dropout. The job being done at the expected (or greater) level is what [should] matters

ps Is your overbearing mother still berating you? I can speak to her and set her straight if you need

A salaried employee is only paid what they're worth to a company so I wonder how the government would mandate companies to track and provide this information upon request.

I'm not talking about female doctor versus male doctor based on the number of patients they see per day, but rather management positions where productivity is not so cut and dry.

Qualifications don't matter? I would think that with the cost of education now-a-days coupled with student debt that paying a college-dropout and graduate the same salary would hurt one financially and send the message that college isn't worth it to youth.

Try something that'll make me chuckle.

1. Disagree strongly.
2. Disagree to an extent.
3. Disagree, laziness is too simple an answer, although I do think the main cause is ultimately because people can't function as adults and take care of themselves, caused by a few different things.
4. Agreed strongly. I see no reason to treat a dog differently from a cow, I see no way to rationalise or justify how we treat animals in the food industries, and I still don't understand why people drink cow's milk. It's also just stupidly expensive to produce animal foods compared to plant foods, causes a ton of pollution, isn't great for your health, and I heavily disagree with the government subsiding these industries, when in reality, the price of a burger should be much higher than it is. These industries should be left to fall apart due to their lack of sustainability, and in general benefit from crony capitalism.
5. Disagreed, I think.
6. Disagreed, I'm sceptical if climate change is as pressing an issue as it's made out due to discrepancies with climate models vs. real studies, and if we are to combat climate change, increased taxes and regulation aren't the best way to do it.
7. Disagreed, I think it's your job as an individual to seek out the best deal possible from your employer. I think any sane employer would pay everyone the same for the same job, to avoid a shitstorm.
8. Two biological sexes. Don't really care what people think past that.
9. Conscripted? Lmao. No. Just don't give them free things and leave it to charities.
10. To an extent, yes, white guilt is becoming more prominent and academia/media seems to be saturated with virtue signalling leftists.
11. No idea.
12. No, I think if we treated health care the same way we treat food, and virtually every other business, people would be better off, the standards of health care would be better and it would be cheaper.

Originally posted by Kurk
So how will the level of performance be objectively measured?

A salaried employee is only paid what they're worth to a company so I wonder how the government would mandate companies to track and provide this information upon request.

I'm not talking about female doctor versus male doctor based on the number of patients they see per day, but rather management positions where productivity is not so cut and dry.

Qualifications don't matter? I would think that with the cost of education now-a-days coupled with student debt that paying a college-dropout and graduate the same salary would hurt one financially and send the message that college isn't worth it to youth.

Try something that'll make me chuckle.

Performance levels if employees are measured by employers, usually during a yearly (or bi-yearly) review.

The how wasn't the question. It was if we should do something about it.

Manager performance levels , just like the pleb employees, is also something that is measured.

After the fact of being hired, it does not. Or it shouldn't. We're not talking about two people with different qualifications applying for the same job, obviously hire the more qualified candidate. My scenario was two people already doing the same job where their performance levels are on par.

No need.

Originally posted by Robtard
A man and woman doing the same job with similar qualifications** and length of employment should make very similar wages; within 1-2% percentage points.

?? People with equal paper stats can still make vastly different wages depending on, among many factors, their job performance. Even if you're just talking about their starting salary, that can still depend on interview performance + reputation.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
?? People with equal paper stats can still make vastly different wages depending on, among many factors, their job performance. Even if you're just talking about their starting salary, that can still depend on interview performance + reputation.

I did note that performance would be equal when I said "competitive performance score", obviously you're not going to pay a shit employee the same as one who excels at their job.

edit: Unless you're POTUS apparently

Originally posted by Robtard
I did note that performance would be equal when I said "competitive performance score", obviously you're not going to pay a shit employee the same as one who excels at their job.

edit: Unless you're POTUS apparently

Yeah so if a company has a pay gap because of different performance evaluations, how can the courts tell if that disparate is legit or not, and how do you argue that the men or women in your company are doing better without getting crucified for being sexist?

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Yeah so if a company has a pay gap because of different performance evaluations, how can the courts tell if that disparate is legit or not, and how do you argue that the men or women in your company are doing better without getting crucified for being sexist?

If there's different performance evals, that would be more difficult. But stands to reason if a company has a history of underpaying women for the same job as men, it will be more than an employee here/there, there would be incident after incident after incident.

It's easy to not get crucified for being sexist: Don't be sexist. Rather simple, not sure why this is so hard.

1.[b] 'There are some groups in society that are inherently more privileged than others, and policies such as Affirmative Action are needed to bridge the gaps.'

Agree with the bolded, disagree with the underlined.

2. 'Western countries have a duty to repay disadvantaged peoples for the crimes of colonialism and slavery.'

Depends on what one means by "repay." If it's just throwing money at individuals? I'm not sure that's a constructive solution.

3. 'There very well could be other reasons for poverty and homelessness, but chief among the reasons must be laziness.'

"Chief among the reasons?" Disagree very strongly.

4. 'Meat-eating is wrong, and an anachronistic practice that should be challenged'

As a meat eater, I understand my obvious cognitive dissonance, but I agree.

5. 'It's all well and good for countries to be independent, but there are some that would benefit from vassalization.'

Dunno.

6. 'Climate change driven by human action is happening, and requires government intervention in the form of regulation and taxes to remedy.'

Agree.

7. 'It is appropriate to criminalise the presence of a wage gap between men and women in companies.'

Agree.

8. 'There are only two genders.'

Disagree.

9. 'Those who are unemployed for prolonged periods should be conscripted into community service.'

Disagree.

10. 'The media and academic elite are virulently hostile to white people.'

I've seen some hostility, depending, but "virulently?" No.

11. 'Black Americans were better off during Jim Crow than they are now, all things considered'

Fuck no.

12. 'Healthcare should be government subsidised, so that all can afford it.'

Needs to be handled with care but I agree.

Originally posted by Robtard
Performance levels if employees are measured by employers, usually during a yearly (or bi-yearly) review.

The how wasn't the question. It was if we should do something about it.

Manager performance levels , just like the pleb employees, is also something that is measured.

After the fact of being hired, it does not. Or it shouldn't. We're not talking about two people with different qualifications applying for the same job, obviously hire the more qualified candidate. My scenario was two people already doing the same job where their performance levels are on par.

No need.

So business higher-ups will be conducting reviews on salaried, non-quantitative, employees. If there was a true discrepancy in compensation between two "evenly matched" male and female employees, do you think they would risk throwing their company and possibly their own job under the bus by genuinely documenting it?

Also, female porn stars make on average three times the amount male ones do. Would this constitute as gender income inequality for the man?

Male and female porn stars are not doing the same/equal work, Kurk. In straight porn (not the mansexual stuff you like) women are the attraction and they're bringing in the buyers (ie usually men); they're the ones chugging down 10" cocks and taking it up the ass repeatedly; not the guys. You can have almost any guy in the scene as long as he's not a micropenis (like Vansonsbee for example) and men will buy the video for the female performer specifically.

Originally posted by Robtard
Male and female porn stars are not doing the same/equal work, Kurk. In straight porn (not the mansexual stuff you like) women are the attraction and they're bringing in the buyers (ie usually men); they're the ones chugging down 10" cocks and taking it up the ass repeatedly; not the guys. You can have almost any guy in the scene as long as he's not a micropenis (like Vansonsbee for example) and men will buy the video for the female performer specifically.

You asked a silly question and the facts embarrassed you. Not the first time.

Originally posted by Robtard
You asked a silly question and the facts embarrassed you. Not the first time.

Right, you and your stories.

Originally posted by Robtard
Right, you and your stories.

Originally posted by Robtard
If there's different performance evals, that would be more difficult. But stands to reason if a company has a history of underpaying women for the same job as men, it will be more than an employee here/there, there would be incident after incident after incident.

You're assuming there can't be aggregate differences that materialize out of some factor other than company discrimination.

1. Somewhat agree
2. Strongly disagree
3. Strongly disagree
4. Strongly disagree
5. Somewhat agree
6. Agree
7. Disagree
8. Agree
9. Agree
10. Somewhat agree
11. Disagree
12. Agree

Originally posted by riv6672
1. Somewhat agree
2. Strongly disagree
3. Strongly disagree
4. Strongly disagree
5. Somewhat agree
6. Agree
7. Disagree
8. Agree
9. Agree
10. Somewhat agree
11. Disagree
12. Agree

Your rating system is better. Added a bit more nuance to the ratings without having to explain yourself.