Corporations are Sexist

[Toro]

Yes, I am afraid it is true. There is a tremendous amount of sexual discrimination in the workplace. It's time we put a stop to this. It's about time that the liberals in Congress do something about the blatant discrimination going on corporate America against ... men!

For you see, the ratio of unemployment of males to females is at generational highs!

Greg Mankiw's Blog: This Recession's Gender Gap

I expect a full hearing from Nancy Pelosi to get to the bottom of these structural biases, with full support from MoveOn.org, the Daily Kos and the New York Times.

 

[KittenKoder]

Um ... that's because there are more men working than women still.

 

[RodISHI]

That's because women are paid less from the get go, therefore they are the ones most likely to be kept on when times get tough.

 

[Toro]

That's because women are paid less from the get go, therefore they are the ones most likely to be kept on when times get tough.

The gap between men's and women's wages is at all time lows. Yet the ratio of men to women's unemployment is at all-time highs. One would expect that if the wage gap was narrowing, then the ratio would be falling, not rising.

 

[Toro]

Um ... that's because there are more men working than women still.

The statisticians adjust for this. They always have. Plus, female participation in the labor force is at an all-time high. Thus, the number of men working relative to women should not be a reason for the relative increase in male unemployment.

 

[KittenKoder]

That's because women are paid less from the get go, therefore they are the ones most likely to be kept on when times get tough.

The gap between men's and women's wages is at all time lows. Yet the ratio of men to women's unemployment is at all-time highs. One would expect that if the wage gap was narrowing, then the ratio would be falling, not rising.

First, unemployment is not based on who lost their job, but who is collecting unemployment benefits, so those numbers are never that accurate to begin with. However, of course more men will lose their jobs if more men have jobs.

 

[Toro]

That's because women are paid less from the get go, therefore they are the ones most likely to be kept on when times get tough.

The gap between men's and women's wages is at all time lows. Yet the ratio of men to women's unemployment is at all-time highs. One would expect that if the wage gap was narrowing, then the ratio would be falling, not rising.

First, unemployment is not based on who lost their job, but who is collecting unemployment benefits, so those numbers are never that accurate to begin with. However, of course more men will lose their jobs if more men have jobs.

Right, but everybody knows that so they statistically adjust for it. Otherwise, the ratio of male to female unemployment would always be higher, but that is not the case.

 

[KittenKoder]

The gap between men's and women's wages is at all time lows. Yet the ratio of men to women's unemployment is at all-time highs. One would expect that if the wage gap was narrowing, then the ratio would be falling, not rising.

First, unemployment is not based on who lost their job, but who is collecting unemployment benefits, so those numbers are never that accurate to begin with. However, of course more men will lose their jobs if more men have jobs.

Right, but everybody knows that so they statistically adjust for it. Otherwise, the ratio of male to female unemployment would always be higher, but that is not the case.

You don't realize that statistics are extremely subjective when published, right?

 

[Toro]

You don't realize that statistics are extremely subjective when published, right?

I have a fair understanding of statistics, so I generally understand the biases. Government statistics are not "extremely" subjective.

As this guy notes

Basically, it comes down to how people feel about government. Most students enter college -- we know, we taught them -- with a negative bias. They see movies. They make the mistake of thinking of Congress -- 535 people with different motives, coalitions, and partnerships, as if it were a rational unitary actor. Simple and facile interpretations can be persuasive. ...

Normally the highest people in socio-economic-status (SES) also have a higher score on questions related to Confidence in Government.

A Dash of Insight: The Most Important Stat: Bloggers versus Experts

As for the government, I have known many statisticians and economists. This sums it up about right.

“We go out of our way to be transparent,” says Thomas Nardone, who during 32 years at the Bureau of Labor Statistics helped implement many of the changes in calculating the unemployment rate. “We’d be remiss if we didn’t make changes,” he says. “I’ve never seen measurement changes that were politically motivated.”

Katherine Abraham served as commissioner of BLS during the Clinton administration. Commissioners, unlike the statisticians who work for them, are political appointees. Now a professor at University of Maryland, Abraham says she did see political pressure, but rarely, and never with results. Once, she says, a prominent lawmaker told her the BLS might get more funding if it would agree to propose changes that reduce the appearance of inflation. Abraham says she rebuffed the offer.

True or False: U.S. Economic Stats Lie at SmartMoney.com

Now, if you think the government is cooking the books on purpose, I would suggest you read this.

http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2008/08/art1full.pdf

I imagine nobody will because it is long and technical, but it offers a good rebuttal to the argument that the government is fudging the numbers for inflation.

 

[pinqy]

First, unemployment is not based on who lost their job, but who is collecting unemployment benefits, so those numbers are never that accurate to begin with. However, of course more men will lose their jobs if more men have jobs.

No, the unemployment rate is not based on unemployment benefits. Unemployed is defined as not having worked in the reference week, available to work, and having actively looked for work in the previous 4 weeks.

 

[sealybobo]

Yes, I am afraid it is true. There is a tremendous amount of sexual discrimination in the workplace. It's time we put a stop to this. It's about time that the liberals in Congress do something about the blatant discrimination going on corporate America against ... men!

For you see, the ratio of unemployment of males to females is at generational highs!

Greg Mankiw's Blog: This Recession's Gender Gap

I expect a full hearing from Nancy Pelosi to get to the bottom of these structural biases, with full support from MoveOn.org, the Daily Kos and the New York Times.

Corporations pay women less so of course they let the guy go and keep the cheap.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Corporations pay women less so of course they let the guy go and keep the cheap.

so women actually earn more because they are laid off less? This is discrimination and calls for govt regulation!!