Google says it would cost too much to gather wage gap data

[Commodus]

2 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

Let's not create fallacies through omission.

Think you're being a bit arbitrary here.  Yes, of course women aren't always responsible.  The argument is rather that you shouldn't give men legal say over an abortion because they're not always responsible and they're not the ones carrying the child.  Whoever makes the mistake, the woman has to literally carry the consequences.

[MadyTehWolfie]

29 minutes ago, Commodus said:

It's definitely a tricky issue on that front.  In cases like this, you'd want to make the distinction between accidents like the one you describe and, say, just being irresponsible.  If you purposefully avoided protection or were trying for a kid and then had second thoughts... well, too bad!  The challenge would be proving intent, and I don't know that there's easy answers to that.

I don't believe in child support. A women can abort the child to get out of parental duties and she's called "brave" and "responsible". A guy dosent have the right to make that choice it is forced upon him and if he makes the same choice as a women he is called a "loser" "dead beat". Women talk about feminism and equality but really they just want full control over men and in this case when it comes to reproduction and holding a man accountable for making her pregers when she can without even talking to the other half that created the child kill a man's offspring. Can't have it both ways women either do away with abortions and make both parties responsible or let a man decide to walk away like you can do by killing the baby/fetus./possible soul if your the religious type.

[Eaglerino]

2 hours ago, MadyTehWolfie said:

I don't believe in child support. A women can abort the child to get out of parental duties and she's called "brave" and "responsible". A guy dosent have the right to make that choice it is forced upon him and if he makes the same choice as a women he is called a "loser" "dead beat". Women talk about feminism and equality but really they just want full control over men and in this case when it comes to reproduction and holding a man accountable for making her pregers when she can without even talking to the other half that created the child kill a man's offspring. Can't have it both ways women either do away with abortions and make both parties responsible or let a man decide to walk away like you can do by killing the baby/fetus./possible soul if your the religious type.

If you stick it in her without taking precautions to avoid getting her pregnant, you're half responsible. It sounds like you want to move responsibility somewhere other than yourself.

[suits]

21 hours ago, Mitchell B said:

Original article from Engadget.

 

Google refuses to hand over employee income records. Explaining that it would cost too much and require too much time. Raising suspicions about a disparity in men and women's pay. 

 

 

But Google is extremely liberal, no way there is a gap in pay right?

[leadeater]

[MadyTehWolfie]

1 hour ago, Eaglerino said:

If you stick it in her without taking precautions to avoid getting her pregnant, you're half responsible. It sounds like you want to move responsibility somewhere other than yourself.

Don't think you read my post carefully. I said either make both take responsibility and get rid of abortions. Or let both parties be able to go there own way if they so choose. Don't think you fully understood my post. It's a fairly emotional topic for some and I wouldn't hold it against you if you misunderstood due to having strong feelings about the subject. I was saying it's unfair to men that they have no control over if they take care of the child or not. I for one personally believe if you do the action then your responsible for what you create and that you should either take care of it or give it up for adoption. I don't have kids nor will I ever with a women I'm pretty hard core faggy over here.

[divito]

Even if there was a "gap," you'd have to prove it's due to discrimination and not due to qualifications/experience.

[N3v3r3nding_N3wb]

22 hours ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

--snip--

Just so that I'm clear on your stance, do you think that there are less women than men in IT because of industry-wide discrimination against women?

[Inkz]

12 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

In theory, yes, and if that's what it was about, I think we would all agree that that would be discrimination and a real problem.  But I watched a video on it once, and that was not what they were measuring.  They just looked at the total average yearly income of men and women, and complained there was a difference, and I was like "  what!? "  Obviously that is a stupid measurement since it captures a bunch of other factors that aren't relevant in a discussion about true equality.  But, since it's often never made clear what is meant when someone says "wage gap" it tends to make the whole discussion useless.

 

6 hours ago, MadyTehWolfie said:

Wage gap is a myth it was made by taking the stats from the government that didn't compare people with like jobs. An didn't take into account occupation, hours worked, pregnancy, and days taken off. Even when I worked all the women made more then me and had less experience and time worked at the place of employment.

Always makes me think of this video, so convenient.   

Back on topic though. It does seem incredibly suspicious that Google said 100k isn't too much for a multi-billion dollar company. They must be hiding something. If I was to tinfoil I would say it is probably one of three things: they don't pay their women on average on equal and want to hide it, they want to not take an official stance on the subject, or they are worried it would not show a wage gap which is against their bias. To be honest if we use the way the "wage gap" is calculated the average at Google will probably be towards men since the CEO alone would make a sizable dent in the average, but who knows.

[MadyTehWolfie]

51 minutes ago, Inkz said:

 

Always makes me think of this video, so convenient.   

Back on topic though. It does seem incredibly suspicious that Google said 100k isn't too much for a multi-billion dollar company. They must be hiding something. If I was to tinfoil I would say it is probably one of three things: they don't pay their women on average on equal and want to hide it, they want to not take an official stance on the subject, or they are worried it would not show a wage gap which is against their bias. To be honest if we use the way the "wage gap" is calculated the average at Google will probably be towards men since the CEO alone would make a sizable dent in the average, but who knows.

Either way if there was a gap with anything else it usually boils down to men having different jobs then women for the most part. Nothing wrong with that just a receptionist or a human resource person isn't going to make as much as a coder or computer analyst, which is a job that mostly men go into. It's not sexist just a fact of life. Some people just need to except that certain jobs get paid less then others and complaining about it shouldn't get you more pay. In the end just do what you love if it can pay the bills and you'll be fine. Now matter how much money you have in life we are all buried the same depth in the ground anyway.

 

Edit: ps hate shoe on head. She's kind like a less annoying version of box and only has a few videos which are pretty awful in production quality with no links sited like Sargon, armored skeptic, bearing, louder with Crowder.

[Inkz]

4 minutes ago, MadyTehWolfie said:

 

Edit: ps hate shoe on head. She's kind like a less annoying version of box and only has a few videos which are pretty awful in production quality with no links sited like Sargon, armored skeptic, bearing, louder with Crowder.

Shoe is usually for entertainment as opposed to an actually rebuttal  video. She purposely uses a crappy webcam and has a weird style.  Sargon and Skeptic (ironically her BF, maybe they wanted to make their videos different? idk) do a much more in depth job and would be easier to make a point. The video is just a short convenient statement on a huge topic, so it definitely doesn't cover everything.

[MadyTehWolfie]

1 minute ago, Inkz said:

Shoe is usually for entertainment as opposed to an actually rebuttal  video. She purposely uses a crappy webcam and has a weird style.  Sargon and Skeptic (ironically her BF, maybe they wanted to make their videos different? idk) do a much more in depth job and would be easier to make a point. The video is just a short convenient statement on a huge topic, so it definitely doesn't cover everything.

Can't stand her videos they are pretty crappy. Though I guess she's a good example about female privilege. Only has 10 something videos and has over 100k subscribers on YouTube. Her videos are about as deep as a puddle and the entertainment of a clown fucking a circus bear. My guess more then half her subs come from people fapping or rubbing one out to her. Le standard when a girl's on YouTube and they don't look like then own 15 cats and stocks in fancy feast. In short I put her in the group of attention whores on YouTube. Karen Southern and this other women make far better videos. If you want to watch and enjoy her lack luster videos well that's non of my business. 

[Inkz]

3 minutes ago, MadyTehWolfie said:

 entertainment of a clown fucking a circus bear.

One of the funniest things I read all day. (Not trying to sound sarcastic, I find this genuinely hilarious).

 

The numbers are a little off, but not too far off. The internet is definitely known for being thirsty, can't deny that. The best content does not always make it to the top. If people were more logic oriented then Skeptic would have way more views per video than her (or the classic Pewdiepie example). I am sure you know this however and I am probably wasting your time. I don't actually watch her a lot, but YT does suggest her a lot to me when watching the previously mentioned people. I enjoy some but not all of her content, but taste is taste and is totally subjective (as far as content wise she definitely has bad quality). 

 

I completely derailed this thread so I need to stop.

[MadyTehWolfie]

4 minutes ago, Inkz said:

One of the funniest things I read all day. (Not trying to sound sarcastic, I find this genuinely hilarious).

 

The numbers are a little off, but not too far off. The internet is definitely known for being thirsty, can't deny that. The best content does not always make it to the top. If people were more logic oriented then Skeptic would have way more views per video than her (or the classic Pewdiepie example). I am sure you know this however and I am probably wasting your time. I don't actually watch her a lot, but YT does suggest her a lot to me when watching the previously mentioned people. I enjoy some but not all of her content, but taste is taste and is totally subjective (as far as content wise she definitely has bad quality). 

 

I completely derailed this thread so I need to stop.

This whole thread is a derail and serves no purpose other then to stir up people about the PATRIARCHY! lol As someone who's seen both sides of the fence I can honestly say no one gender has it worse or better more or less control then each other just more control in certain areas. 

[Builder]

http://narrowthegapp.com

 

Quote

"Women work fewer hours than men so it follows they earn less."

The data set presented here only counts the salaries of full-time workers.
"Women choose lower-paying jobs so that's why there's a pay gap."

This data compares the salaries of women and men in the same jobs, from janitors to executives.
"Women don't negotiate their salary as aggressively as men so it's their fault there's a pay gap."

Better negotiation techniques can help close the wage gap, but the problem is multi-faceted and systemic.
"Women choose to stay home with their kids so they have less professional experience than men and thus should earn less."

Studies show the pay gap exists whether or not women have children.
"In a lot of jobs, there's no pay gap—and sometimes, women earn more than men."

Pay disparity does not exist in every occupation — but across all occupations, women consistently earn less at the same jobs.

 

[Urishima]

On 28.5.2017 at 5:30 AM, BluJay614 said:

Cause it doesn't exist

That's why it would cost so much money. It takes time and effort to properly fudge the numbers.

[Ertman]

On topic, doesn't it strike at least some of you people as weird that a company who makes money around providing anonymized data with statistical breakdowns can't do the same for their payroll?

[Taf the Ghost]

3 minutes ago, Ertman said:

On topic, doesn't it strike at least some of you people as weird that a company who makes money around providing anonymized data with statistical breakdowns can't do the same for their payroll?

It's the rhetorical impact, not that Stats that are the problem.

 

What Google is actually worried about isn't the pay for Women.  They're extremely worried about having actual numbers of Men, Whites & Asians known on their Staff in extreme detail.  Google is the core of Silicon Valley, so they can't afford to run afoul of the current SJW Narratives.  What will be notable if their pay data comes out is that there aren't a lot of Women in the upper reaches of the company, there are very few in the really technical areas and they're mostly staffed by really smart White & Asian Men. 

 

That just unacceptable for a "Progressive" company, but if they stopped having that type of Demographics they'd rapidly ceased to be a functioning company in the Tech field. It's currently not acceptable to talk about the variance of mental abilities across Race & Gender, but they are a reality.   Well, it's not acceptable when it's positive for Whites & Asians. Mentioning West African descended Blacks have higher average fast-twitch muscle is acceptable.  (There's actually a "Sprinter Gene" that's been identified.)  There simply isn't a large supply of people with high IQ, high Visual-Spatial Reasoning and likes to code.  Of the supply, it's almost all White & East Asian Men.

 

As for the topic of the thread, the "Wage Gap" has never been about being accurate. That's not the point of the talking point. It's there to push a political angle that favors the groups that profit from it existing. Basic Economic Reality is that, if a gap existed, it'd be ruthlessly exploited to drop Wages in general. (Companies didn't start Offshoring because it was fun.) This is why the honest studies show, quite conclusively, there is no functional Gap. All we see is that Men & Women do, in fact, make different decisions based on their own desires. (Another point that's currently considered unacceptable to mention.)

 

This always ends up in a weird place because there's no argument here, nor is it ever being offered as an argument.  It's simply a Demand. It means your only real choice to respond is with mockery. It's little different than someone saying we got our technology from Aliens. You aren't in a situation to discuss a topic logically nor is the other party going to be open to actual discussion.  Thus, mock them. (As a side point, this is the reason the Internet discourse has become the way it has. There's no discussion to be had in a politically correct environment. The only recourse is some level of mockery of the stupidity. Thus, memes.  Lots & lots of Memes.)

[MadyTehWolfie]

10 hours ago, Taf the Ghost said:

It's the rhetorical impact, not that Stats that are the problem.

 

What Google is actually worried about isn't the pay for Women.  They're extremely worried about having actual numbers of Men, Whites & Asians known on their Staff in extreme detail.  Google is the core of Silicon Valley, so they can't afford to run afoul of the current SJW Narratives.  What will be notable if their pay data comes out is that there aren't a lot of Women in the upper reaches of the company, there are very few in the really technical areas and they're mostly staffed by really smart White & Asian Men. 

 

That just unacceptable for a "Progressive" company, but if they stopped having that type of Demographics they'd rapidly ceased to be a functioning company in the Tech field. It's currently not acceptable to talk about the variance of mental abilities across Race & Gender, but they are a reality.   Well, it's not acceptable when it's positive for Whites & Asians. Mentioning West African descended Blacks have higher average fast-twitch muscle is acceptable.  (There's actually a "Sprinter Gene" that's been identified.)  There simply isn't a large supply of people with high IQ, high Visual-Spatial Reasoning and likes to code.  Of the supply, it's almost all White & East Asian Men.

 

As for the topic of the thread, the "Wage Gap" has never been about being accurate. That's not the point of the talking point. It's there to push a political angle that favors the groups that profit from it existing. Basic Economic Reality is that, if a gap existed, it'd be ruthlessly exploited to drop Wages in general. (Companies didn't start Offshoring because it was fun.) This is why the honest studies show, quite conclusively, there is no functional Gap. All we see is that Men & Women do, in fact, make different decisions based on their own desires. (Another point that's currently considered unacceptable to mention.)

 

This always ends up in a weird place because there's no argument here, nor is it ever being offered as an argument.  It's simply a Demand. It means your only real choice to respond is with mockery. It's little different than someone saying we got our technology from Aliens. You aren't in a situation to discuss a topic logically nor is the other party going to be open to actual discussion.  Thus, mock them. (As a side point, this is the reason the Internet discourse has become the way it has. There's no discussion to be had in a politically correct environment. The only recourse is some level of mockery of the stupidity. Thus, memes.  Lots & lots of Memes.)

When it comes to hiring practices I go by aristotelian view that says people should get things based on merit alone. Don't Care what color you are or what your dangly bits are as long as your the best for the job. If it happens that a certain group are better then your group that's not anyone's fault, different races and genders usually go into different fields and then there's the percentage of the populations they are of the total population that will also skew the data. It seems to me that SJW's want equal OUTCOME not equal OPPORTUNITY, and only when it's adventagous to them. Least if they win the culture war I can say hey look I'm a fag and my eyes look asiany and when it's summer I tan and look like a Mexican so give me free shit and jobs. Lol Logic fail social Marxism is for idiots as even mentally challenged people can see past the B's with it.

[Taf the Ghost]

2 hours ago, MadyTehWolfie said:

When it comes to hiring practices I go by aristotelian view that says people should get things based on merit alone. Don't Care what color you are or what your dangly bits are as long as your the best for the job. If it happens that a certain group are better then your group that's not anyone's fault, different races and genders usually go into different fields and then there's the percentage of the populations they are of the total population that will also skew the data. It seems to me that SJW's want equal OUTCOME not equal OPPORTUNITY, and only when it's adventagous to them. Least if they win the culture war I can say hey look I'm a fag and my eyes look asiany and when it's summer I tan and look like a Mexican so give me free shit and jobs. Lol Logic fail social Marxism is for idiots as even mentally challenged people can see past the B's with it.

They aren't logical, which is the one mistake you're making.  Their Marxist in orientation, so everything is in the pathetically simple view of Oppressor vs Oppressed. You're already starting to see them out-group gays because a lot of them are White & Male.  That's wholly what it's about.  You'll have better luck explaining Astrophysics to a 6-year old, since they simply are not open to being wrong about the implementation of their world view.

 

And the real problem is the thinking has great influence inside all of the Western cultures.  Which is why things are going to get ugly & violent over the next few decades. Ideologies this stupid are only ever beaten out of a culture.  

[MadyTehWolfie]

47 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

They aren't logical, which is the one mistake you're making.  Their Marxist in orientation, so everything is in the pathetically simple view of Oppressor vs Oppressed. You're already starting to see them out-group gays because a lot of them are White & Male.  That's wholly what it's about.  You'll have better luck explaining Astrophysics to a 6-year old, since they simply are not open to being wrong about the implementation of their world view.

 

And the real problem is the thinking has great influence inside all of the Western cultures.  Which is why things are going to get ugly & violent over the next few decades. Ideologies this stupid are only ever beaten out of a culture.  

Or when that one college tried to force all white people to leave campus for the day. Hey America is racist so let's be racist and wonder why more people are actually turning to racism because of our racism. It's a vicious cycle and all the stuff they do only encourages actual white supremacist and black supremacists to be more active, or just turns perfectly normal people into hate filled asshats.

[Builder]

14 hours ago, MadyTehWolfie said:

*snip*

Oh god...PragerU? Louder with Crowder? First off, get better sources. Narrow the Gapp uses data from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, and they link it below. Also that's a 19% wage gap, not 29%. 29% would be if they get paid 71c on the dollar, but they get paid 81c on average.

 

Labor markets are also not susceptible to supply and demand in the same way that commodities are, so the idea that corporations could reduce their costs by hiring women and that because they don't that that means the gap doesn't exist is a direct fallacy. Case in point, raising the minimum wage does not increase unemployment. This was discovered through research in the early 1990s.

 

Refuting the video itself, they don't account for the refutations in my original post. The 81% number is based off of people working in the same field under analytically comparable conditions. That video doesn't even refute this point, they just say that men and women go into different fields. Well duh. Please be a little bit more careful in the arguments you're making, as I've already refuted all of them in my first post here.

 

But let's just assume they're right, even though they're wrong. What accounts for consistently paying women 5% less than men across the board? That's not ok either. The idea that anything less than equal pay for equal work is ok is laughable.

 

DItto on the gay transsexual though (notice the avi?), but of course I'm white. That doesn't mean (and I don't believe) that that makes you right and me wrong, that's just idiotic.

 

And no, I'm not trolling, I'm trying to have a serious discussion here.

Edited May 31, 2017 by wkdpaul
cleaned up

[WkdPaul]

Thread cleaned.

 

Please keep the community standards in mind;

Quote

Ensure a friendly atmosphere to our visitors and forum members.
Encourage the freedom of expression and exchange of information in a mature and responsible manner.
"Don't be a dick" - Wil Wheaton.
"Be excellent to each other" - Bill and Ted.
Remember your audience; both present and future.

 

[Jito463]

On 5/30/2017 at 2:49 AM, Builder said:

http://narrowthegapp.com

First off, there's no actual data there.  I looked, it's just not there.

 

Second, the links they have below either lead to basically the same essential page with slightly different text up top, or to some newspaper article which is more opinion than fact.  That's pointless.

 

Third, it's spelled "gap", not "gapp".  Someone needs to send their webmaster a dictionary.

If they can't even get a simple three letter word right in their domain name, I surely trust them to do critical thinking on complex statistics across multiple careers in multiple fields. 

 

What exactly is there that one is meant to refute?

[Shakaza]

4 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

Third, it's spelled "gap", not "gapp".  Someone needs to send their webmaster a dictionary.

If they can't even get a simple three letter word right in their domain name, I surely trust them to do critical thinking on complex statistics across multiple careers in multiple fields. 

This third point...the domain name is "gapp" because there's already another domain with the URL of "narrowthegap." And I think you're overly inflating the severity of that misspelling because of your preconceived notions of the legitimacy of their website and statistics.

 

I can't speak for the other two points, so I'll let @Builder handle that.