Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sign in to follow this  
kelownabomberfan

The Gender Pay Gap

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, kelownabomberfan said:

Thanks for that. I figured as much regarding the gender pay gap but thanks for confirming. 

You understand that we did different work right ?...

 

13 hours ago, kelownabomberfan said:

Mark/mods:

Is it possible to hive off this union stuff and put it in a separate thread? Just curious.  Thanks.

Why would you want this separated ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kelownabomberfan said:

Back on topic:

 

 

I'm sorry I couldn't get to the message that you are trying to convey with this video- I tuned out once I saw that you had Milo Yiannopoulos making your argument. 

I try not to dismiss the message because of the messanger, but you chose Milo Yiannopoulos - he's pretty vile. 

I mean he starts off his argument with:

"it doesn't surprise me to hear a lesbian skeptical about family values- since after their relationship start, you know... lesbian bed death sets in... you know.... well look.."

 

You should know a little about him before you post more stuff with him. 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/21/milo-yiannopoulos-rise-and-fall-shallow-actor-bad-guy-hate-speech

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2017/02/21/the-96-hours-that-brought-down-milo-yiannopoulos/?utm_term=.d2dbf6db1a31

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/james-ball-rise-and-fall-of-the-alt-right-poster-boy-1-5809076

 

He was a poster boy for the Alt-right movement and was one responsible for bringing that into the mainstream. 

 

Anyways- you might want to be careful who you use to prove your point.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Brandon said:

Just because someone you consider is vile, doesn't mean that he isn't right.

 

I don't recall disagreeing with his view point or agreeing with it either. I just stated that, I tuned out because he is a vile person. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

 

I don't recall disagreeing with his view point or agreeing with it either. I just stated that, I tuned out because he is a vile person. 

Just because you think someone is vile doesn't make it so.. it seems like the main criterion for being "vile" is that they disagree with whatever is "acceptable" according to the radical left. But he's not the only one in the video. And you know that. This smells like another derailment attempt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

 

He was a poster boy for the Alt-right movement and was one responsible for bringing that into the mainstream. 

Not really. And who cares.

6 hours ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

 

Anyways- you might want to be careful who you use to prove your point.  

 

Or what....????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, kelownabomberfan said:

Just because you think someone is vile doesn't make it so.. it seems like the main criterion for being "vile" is that they disagree with whatever is "acceptable" according to the radical left. But he's not the only one in the video. And you know that. This smells like another derailment attempt.

Did you give a peek at the link I sent you?

2 hours ago, kelownabomberfan said:

Not really. And who cares.

Or what....????

Or people will realize that you are trying to convey your message through a person that advocated pedophilia. 

 

And Yeah- he is not necessarily wrong (or right), but you can probably choose someone better to convey your ideas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ediger said:

I've avoided this thread for weeks and after popping in... Yep. It's as off the rails as I imagined. Good job! As soon as I saw Jordan Peterson used as an argument I knew this thing was completely ******.

Once again no examples given, just attacking the messenger not the message, with no real value added to the discussion whatsover. If "you knew this thing was completely *****" as you say, it would be nice if you could provide some backup to that statement. But you can't. And that's the problem. And it looks like you didnt bother to watch the video in the OP either. And that's shame on you.

Political correctness is a funny thing. Some people are angered by its doctrines, some blindly believe everything they are told despite any proof (and this belief is reinforced when people they are told are "vile" disagree with said doctrines) and then there are people like me, who simply ask questions. And its actually amazed me how unwilling or unable those who have chosen to believe this doctrine re gender pay gaps have been able to answer my and others' questions.  It makes me wonder why smart people are so willing to do this. To blindly accept something as truth without evidence, because they are told to. And reject anything shown to the contrary. It is actually fascinating. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, kelownabomberfan said:

Once again no examples given, just attacking the messenger not the message, with no real value added to the discussion whatsover. If "you knew this thing was completely *****" as you say, it would be nice if you could provide some backup to that statement. But you can't. And that's the problem. And it looks like you didnt bother to watch the video in the OP either. And that's shame on you.

Political correctness is a funny thing. Some people are angered by its doctrines, some blindly believe everything they are told despite any proof (and this belief is reinforced when people they are told are "vile" disagree with said doctrines) and then there are people like me, who simply ask questions. And its actually amazed me how unwilling or unable those who have chosen to believe this doctrine re gender pay gaps have been able to answer my and others' questions.  It makes me wonder why smart people are so willing to do this. To blindly accept something as truth without evidence, because they are told to. And reject anything shown to the contrary. It is actually fascinating. 

Because the way you have tried to engage people is flawed. You trigger people's reptile brain by using very strong incendiary polarizing figures to deliver your message and people are immediately opposed to what ever you are trying to share. 

 

You essentially ruin any chance at civil discourse when you use (for example with Milo) a pro-pedophile mouthpiece to make your point. 

 

How open would you be to civil discourse if I we to use  Hilary clinton clip to prove my point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, kelownabomberfan said:

Once again no examples given, just attacking the messenger not the message, with no real value added to the discussion whatsover. If "you knew this thing was completely *****" as you say, it would be nice if you could provide some backup to that statement. But you can't. And that's the problem. And it looks like you didnt bother to watch the video in the OP either. And that's shame on you.

Political correctness is a funny thing. Some people are angered by its doctrines, some blindly believe everything they are told despite any proof (and this belief is reinforced when people they are told are "vile" disagree with said doctrines) and then there are people like me, who simply ask questions. And its actually amazed me how unwilling or unable those who have chosen to believe this doctrine re gender pay gaps have been able to answer my and others' questions.  It makes me wonder why smart people are so willing to do this. To blindly accept something as truth without evidence, because they are told to. And reject anything shown to the contrary. It is actually fascinating. 

Kinda like cheering for a football team that hasn't won it all in 30years,  but you continue to tell anyone who will listen just how good they are (?)...... lol

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

Because the way you have tried to engage people is flawed. You trigger people's reptile brain by using very strong incendiary polarizing figures to deliver your message and people are immediately opposed to what ever you are trying to share. 

I call BS on this. I say that no one can find any evidence and so grasp at straws instead rather than admit that they've potentially bought into a giant pile of hooey. I do love it though when its everyone else who has the "closed mind" on issues like this, by asking questions.  That 9ne made me laugh.

5 hours ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

 

You essentially ruin any chance at civil discourse when you use (for example with Milo) a pro-pedophile mouthpiece to make your point. 

Not really. If one focuses on the actual arguments rather than making up excuses to hide or derail, it just shows that they really have nothing to back up their argument. 

5 hours ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

 

How open would you be to civil discourse if I we to use  Hilary clinton clip to prove my point?

If she had a relevant point to the discussion I would love it! Like you feel with Milo, I find Hillary to be a "vile person", but if she has a view and it isnt just unproven dogma I would want to hear it. For sure. For instance, when she was practicing law, did she get paid less than other lawyers who were defending rapists? That would be interesting to hear, though it was a long time ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kelownabomberfan said:

I call BS on this. I say that no one can find any evidence and so grasp at straws instead rather than admit that they've potentially bought into a giant pile of hooey. I do love it though when its everyone else who has the "closed mind" on issues like this, by asking questions.  That 9ne made me laugh.

Ok what ever. I have posted a ton of links for you over the years and I KNOW you haven't read most of them, hell I would be surprised if you have read even one. the reason you don't find any evidence is that you refuse to acknowledge it. You can lead horse to water and all that jazz.

 

1 hour ago, kelownabomberfan said:

Not really. If one focuses on the actual arguments rather than making up excuses to hide or derail, it just shows that they really have nothing to back up their argument. 

That is bull ****. I refuse to watch your pedophile endorsing alt-right try to make your point for you. please argue me on this... 

 

1 hour ago, kelownabomberfan said:

If she had a relevant point to the discussion I would love it! Like you feel with Milo, I find Hillary to be a "vile person", but if she has a view and it isnt just unproven dogma I would want to hear it. For sure. For instance, when she was practicing law, did she get paid less than other lawyers who were defending rapists? That would be interesting to hear, though it was a long time ago.

What ever. see there you go teeing off on Hilary already. because she triggers your reptile brain. If you want to know about the reptile brain, PM me for more information and links- because I KNOW posting informative links for you in threads is a waste of my time, as you never read them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, kelownabomberfan said:

I call BS on this. I say that no one can find any evidence and so grasp at straws instead rather than admit that they've potentially bought into a giant pile of hooey. I do love it though when its everyone else who has the "closed mind" on issues like this, by asking questions.  That 9ne made me laugh.

I gave evidence from my own profession - I even told you that the government and the unions view it as an issue and are looking into it.

Granted, there may be some fields where it doesn't happen - but that doesn't mean that it never happens anywhere. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎2019‎-‎02‎-‎03 at 5:24 PM, wanna-b-fanboy said:

Ok what ever. I have posted a ton of links for you over the years

about the gender pay gap? Where? When??

On ‎2019‎-‎02‎-‎03 at 5:24 PM, wanna-b-fanboy said:

 

 

That is bull ****. I refuse to watch your pedophile endorsing alt-right try to make your point for you. please argue me on this... 

the only bull**** being exhibited here is you making excuses for why there is no evidence that the gender pay gap exists.

On ‎2019‎-‎02‎-‎03 at 5:24 PM, wanna-b-fanboy said:

 

What ever. see there you go teeing off on Hilary already. because she triggers your reptile brain. If you want to know about the reptile brain, PM me for more information and links- because I KNOW posting informative links for you in threads is a waste of my time, as you never read them. 

I'm not teeing off on Hillary at all.  Please post some links from her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2019-02-03 at 7:22 PM, Mark H. said:

I gave evidence from my own profession - I even told you that the government and the unions view it as an issue and are looking into it.

Granted, there may be some fields where it doesn't happen - but that doesn't mean that it never happens anywhere. 

The union and the government feeling that there aren't enough women in admin is not evidence of a pay gap, it just means that less women are applying for admin jobs. Or there is sexism. Or something else. The only way a "pay gap" would exist is if women are working the same jobs as men in admin and being paid less for that job. Do you know if this is happening?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, kelownabomberfan said:

The union and the government feeling that there aren't enough women in admin is not evidence of a pay gap, it just means that less women are applying for admin jobs. Or there is sexism. Or something else. The only way a "pay gap" would exist is if women are working the same jobs as men in admin and being paid less for that job. Do you know if this is happening?

This is an oversimplification of a very complex problem. It doesn't even address the problem of:

Applicant "A" and Applicant "B" are both very qualified for the position being filled- Employer chooses applicant "A" over Applicant "B" because they are concerned that Applicant "B" will take child-minding leave and have a family. 

The above has NOTHING to do with Applicant "B"s choice to choose a less paying job.

Edited by wanna-b-fanboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, kelownabomberfan said:

The union and the government feeling that there aren't enough women in admin is not evidence of a pay gap, it just means that less women are applying for admin jobs. Or there is sexism. Or something else. The only way a "pay gap" would exist is if women are working the same jobs as men in admin and being paid less for that job. Do you know if this is happening?

No, that is not what’s happening.  But that’s not the only way a pay gap can exist. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

This is an oversimplification of a very complex problem. It doesn't even address the problem of:

Applicant "A" and Applicant "B" are both very qualified for the position being filled- Employer chooses applicant "A" over Applicant "B" because they are concerned that Applicant "B" will take child-minding leave and have a family. 

The above has NOTHING to do with Applicant "B"s choice to choose a less paying job.

I agree that your example has nothing to do with the gender pay gap, if it exists at all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×