Here's an interesting article discussing the gender wage gap in the United States. According to a new report released by congresswoman Carolyn B. Maloney, a woman in the workforce makes on average (the broadest estimate) 79% of what a man in the same position makes. For women of color, that drops to less than half of what their white, male counterparts make.
Aside from the obvious moral argument that men and women should receive equal pay for the same work, do you guys think the gender wage gap is affecting the economy, as the article suggests? Would equal pay regardless of gender boost the economy?
The article concludes by saying that "...the U.S. GDP could add yet another $2.1 trillion by increasing women’s workforce participation and achieving parity." Simply by lifting women's and people of color's wages to the level white males are receiving, it will definitely boost the economy as discriminated workforce will be able to put more money on pensions and savings, and become less dependent on Social Security. (Unless the equal pay means male's wages are lowered to that level of current wages females are receiving.)
ReplyDeleteRegardless of whether closing the wage gap will boost the economy or not, everyone should be paid equally, not by their gender or color.
I am not sure whether the article's argument is valid. Wages are decided by many variables including people's level of education, work achievement, and career history. It is true that women have disadvantages in some of factors including career history and work achievement because women need to take time off for giving birth.
ReplyDeleteI do not understand how we can simply pull up wages of women. It sounds really ideal and unrealistic. Definitely, if money goes more towards women, it will help economy because increasing wages partially means an increase of consumption.
I claim that the article made too much generalization.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe wage gap can be primarily explained by the different choices men and women choose in regards to their jobs, hours worked, etc etc. Statistically the 79% figure is misleading. If this were widespread, companies would only hire women to save costs.
ReplyDeleteRecent graduates (both men and women) with similar credentials are paid roughly the same. The gap widens usually at the time women start having children. If you take single women that have never had children, some studies show that they earn the same as men assuming everything else is equal.
The more important issue might be is how do you get women to participate and be competitive in the labor market after being away on maternity leave?
http://skepchick.org/2015/04/bad-chart-thursday-redditors-prove-the-gender-wage-gap-is-a-myth/
I don't think that calling the gender wage gap a "myth" is the right wording. Underneath that chart in the article you shared makes a lot of good points about it. First of all, in every one of those fields men still made more after controlling for all of the things they did. They still haven't explained all of it, so some of it still may be due to discrimination. The other thing is that the difference still does exist, it's just that it can be explained by things other than discrimination. Another question I think that we need to add is why don't women go into the higher paying fields such as computer science, math, and engineering? The answer to that may very well include some discrimination and then we're back where we started.
DeleteI agree, Spencer. I think it's worth exploring the role of education. Are women not as likely to study in STEM subjects because they are not interested? Or is there some other reason?
DeleteMaternity leave should not be considered in the employment process whatsoever. If women want to have children, it is their right to utilize maternity leave. Paying women less because they "might" have a child is ethically questionable.
ReplyDelete