General Discussion

Aerows

(39,961 posts)

39. It certainly happens

Reply to HiPointDem (Reply #25)

Fri May 4, 2012, 04:39 PM

May 2012

Do you know what everyone at your company makes? In many companies that is a highly taboo subject.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

94 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Is Rachel Maddow sincere? [View all] hfojvt May 2012 OP

she gets things wrong sometimes Enrique May 2012 #1

I believe she cares about relaying the unvarnished truth. AtomicKitten May 2012 #2

if she cared about unvarnished truth, she wouldn't have quoted the clip selectively. HiPointDem May 2012 #3

Her point - that a gap exists - seems to be lost on the pickers of nits AtomicKitten May 2012 #8

23% v. 5% = not a nit. It's a huge difference. HiPointDem May 2012 #11

mathematically, sure. but politically, morally, and otherwise, no. unblock May 2012 #44

Then why not say "Women doing the same work/hours with the same qualifications, experience, on HiPointDem May 2012 #49

just to be clear, then, we're no longer talking about maddow getting it wrong in any way. unblock May 2012 #60

There may indeed be some form of discrimination going on beneath that 18%, but it's nothing HiPointDem May 2012 #65

the 77% figure may still be relevant if we want to rectify past wrongs, unblock May 2012 #71

no, she's under no obligation to present a full picture, but in that case, how is what she does HiPointDem May 2012 #74

foxnews is different in at least 2 respects: unblock May 2012 #79

it's not "comparable work" though. It is just an aggregate. hfojvt May 2012 #80

i don't think we have enough information to say how much of it is due to discrimination unblock May 2012 #82

For the longest time I didn't know what a nit was. LiberalLoner May 2012 #26

It won't work. She is the Queen of the Undead. Ruby the Liberal May 2012 #35

Lesbian vampire?! AtomicKitten May 2012 #41

I remember when that aired. Ruby the Liberal May 2012 #45

HORROR!!! AtomicKitten May 2012 #63

and people who only watch her show hfojvt May 2012 #12

I'm giving her the benefit of the doubt Aerows May 2012 #37

sometimes it's somerby who commits the howler unblock May 2012 #4

yeah that's what the first commenter thought too hfojvt May 2012 #15

well i think there's direct discrimination and indirect discrimination unblock May 2012 #46

All TV talking heads are limited in their "honesty" just1voice May 2012 #5

Maddow did mention these other studies DearAbby May 2012 #6

"discriminated against" = systematic lower pay for women v. men for doing the same work with the HiPointDem May 2012 #23

At a lot of companies Aerows May 2012 #38

"At a lot of companies" = more true for the top 20% than the bottom 80%. Yes, at the top HiPointDem May 2012 #52

It still is a big deal Aerows May 2012 #56

no, it's a big deal to some in the top 20%. like maddow. personally, i could care that she gets HiPointDem May 2012 #58

I'm female Aerows May 2012 #61

I'm also female. I'm not "miffed" that men have lost ground, I'm angry, outraged, that the entire HiPointDem May 2012 #62

Let me state this plainly Aerows May 2012 #64

And let me state *this* plainly. No one is disputing the principle of equal pay for equal work, HiPointDem May 2012 #66

Why do you talk adjustments? DearAbby May 2012 #69

statistical adjustments. it *is* partly a mathematical problem, even if you don't understand it. HiPointDem May 2012 #72

Just sounds like a way to justify paying women less than men. DearAbby May 2012 #88

sorry it's so difficult for you. HiPointDem May 2012 #90

because some adjustments are logical hfojvt May 2012 #81

Just more reasons to justify paying women less than men. DearAbby May 2012 #89

just to be clear then hfojvt May 2012 #92

You know she was being dishonest joeglow3 May 2012 #55

Bob Somersby is a PUMA One of the 99 May 2012 #7

interesting theory hfojvt May 2012 #16

It's not a theory One of the 99 May 2012 #48

She went through charts EC May 2012 #9

I read your link and then watched the half hour segment of Rachel's show... Spazito May 2012 #10

the real issue is that once you adjust for differences in women's employment patterns, the HiPointDem May 2012 #17

The burden of bearing children still falls on women. Right now, only women can have babies. And LiberalLoner May 2012 #21

Agreed. But that's a different issue than some kind of systematic discrimination by employers HiPointDem May 2012 #25

It certainly happens Aerows May 2012 #39

"It happens" does not a pattern make. And what happens to upper-tier corporate workers HiPointDem May 2012 #53

Well Aerows May 2012 #59

and the fact that you've never held such a position speaks to a difference in our class positions. HiPointDem May 2012 #67

No, I disagree... Spazito May 2012 #28

the issue so far as the maddow report goes is that most of that difference can be explained HiPointDem May 2012 #47

You are dismissing the equal pay for equal work.... Spazito May 2012 #51

The studies in question did not look at "assistant A" and "assistant B". They aggregated data HiPointDem May 2012 #54

In aggregate, they did.... Spazito May 2012 #57

no, they averaged the wages of thousands of people in a broad job category. Like "manager". HiPointDem May 2012 #68

Having read your other posts in this thread... Spazito May 2012 #70

good. i didn't realize that *me* changing *my* position was the only possible reason to discuss HiPointDem May 2012 #73

"the gap is reduced to almost nothing." kiva May 2012 #76

I think 5% is very relevant hfojvt May 2012 #83

You should always take these cable news hosts with a grain of salt RZM May 2012 #13

Your concern for the left is duly noted. Pisces May 2012 #14

maddow = "the left"? HiPointDem May 2012 #19

You've been here four years WilliamPitt May 2012 #20

Dude doesn't understand why the supreme court forbids mandatory school prayer, for one. Warren DeMontague May 2012 #32

If you don't want to call him a concern troll today, Quantess May 2012 #50

I think he meant that I am worse hfojvt May 2012 #84

Wow - what a nasty attack screed. Ruby the Liberal May 2012 #18

That was nasty? WilliamPitt May 2012 #22

"Maddow is sold as a former Rhodes Scholar" Ruby the Liberal May 2012 #29

The Daily Howler still exists? Larkspur May 2012 #24

If you are concerned, bring it to her attention. When she makes a mistake, she admits it. She mfcorey1 May 2012 #27

Apparently, Joe Screed already covered that. Ruby the Liberal May 2012 #31

Here's the thing. hfojvt May 2012 #86

This message was self-deleted by its author Warren DeMontague May 2012 #30

Do I? hfojvt May 2012 #87

This message was self-deleted by its author Warren DeMontague May 2012 #93

The gap is real veganlush May 2012 #33

more sincere than this Somerby that you quote. WI_DEM May 2012 #34

Mr. Somerby belongs on Fox "News". Dawson Leery May 2012 #36

My wife would not think you were sincere. I know that for a fact. See ... JoePhilly May 2012 #40

If You Want To Trash Rachel, Take It To The Gun Control/RKBA Group. Paladin May 2012 #42

Sincere is not the important question. Rachel is a paid employee of CenaW May 2012 #43

Does the Pope wear a funny hat? Nt. Mc Mike May 2012 #75

I think there is legitimate debate to be had about the numbers Bjorn Against May 2012 #77

Your posts makes no sense. shcrane71 May 2012 #78

Rachel Maddow is one of the smartest and most sincere people of all the political shows. Tennessee Gal May 2012 #85

your blanket statement is not factual. and that's not even what maddow said. HiPointDem May 2012 #91

She fell into "show biz" accidently.. Take a look at the annabanana May 2012 #94