David Horowitz wrote: > You could be so much happier if you understood economics 101.The labor department > statistics are aggregates. They don't mean anything. June O'Neill has shown that > women already get equal pay for equal work. If women earned 70% less for the same > work, capitalists would fire all their men workers, hire women and instantly > increase their profits by 30%. The disparity in the aggregate statistics is > explained by the fact that the average woman takes time out to have children (and > therefore has less job experience) or seeks flex time jobs, again to take care of > children, and these are just by nature lower paying jobs. > To back this assertion up (beyond the implication that it's OK to pay moms less), you would need to show me that fathers who opt for flex time or take paternity leave earn at the same rate as women. -- ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Mark Bunster **Milo Venus was a beautiful lass Survey Research Lab**had the world in the palm of her hand VA. Commonwealth U **lost both arms in a wrestling match Richmond, VA 23284 **fighting over a brown-eyed handsome man. mbunster@vcu.edu ** rbunster@earthlink.net** --Chuck Berry http://www.imagineradio.com/mymusiclisten.asp?name=mbunster
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 10/03/00 EDT