Re: pay me to shop elsewhere


Paul Ciszek (nospam@xxxxxxxxxx) writes:
> In article <dbs0el$l48$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> Mean Green Dancing Machine <aahz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>In article <dbs013$lrn$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
>>Paul Ciszek <nospam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>In article <edl2e15p56dqrjrvj7rn91sfihaciniof6@xxxxxxx>,
>>>Marilee J. Layman <mjlayman@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Actually, it is. McDonalds isn't sexist, and you can make a decent
>>>>salary there.
>>>
>>>What has Walmart done in the area of sexism, besides pulling the
>>>"Someday a woman will be president" T-shirt?
>>
>>Short answer: they treat women like *** and pay them less than men.
>>
>>For a longer answer, just Google "walmart women".
>
> Given:
>
> A) Walmart pays women less than men
>
> B) Walmart will do anything to reduce its own costs
>
> Why does Walmart hire men at all? It would seem that every man working
> for Walmart represents a loss of (1-X)*Salary, where X is the fraction
> (what they pay women)/(what they pay men)

This is one of the proofs that the claimed " wage gap " between men
and women is a *myth*, and nothing more.

Dr. Warren Farrell explains all this quite well in his latest work,
" Why Men Earn More ". Among the points brought up in there, is that,
on average, men work longer hours than do women and tend to do harder
and more dangerous work.

Yes, one can find exceptions to this aplenty, but, statistically
speaking, those are exceptions.

So, we come back to the basic question: If it were *true* that women
get paid less money *for doing the same job for the same amount of time,
while having the same qualifications and time on the job*, then in the
modern cost cutting business mania, literally no firm would hire the
higher cost workers, namely men.

Andre

--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.
.

Loading