In an effort to narrow wage discrimination and a persistent gender pay gap, President Barack Obama unveiled new rules on Friday that would require U.S. companies with more than 100 employees to provide summary pay data by gender, race, and ethnicity.
This mandate, according to the White House, "will help focus public enforcement of our equal pay laws and provide better insight into discriminatory pay practices across industries and occupations."
You know this is all thanks to Bernie being in the race! Suddenly the democrats want to look more progressive instead of being the little brother tagging along behind the republicans on the oligarchy (paid for) joy ride. Suddenly Obama is starting to move towards being the Obama people hoped they were voting for but didn't get for these last seven years.
All this is because Bernie has the establishment running scared that democracy might actually win and don'cha know ...they weren't prepared for that to happen.
Want to talk about unequal wages? How about Social Security paying perhaps a majority of recipients (retirees and disabled people) -LESS THAN MINIMUM WAGE? This is not an issue for anyone, unless it's happening to you. And of course, "We can't afford to pay you more." But we always have a spare Trillion lying around for the latest war- based-on-lies. Wait till it's your turn to sweat losing your apartment. And no one cares.
I wasn't really making a comment on the issue as much as I was making an observation that this and many other progressive issues that have long been part of Bernie's message are finally being discussed as mainline issues as opposed to side issues and only for interest groups. Bernie has had a huge influence on the issues involved in this election and that is to his credit and our great good fortune..
You mean like decades of supporting issues like this one is the same thing as drumming up populism?
You are so cute! Play nice now. So decades of issues such as this doesn't matter to you (or you don't bother learning what you don't really want to know?) and it is all just recent cynicism? Lol. Seriously you really are ... precious.
What does it mean? It is basically the opposite of >>> "Can I have a cookie?"
Double plus Piffle!!! Hey where did I even comment about the issue as I originally said didn't I? I made an observation but you wanted to engage me on this issue. Well I engaged and pointed out that this is NOT a new issue with Bernie now is it? Therefore your premise is faulty right out of the gate. It is a debating trick to characterize something by using it in a formula. So if Bernie says anything about something that he has often said before then that is according to you his only drumming up votes by playing to emotions? What a crock and gee sorry if you think such an obvious technique is worthy of respect because I don't. Ergo the next time reference.
By the way you argue like answering a question in a standardized test. If A equals C then B equals A then will D equal B etc.
If, if , if? Are you unaware of the actuality out there? You suggest that -
So tell me what is the reality out there? Not a theoretical but actual? Are women paid equally? I have too little patience with standardized test logic okay. You argue as if you don't see what is the reality yourself. Maybe you don't.
A long time ago in a neighborhood far far away, I was offered a job at a major firm, I was told point blank that I would be paid more than a female employee because of the tradition of the male bread winner. I objected to the discrepancy as the power of the Left was with me and ultimately chose to turn down the position. I managed to avoid the temptation of the corporate dark side that time but I never forgot that in your face reality.
You can claim your statistics are true and so can anyone else who wants to co-troll with you but reality is NOT only what you read about online but what you have learned while going through life. Maybe you haven't noticed certain things but are relying on stats online and so forth. Too bad for you... you are a bit light in the reality mode. Observation is the truth you've seen. Stats are the possible truth that you need to verify by observation or else you just assume they are true.
Millions of women report, talk about, know first hand that there is a discrepancy in wages... observe that before you talk. Real world facts are observable.
Yes of course what you read is more real to some people. Like women have been making this tiff up for decades right? Such is the power of denial for some people. They would rather believe what someone tells them so they carefully pick whom they will listen to...lol.
Like with climate denial sites... Who listens to their baloney? Only those who want to believe that baloney is true.
Relying strictly on statistics without considering the REALITY of the wage disparity distorts the true picture. Just like the unemployment rate that is put out by the U S Dept of Labor that counts one household as a part of the formula when the reality is that there may be a half-dozen people in that "household" who are unemployed but are only counted as one. The underemployed and those who have run out of unemployment benefits are nowhere to be found in the statistical analysis.