• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Are men who are underpaid a good thing if it helps gender pay equity statistics?

Is it a good thing to have underpaid men to improve gender pay statistics?

  • Yes

    Votes: 1 8.3%
  • No

    Votes: 11 91.7%

  • Total voters
    12

SDET

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 1, 2015
Messages
7,802
Reaction score
1,610
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
If women gain absolutely nothing more, but men start seeing earning reductions, is that a good thing if it results in pay equity? Please ignore the assertion of whether or not women actually do earn less. Let's just say *if* women earn less.
 
Re: Is men who are underpaid a good thing if it helps gender pay equity statistics?

If women gain absolutely nothing more, but men start seeing earning reductions, is that a good thing if it results in pay equity? Please ignore the assertion of whether or not women actually do earn less. Let's just say *if* women earn less.

This sounds like something that could have been a plank on Hillary Clinton's platform.
 
Re: Is men who are underpaid a good thing if it helps gender pay equity statistics?

This sounds like something that could have been a plank on Hillary Clinton's platform.

:lamo
 
If women gain absolutely nothing more, but men start seeing earning reductions, is that a good thing if it results in pay equity? Please ignore the assertion of whether or not women actually do earn less. Let's just say *if* women earn less.

Is increasing wealth inequality beyond its already totally insane levels where wages have been stagnant for ages as living costs rise a good thing?

Uh... no.

Women aren't gaining anything in that situation. Their situation stays just as ****ty. It's merely a question of someone else losing something. I'd really prefer if we stop putting people in ****ty situations all together.

This is like the draft thing, where people are always pointing to women wanting to serve equally, but overwhelmingly not supporting registering for the draft. What those people fail to mention is that they don't want men to have to register for it either. They'd prefer everyone to have an equally good position, rather than an equally ****ty one.

Screwing everyone is not a solution to some people already being screwed.
 
Yes, we should lower the MW for males to $5/hour to help females get a better start in the labor force. ;)
 
If you reduce the amount of money men make, you also consequently reduce the amount of money available for women to spend.

Even now, we're still living in a society where while we have a "lifetime earnings" gap (not to be conflated with a real wage gap), we also have a significant consumption and spending gap in households that heavily favors women. In families, women control the majority of wages of both themselves and their partners.

It negatively impacts the heterosexual family unit which is still the most common relationship dynamic in America. So no, a change in men's earnings will have a gross negative impact on women at the same time. It's not like the society is made up of single men and single women only. Most people pair off as men+women pretty much soon as they can. It functions as a unit and so employers need to be reminded that those who are the primary bread earners in a household (whether it's the man or woman doesn't matter), both need to be provided wages that can sustain the family unit and we need to start moving towards single-incomes that can sustain families instead of pushing for more dual income households.

We should be moving towards improving wages for everyone. By isolating the issue to just one or a few segments of the populations, people are essentially driving themselves into the ground even more overall.
 
Last edited:
How is this even a question? Earning less is no good for anyone. This would be the biggest cop-out of all time. Well, we can't REDUCE mens' wages, so we just have to accept the current male/female imbalance. Oh, well! Is that what we're driving at?
 
Depends on your POV/goals:

If your goal is fairness that'd work, as it would be more fair.

If you goal is to improve people's quality of life, then it's an awful idea.

If you goal is to maximize profits for the employers, then it's awesome.

If you want to improve income inequality, it's a distraction, as the important gap is between income levels, rather than genders.


Maybe get the LGBT to demand their new genders (what's it like 30+ of them) be counted separately? That'll spread out the numbers.
 
If women gain absolutely nothing more, but men start seeing earning reductions, is that a good thing if it results in pay equity? Please ignore the assertion of whether or not women actually do earn less. Let's just say *if* women earn less.

The pay gap has been debunked thoroughly. Think about it, If women are paid less, then why aren't employers hiring more of them to save money? Also it's illegal to pay women less than men.
 
How is this even a question? Earning less is no good for anyone. This would be the biggest cop-out of all time. Well, we can't REDUCE mens' wages, so we just have to accept the current male/female imbalance. Oh, well! Is that what we're driving at?

It boils down to individual justice versus "social justice". I'm driving at that I'm against ANYONE being underpaid. I recently coached someone, who happened to be female, to get a job offer then hand two letters to her boss: Her two week notice or a 22% pay increase request. She told her boss to pick one. She got the 22% pay raise. There's no advocacy group for underpaid men.
 
Back
Top Bottom