Comments by "Robert Steele" (@robertsteele474) on "JUST IN: Schumer blasts McConnell, GOP for blocking bill to combat gender pay gap" video.

  1. Like "It's a myth" it is an exaggeration.
    1
  2.  @Kehvan  The Republic is failing because of 1) the electoral college 2) plurality voting 3) the Senate 4) gerrymandering 5) voter suppression 6) legalized corruption, Citizens United. Satisfied now?
    1
  3. It is not that simple, but the bill is still ridiculous anyway.
    1
  4. @UCuQEIu0UuNLkKp1hnEuYm7Q If the pay gap is based on an hourly rate, how many hours did you work does not apply to the argument. If it is based on the income over a lifetime, then you may have some argument. The length of time you worked at a particular company is meaningless since most employees have about a 3-4 year length of employment on any job. Length of employment is not equivalent to performance and productivity and, in a supposed meritocracy, performance should be the driving force behind wage rewards. Since raises are frequently determined by the base of the starting pay, the longer people are at the company in a given position are paid less that people coming into the company as the people directly coming into the company are negotiating what the market will bear, and are not initially tied to some arbitrary HR algorithm. Companies use information about previous wages to negotiate starting wages, which means wages were determined by rate of pay starting from the first job held, which is a trap most people fall into. If the first job was minimum wage (or below) the rate of all future wages will be determined by that information if is passed on to the subsequent companies. Not volunteering that confidential information opens the negotiation process up to what the market will bear. (Even though it is illegal in some states such as California for companies to ask this question, outsourced HR services doing business in California are bringing this back as they are including this as a mandatory question on applications even though it is illegal) Certain highly-physical and dangerous blue-collar do indeed pay more and attract people that are physically able to do them, and more and more women are choosing to work in those industries (carpenters, steelworkers, manufacturing workers), but the majority of the jobs in the US are service industry/white-collar. Service industry jobs are low paying and white-collar jobs are mid-to-high paying. Currently high-paying white-collar jobs pay more than blue collar jobs for which women as qualified as men. I could go on for pages about how internal social structures and hierarchies and companies’ systemic mismanagement affect employees’ compensation and effective strategies around the system. So you see, it is much more complicated and as I said. The Bill is ridiculous and does not address any of these systemic problems. My point is you can’t effectively fight useless and counter-productive legislation with over-simplistic arguments.
    1
  5.  @Kehvan  What a simplistic simplistic reply to a critique of simplistic and ineffectual argument . I repeat, your overly simplistic argument does not help you fight A USELESS Bill that WILL NOT WORK. Jesus "Kehv", take some advice so people will take you seriously. Also, reading the first line of an argument does not mean you understand the whole argument, sonny. So continue to argue with someone who agrees with you that the the bill that will not work.
    1