Feminism

[NextEpisode]

(ii) Equal pay for equal work. Milton Friedman made the case, quite brilliantly, against

Yea but milton friedman is a dickhead

Lmao, the troll is back.

[UofLCard]

But this is about equality, not oppression. We never mentioned being oppressed. So why are you bringing up slaves & jewish people. I don't think you can compare that :S

Listen to charlottemathers.

[UofLCard]

Feminism started with the right intentions but has taken a deadly wrong turn. We live in a feminist catering world where everything is the man's fault, being a man is incorrect and the sequestration of what makes us men in the first place (y'know, providing for our family?) is slowly being taken from us.

vvvv

Feminism has always been about equal rights. But unfortunately, there's that chunk of people who are using feminism as an excuse to hate men and give the others a bad name. They're the loudest and get on the news more often.

[Minimii]

Lmao, the troll is back.

im right tho

[NextEpisode]

Lmao, the troll is back.

im right tho

About what exactly? Because, whether you consider Milton Friedman "a dick" or not is irrelevant. What is relevant is the actual statement that Friedman made. Do you disagree with it? What are your thoughts on "Equal pay for equal work"?

[12characters]

Would you mind explaining to me what "Equal pay for equal work" is, good sir? ^

[Alex2012]

I don't care about feminism organisation because in my country the woman practically got all what they wanted thanks to my grandmother, but i'm more tiring about sexism and gender stereotypes.

[EminemInsider]

http://i.imgur.com/jztLw.jpg

[Minimii]

Lmao, the troll is back.

im right tho

About what exactly? Because, whether you consider Milton Friedman "a dick" or not is irrelevant. What is relevant is the actual statement that Friedman made. Do you disagree with it? What are your thoughts on "Equal pay for equal work"?

Society shouldnt be built around things like, someone might be sexist or racist and therefore different rules should be made for situations like that. Instead sexism and racism should be removed from society.

How stupid would it be if government for instance lowered government officials' wages because they are getting bribed so much anyway, instead of fixing the corruption itself. It's not a good solution.

Without minimum wage employers could pay ridiculously small amounts during hard times when it's hard to get a job because they could just lower your wages and you dont want to resign in a fear of not finding another job.
Or in poor areas an employer gives you an option: 500/month or no job at all.
In those areas there probably isnt lack of potential employees thus it would only be beneficial to the emplyer to give extremely low wages. That would force those areas to remain poor because of people doing multiple jobs and not having a chance to educate themselves or such.

Maybe have, lets say, certain wage which the employee has to eventually end up getting. If you work for 800/month while the minimum wage is 1000 you would eventually end up having that set 1000/month, and that couldnt be lowered ever again.
Kinda like internship i guess.

[Hadez]

Society shouldnt be built around things like, someone might be sexist or racist and therefore different rules should be made for situations like that. Instead sexism and racism should be removed from society.

please explain how you would go about "removing" sexism and racism from society. it's plainly obvious that those two things will ALWAYS be around whether we like it or not. we do it to ourselves. there's no getting around it.

[_Jesus_]

Feminism is claiming equality between both sex by focusing on problems of one only

[Supershade]

http://i.imgur.com/jztLw.jpg

[NextEpisode]

Society shouldnt be built around things like, someone might be sexist or racist and therefore different rules should be made for situations like that.

No, and I wasn’t suggesting that either. It is the special interest policies/rules that often creates the problem in the first place. What you ought to have is a society where individuals have the right make up their own mind about X (whatever object X is) without the state interfering – as long as it doesn’t coerce other individuals.

If anything, it’s you who’s promoting such a society, in the sense that you’re indirectly arguing for special rules for special situations (“equal pay for equal work” law). I’m not saying that we should treat the sexist/racist different from anyone else. You are.

You say “sexism and racism should be removed from society”. A world without sexism and racism, sure I’m all for that, but the real question is HOW do you achieve (or at least move in the direction of) such a society? Do you think the state should have the authority to remove/replace people’s opinions? If so, I suggest you – instead - just move to North Korea, they’ll execute those types of policies flawlessly.

What I’m saying is that a society should, imo, be built upon institutions, laws and policies that do not interfere with individuals’ freedom or denies the right to equal opportunity (not equal pay, but equal opportunity). If the state is able to institute policies and laws that do not interfere with the factors just mentioned, whilst at the same time promoting the cause and create incentives for people not to be sexist or racist, that’s a big and in my opinion, and the way to go about.

How stupid would it be if government for instance lowered government officials' wages because they are getting bribed so much anyway, instead of fixing the corruption itself. It's not a good solution.

Exactly.

Instead one should try to identify the root of the problem. In the case mentioned here, “corruption among government officials”, the question one should ask is:

Why are government officials being bribed in the first place?

Because government officials are in the position to give something valuable in return - maybe it’s a policy that is beneficiary to the briber in question. In other words, government is very influential in a lot of aspects of society. That leads to a follow-up question:

How do you stop/reduce the bribing?

1. Either you try to enforce laws that prevent individuals/companies from donating money for campaigns, or in general, transactions between government officials and non-government individuals.

2. Or you try to reduce the influence of government, i.e. the incentive for the briber to even reach out to the government official.

As I’m somewhat influenced by classic liberalism, I’m biased towards #2. I also think #1 has its implications, and will be hard to implement in practice. Even if the laws are improved, the bribes will still occur - because the incentives for doing so are still there.

Again, the free-market + a “less is more” approach is

Without minimum wage employers could pay ridiculously small amounts during hard times when it's hard to get a job because they could just lower your wages and you dont want to resign in a fear of not finding another job.

No, no and no. What you’re describing is a situation in which there is an absence of contracts. What I’m saying is that employer X and employee Y should be able to settle a contract (about wage, time-period, working conditions etc etc…) without government Z interfering. No one should be able to force neither party to enter into the contract. If the individual looking for the job in question feels as though the pay is too low, he/she has the right to NOT sign the contract, and look for another job.

Or in poor areas an employer gives you an option: 500/month or no job at all.
In those areas there probably isnt lack of potential employees thus it would only be beneficial to the emplyer to give extremely low wages. That would force those areas to remain poor because of people doing multiple jobs and not having a chance to educate themselves or such.

So the first question one should pose is; how did it come about that area X is poor in the first place? If you take a closer look, you’ll see that most of these areas are poor due to very high unemployment. And why is the unemployment rate high? Common contributing factors are (i) lack of (good) education, (ii) bad government policies.

Solution? Well, the first problem that needs to be addressed is the high unemployment rate, which leaves people with lack of health insurance, reduced life quality and reduced skills. Then one must ask, how does one employ people with lack of experience, lack of education, and consequently lack of skill? If you set a “minimum wage”, you are indirectly/unintentionally setting up a system under which these individuals remain unemployed.

If you instead abolish the minimum wage law, and let employers hire people at lower cost, their incentive to move business to these “poor areas” increase. In turn, individuals in these areas would get employed, get health insurance receive skills at work, and in general increase life quality. As (i) less and less people stay unemployed and (ii) individuals skills increase at work --> the pressure for higher wages will increase, and consequently the wages will rise. In the meantime, there are several federal support mechanisms that could be applicable. Milton Friedman suggested a negative-income tax, which would guarantee that no individuals earned less money than X.

[Tornado]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23424289

I'm not even English but this pisses me off.

It's a fucking joke, why should female representation on a bank note even make news for? Don't people have nothing better to debate/petition for? And why they cared enough to make it an issue, fuck knows, like having more females on bank notes is gonna change shit

[UofLCard]

It's a fucking joke, why should female representation on a bank note even make news for?

Because there's not a lot of females on currency.

That's like when people were wondering why it was news when Jason Collins came out as gay.