No substantive response, eh? Feel free to follow through with your threat to abandon this discussion at any time then. Or, you could source your claims and tell me what you feel I've left unsourced.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
U.S. Senate Approves Anti-Discrimination Bill Endorsed by Tim Cook
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No substantive response, eh? Feel free to follow through with your threat to abandon this discussion at any time then. Or, you could source your claims and tell me what you feel I've left unsourced.
It is not a discussion as that would entail an civil exchange of ideals and not one party just challenging every statement the other has made. A you are doing is avoiding any counterclaims and providing nothing to back your claims then insulting me. I have provided your claim and cited the source, it is number 2 on the reason cited for the war and doesn't relate to slavery, and there other reasons but there is always the relationship made to slavery as that is the belief held that everything relating to the war is slavery related solely.
I'm not accusing anyone in this discussion, but sometime I wonder if some people really understand what slavery was like? At it's best, treated like the family pet, maybe even special treatment based on affection or consensual sexual favors. At it's worst, treated like an animal, whipped, worked like mule, minimal quality of life other than being alive, sexually violated. In all cases zero rights, the only benefits received were at the discretion of the Master. BTW, I plan on seeing 12 Year a Slave soon.
Let's start with a simpler question: what claims have I made that you feel are unsourced? You keep saying this, but every time I ask, you ignore it.
Also, if you cited something, I missed the link to it.
I would think that most people within the US will never know the persecutions and hates that several groups have experienced through the years. This is a good thing. When the worst that most have to worry about is "feeling second class" it shows progress.
Other than earning a wage and not being owned, several children suffered the same fates in the factories of the north before child labor laws were enacted. They were beat and mistreated, locked into small dank rooms to produce product, and overall not thought of as human.
----------
You have several times claimed I have stated things that are both not true and incorrectly quoted. I have asked you to prove my statement that you claim are incorrect but you have failed to do so. You haven't proven once that my claims about war were not solely due to slavery were incorrect. You have claimed that slavery is the reason for the war, so you must be able to prove this. When challenged you have provided nothing.
Scroll back as it is on this page, it is the federal controls that I was referring to previously. I documented this so you would be happy (although I know this won't happen).
Curious... What race are you? Because my instinct tells me that "feeling second class" isn't what most minorities worry is the worst thing they might face in their life. But, not being a (racial) minority myself, I would feel extremely uncomfortable making this claim.
You tell me. I have stated this many times in this thread and not hidden it at all. You claim to read and pay attention yet this fact has escaped you. I have stated it in the open several times.
My race should have no bearing anyway, as I have experienced several forms of discrimination throughout my life and within the US the worst that we should expect is to feel like a second class citizen. If otherwise happens then we can't regulate the criminals, as any race or class has a possibility of being subjected to mistreatment as criminals don't obey nor care about laws. I have been discriminated against where my life was endangered yet this isn't something we should have to worry about in the US, as even when equality exists there will still be hatred.
My race should have no bearing anyway, as I have experienced several forms of discrimination throughout my life and within the US the worst that we should expect is to feel like a second class citizen. If otherwise happens then we can't regulate the criminals, as any race or class has a possibility of being subjected to mistreatment as criminals don't obey nor care about laws. I have been discriminated against where my life was endangered yet this isn't something we should have to worry about in the US, as even when equality exists there will still be hatred.
Last edited:
Amateur psychology too? What a renaissance man you are.
Anyhoo:
http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/south-carolina-declaration-of-causes-of-secession/
Your turn.
That documents why South Carolina succeeded but where does that state that was a direct reason or cause for the war? It only states that the non slave backing states were trying to impose their rights and beliefs upon the state. They also state the Declarations set forth through the Constitution allowed for them to create their own laws, protections, and governess when encroached upon.
This only relates to SC and doesn't prove that the war was solely upon the views of slavery.
And once again with the insults?? Really are we five and feel better now???
This only relates to SC and doesn't prove that the war was solely upon the views of slavery.
And once again with the insults?? Really are we five and feel better now???
Your turn
----------
Oh holy crap, you did it! I mean, you went back and appended this to a post after the fact, but well done!
Although I have to say, this doesn't prove the civil war was about things other than slavery. What laws do you think Calhoun was trying to nullify?
Thanks for the condescension. I added this quite a while ago, like right after posting it originally but you missed it so now you are going to chastise me.
Holy crap, you read something and remember/ noticed/ comprehended it. Wow.
He was trying to nullify the impending taxation to be imposed on many farming related issues such as the cotton gin, the cotton crop, and other taxes that would have only affected the crop producers and not the end users or mills.
It proves that there were other factors than JUST slavery which was all I claimed originally.
Holy crap, you read something and remember/ noticed/ comprehended it. Wow.
He was trying to nullify the impending taxation to be imposed on many farming related issues such as the cotton gin, the cotton crop, and other taxes that would have only affected the crop producers and not the end users or mills.
It proves that there were other factors than JUST slavery which was all I claimed originally.
Yes, you've not been condescending one bit during this exchange. Don't hurt yourself getting down off that high horse of yours. It's a long way to fall.
So you're saying that taxation on farming related issues had nothing to do with slavery? Is that correct? I don't want to be accused of mis-reading your words again.
You hurled the insults first dont forget that and don't fool yourself about trying to be a bigger person. Still waiting for your proof and valid source as you haven't proposed any.
I also never said it did or did not relate to slavery. I specifically never mentioned slavery but once again you drug it in there. So to answer your question. No I did not mention slavery so if you read it as saying it was related to slavery within my statements then yes you misread my statements.
Last edited:
I am officially done with this sidetrack now. As much as I find it interesting and informative, it seems to have turned into a personal vendetta against me by one poster, for what reason I am not sure, and I am not going to persue a line of questioning and discussion where it appears that insult and undermining is the main point of contention. I have better things to do than be belittled and chastised for every comment I make. Feel free to continue the insults and belittlement as you see fit. I just will not take part anymore.
Hopefully back to your regularly scheduled programming.
Hopefully back to your regularly scheduled programming.
He has yet to explain his version of history, e.g, what those taxes on "farming related issues" actually were.
In the non-alternative version of history, everything points back to slavery. I had posted on the 1828 and 1832 tariffs earlier in the thread, but here's a quick recap:
The Tariff of Abominations, caused the Nullification Crisis.
So, cotton. It was about reduced cotton sales.
Cotton. You know, the crop you needed slaves to produce economically in the 1800s. The newly invented cotton gin helps you separate the seeds, but you still needed boatloads of slaves to pick the crop.
No, you hurled the first insult. Then called the whaaaaambulance. I provided my proof. Where's yours? You have yet to do so.
Me: provide proof the civil war was about things other than slavery.
You: here's something about Calhoun and nullification of taxation issue.
Me: just to be clear, you're saying this is the proof I'm asking for that the civil war was about things other than slavery?
You: I never mentioned slavery, nor said whether this relates to slavery or not.
It's not a personal vendetta. Your argument was exposed as weak, and you didn't like being called out on it. The two are not the same.
We certainly do live in a matriarchal society. On what basis do you say that you are paid $0.76 per dollar in your field? Show me a link.
I hope you are not saying this because of the false statement repeated by many, including the President of the United States, that women are "paid 77 cents on the dollar for doing the same work as men."
This is simply not true. The "77 cents on the dollar" is not for people doing the same work. The 77 cents is for all full time working men and women, regardless of profession.
One might as well write a statistic saying that "a seamstress makes 77 cents for every dollar that a mechanical engineer makes."
This is a completely meaningless statement, and certain not the same as saying that X makes 77 cents for every dollar that Y makes "for the same work."
Of course, I should not be surprised to hear people repeat this canard, as we live in a matriarchal society, infused with preconceived and misdirected chivalry. False statistics such as this are frequently taught in your local matriarchal indoctrination camp, otherwise known as a public school, and unfortunately my son will be exposed to this sort of bullcrap many times over before he reaches maturity. The statistic has even inspired a litany of laws!
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-gender-wage-gap-is-a-myth-2012-07-26
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2237196/Women-win-gender-pay-war-20s-earning-men-age.html
Let me state the obvious. For making money, you should choose something other than art.
It is a something for nothing program if you are a housewife and you have never reported significant income or paid a substantial amount into the system. A housewife who does not generally work, qualifies for at minimum 50% of what her full-time working counterpart gets. These are the only able-bodied individuals who receive this treatment. Meanwhile, the homeless guy who lives under a bridge for most of his life gets nothing. Thus, "the less she works and the richer she marries, the more government largess she shall receive."
http://www.ssa.gov/retire2/yourspouse.htm#a0=0
Last edited:
Not for nothing:
http://www.npr.org/2013/06/10/189280329/50-years-after-the-equal-pay-act-gender-wage-gap-endures
http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2013...t-and-smallest-pay-gaps-between-men-and-women
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way...y-for-equal-work-not-even-college-helps-women
But wait! There's more
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2011/02/03/133466384/women-docs-fall-further-behind-on-pay
Perhaps the only canard is the argument coming out of your mouth, which is just as equal to the canard that defines your outright refusal to believe facts about our society. In short, your beliefs that we live in a matriarchal society is crap.
BL.
Yes, when I look around at the bastions of power and privilege in society, all I see are skirts. In fact, just today I was at one of the city's oldest country clubs. I suspect they must have been cleaning the pictures of their female overlords, because the wall of past presidents was all old white men. Surely they will have that rectified by the next time I go.
Actually, no. The statement that women are "paid 77 cents on the dollar for doing the same work as men" is demonstrably false. Despite the fact that it is repeated over and over, this is a global statistic comparing men and women, without regard to profession. So the 77 cent statistic does not compare men & women "doing the same work." Period. End of story.
If you want to bring up other statistics, you have to take into account that it is not really possible to control for all possible variables to try to get an exact estimate of how much women are paid in comparison to men "for the same work", because there are too many variables to account for everything. The studies that tend to control for most things show that women are making at least on average $0.92 cents for every dollar that men make "for the same work." But like I said, it's not possible to control for everything, so even if there is no wage discrimination, you will never be able to account for all factors to come out with a figure of $1 even when real life = $1.
For example, the data you showed here:
http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2013...t-and-smallest-pay-gaps-between-men-and-women
... compares data for men and women by profession, but lumps together all of them as people of the same sex who work more than 35 hours per week. But not all people who work more than 35 hours per week work the same number of hours, and not all people who work more than 35 hours per week have worked continuously for the same number of years. Look at the data and what do you notice? The professions with the biggest wage gaps are those where people often work based on commission (insurance sales agents, sales and related workers, real estate brokers and agents, personal finance advisors, marketing and sales managers, stock brokers). Data shows that men are more than 5 times more likely than women to work a job 60 hours per week or more, which can account for a lot of disparity in fields like this which pay by commission. Likewise for jobs where there is a possibility for a lot of overtime or night shift work, which men also do more frequently than women.
The study you cited here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local...d3a-11e2-9cd5-b55c38388962_story.html?hpid=z2
... after controlling for choice of major in college, profession and a few other things, they came up with a wage gap of only 6.6 %. That translates to "women are paid $0.944 for every $1 that men make for the same work", which is basically a rounding error, and a far cry from $0.77. Note, you can never control for everything in a study. What if the women are more likely to have older boyfriends who have already graduated (taking the highest paying job they could get), whereas the younger girlfriend is more likely to restrict her job search to the vicinity of the established boyfriend? Finding joint employment in a given region is always more difficult than finding employment when are are single and can move wherever. What if women are more likely to choose their place of employment on factors other than pay (e.g. proximity to family, preferring to be in a desirable area, friendliness of colleagues, stress level of the job, perceived "social value", educational value of the first job) with salary not ranking as high on their list of priorities? None of these factors are controlled for in the AAUW study. Note, the results are based on surveys. How do you know that men aren't slightly exaggerating their salaries, or visa versa for women? It's known that biases crop up in studies such as these. More likely than not, that they are making the same amount or perhaps even more "for the same work." Finally, it's even possible that in higher paying fields that tend to be dominated by males such as engineering, men might be just a slight bit better at what they do, even if they get the same grades. In short, a 6.6% difference in a study that doesn't control for 90% of what goes on in life, is basically an insignificant result.
As for this study:
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2011/02/03/133466384/women-docs-fall-further-behind-on-pay
...again, they don't control for a lot of factors. Not even the authors think this is evidence of wage discrimination. "The study's authors say they can't prove it, but they don't think so. Instead, they think the influx of women into the profession is leading employers to offer greater flexibility in hours and other family-friendly policies 'that are more appealing to female practitioners, but that come at the price of commensurately lower pay.' "
This study, while controlling for some factors, does not control for a great many others. For example, female physicians are far more likely to date other people that work and have careers. This may leave them with fewer options to move to where the money is better. In contrast, male physicians may be more likely to date women without careers, or with more flexible / lower paying careers which leave them with more options to move to the jobs where the salaries are better. It looks like other things may not be controlled for, such as where in the state of NY (urban, rural) they work. Men might also simply rank salary higher on the list of priorities for finding a job than women.
One thing is for sure though -- there sure are a lot of people out there trying desperately to find evidence gender wage discrimination when there doesn't seem to be a lot of evidence for it. I wonder how many "negative" results have been buried by simply not publishing them when the investigator didn't find the results "interesting."
Last edited:
Most of those guys are chivalrous bootlickers and generally, they front for the system. Every woman loves to "marry up" (hypergamy). Further, if there is anyone, usually a male, in a position of prominence who can take from unrelated third parties to give to them, women will always show a degree of gratitude.
WOW just WOW.
That is such a bitter and twisted view of the world. I really do feel sorry for you to go through life which such an outlook.
I've been married three times, and I cannot for one moment place myself in your outlook.