THE GENDER GAP ISN'T BETWEEN THE LEGS, IT'S BETWEEN THE EARS. THE MYTH OF PAY INEQUALITY FOR WOMEN.

Over the last few days, jealous females and their effeminate male counterparts have taken to the Internet to engage in whining politics about "gender gap." Likely, these women and their womanish familiars are trying to leverage International Women’s Day for their yearly stab at one of the biggest rhetorical con jobs of the last 40 years, the "gender gap" for pay. Even hack politicians like Barack Obama have blathered platitudes about "equal pay for equal work" in efforts to deceive Americans.



Lost in the entire debate of "closing the gender gap" is the reality of superior male intellects. It has been well-established scientifically and known for decades that average IQ for females and males measures about the same with measurements for males showing greater variability. Most studies suggest males have between 3 and 4 points more than females.

Yet, substantially more males exist with with IQs approaching 130, which is the measure considered to be intellectually gifted. There are almost twice as many males as there are females having stronger intellects as measured by IQ.

If you were to meet with a group of 100 selected at random, about two will have IQs that measure above 135 and both will be male. You would need to assemble a group of 150 also at random before you would get your first female with an IQ above 135.

First, let us divvy up the 147 whose IQs are below 135. Well make 74 women and 73 men. It won't matter if there is one more woman as well assume each half below 135 IQ earns $10 an hour. Well also assume the pay rate for those with IQs above 135 is $12.

So adding the Mensa woman to her kind, the average pay for women now calcuates to $10.02 an hour. Adding the two Mensa men to their kind and the average pay for men calculates to $10.06 an hour.

It should be clear that fewer women with higher IQs means fewer women working in the highest paying jobs. When averaging wages across all 148 million jobs, from lowest to highest, the average for women will calculate lower by this effect alone.

When hazard pay jobs get thrown into the mix, for example, underwater welder, it should be no surprise that men earn more than women, on average, averaging across all jobs. It should not surprise anyone that women as a group, across all jobs for all IQs, earn 82.5¢ for every $1 earned by men as group, on average.

Nothing should be done about it. Legislators cannot increase the number of smarter women nor can legislators force women to work more dangerous jobs.

I found this description at Return of Kings interestingly amusing,

Take I.Q., for example. Despite the noise trotted out by those with lower-to-average intellects about the validity of I.Q. tests and scores, I.Q. remains the strongest single indicator of financial abundance, vocational prestige, academic success, and a host of life’s other achievements. On average, men and women have roughly the same I.Q., give or take a negligible point or two. The glaring differences, however, arise in how this average is distributed. Compared to women, who tend to flock towards neither extreme, men deviate from the average far more, and thus fill out most numbers at both the top and bottom ends of life in general.

It is for this reason, perhaps more than any other, that the majority of outstanding achievers are men, and have been throughout history. The vast majority of scientists, philosophers, musicians, academics, inventors, writers, political leaders, and so forth, are men. 

But men also comprise the bulk of society’s shit heap. The homeless, long-term unemployed, criminals, drug addicts, mental health patients, alcoholics, and degenerate gamblers are also, overwhelmingly, men.

Oddly enough, I’m [SIC] yet to hear a feminist complain about the disparity between genders when it comes to prison populations, or drug rehab centres, or the impoverished unemployed. But when a new government installs only one female in its entire cabinet? Outrage! When yet another report hits the papers of only a handful of female board members in blue-chip? Patriarchy! When women are outnumbered by men in award nominations in almost every field? Misogynist conspiracy!

Read more ...

THE MYTH OF THE OVERPAID CEO IN AMERICA

When you work whether as an employee or self-employed, you are the CEO  of your own firm, one which lacks employees. Your product is your expressed skills through time, which everyone should know as work. 

As I explained in WHY IS THE ECONOMY SO HORRIBLE? BECAUSE ACADEMIA ECONOMICS IS FAKE, the entirety of trade, or commerce, or real economics ties up with two words — property and profit. Without profit from effort, anyone would lack buying power to buy anything else. Without property, no one can trade. Only when property gets created, can trade arise between two persons. 

Though most think of property as things possessed, property always has meant the right of ownership and never the thing owned.  The name for property put to making stuff is called capital. The name for property put to purchase and sale for cash and credit is wealth. 

Your labor is your capital, which you use to make work, which is your wealth. Property in your work is what you trade in a purchase and sale of trade. You sell your work and you buy wages. Thus work is wealth, that is property you no longer desire and wages are wealth that you desire.

Your costs to produce and sell your work are what you spend to buy living space, whether as rent or mortgage paid to another, as well as what you spend to buy electric, heat, food, fitness, which is maintenance paid for your capital, which is yourself and medicine, which is repair paid for your capital, which is yourself.

Your income is your revenue. After you pay your expenses, you arrive at gross profit. 

Politicians have given themselves a right to share in your gross profit and have imposed a duty upon you to let them share in your profit, even though they have not invested in you. They call their share of your profit, taxes.

After politicians have swiped their take of your gross profit, you are left with net profit, which is your net income. The ratio of your net income to income is your personal analog to After Taxes Potential Return to Capitalists.

After Taxes Potential Return to Capitalists is the cash and bank credit remaining after everyone has been paid, including extortion owed politicians who then pay off all those who are free but who refuse to work in exchange for votes and thus power.

Triggered by their uncontrolled envy, many have been indoctrinated into believe that CEOs of the largest firms are overpaid. Unlike welfare freeloaders, wage earners and the self-employed, CEOs think with much bigger numbers and on grander scales.

Without CEOs, there would be no one to steer ships, to coordinate the putting to work thousands of skilled and semi-skilled wage seekers, who would be living as bare subsistence savages absent CEOs and capitalists who back those CEOS. Somewhere in their lives, those who would grow up to be CEOs discovered their chances to earn would be substantively higher than those who merely sell work for wages or sell work as the self-employed.

The executive list and pay data comes from the AFL-CIO, a unionized labor organization, which has every reason to overstate the pay numbers. The firm financials come from Google Finance. The data year is 2012.

For the list, in 2012, the average CEO  pay was US$29.6 million. CEO pay constituted 1.1% of revenues, on average. The After Taxes Potential Return to Capitalists was 9.25, on average.

Were some of these CEOs overpaid? Sure! However, that is only so relative to other CEOs who delivered much more return to capitalists for much less outlay.

Stay tuned because upcoming I shall show how academician egghead Thomas Piketty is oh so wrong.

Oh and have you ever noticed that the laborer, regardless of whether having no skills or highly technical skills, never seeks to offer his skills in a purchase and sale for wages to other poor laborers like himself?

Instead, the laborer always seeks someone who by being bolder and with more vision knows how to amplify with capital the efforts of the laborer and in so doing, lifts the laborer from bare subsistence savagery.

Read more ...