Is there a pay gap, are teachers underpaid, and why do Democrats run on issues that are settled law?

“2020 Democratic presidential contender Sen. Kamala Harris is on a mission to close the pay gap for America's teachers, something she says is "not a partisan issue." Harris, who unveiled her new plan to increase the pay for public school teachers nationwide with a $13,500 pay raise, told "CBS This Morning" on Tuesday that "for too long" teachers have been paid "substandard wages" and are "not being paid their value to us as a society."” (CBS News)

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kamala-harris-on-closing-teacher-pay-gap-lets-pay-them-their-value/?

Why do Democrats campaign on issues settled in law--will more laws help? Teacher pay gap? Local schools set those salaries, not the Department of Education (a federal agency that doesn't need to exist). Public school teachers according to BLS earn $63/hour (with benefits)--if they lie about teachers, then they lie about engineers and plumbers.

The "equal pay for equal work" law was passed over 50 years ago. When women continued to choose jobs that were easier, less risky, closer to home, and child-friendly, the feminists decided it became "equal pay for equal value" and what is that? Of course, a day care worker's job is valuable, but is it as valuable as an RN with an advanced degree or an entry level teacher?

What happens when you compare women with women? I was a librarian, one of the lowest paid jobs that requires an advanced degree, and dominated by women. Who is the commissar of jobs in DC who will decide that entry level Alabama librarians should be paid the same as chefs with 20 years experience in Chicago or a petroleum engineer in Alaska?

Gender Pay Gap

This is nothing new.  Twenty years ago a study involving librarians found out the same thing—choices.  And that was within just one field where all studied had an advanced degree.

“Progressives claim that the pay difference between men and women is caused by sexism that government must redress. But a new study offers compelling evidence that the choices and priorities of women account for much of the disparity.”  Wall St. Journal, Nov. 23, 2018

There’s a pay wall so I won’t provide a link, but I’ll snoop around to see who the editors are citing.  But here are some recent 2016 -  2018 stories on the subject.

https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/the-gender-pay-gap-is-explained-by-womens-choices-say-the-young-turks/

“Jordan B. Peterson has discussed this pressure women face at length: years 25-35 are exactly when one gets their career going, but also the best biological window to have children. Women who work through those years see a huge financial payoff, but may miss out on the child-bearing window. And women who choose babies will miss out on the profit-reaping window.

But the choice is still up to the woman. It’s not rampant sexism which explains the pay gap. A woman’s choice explains the pay gap. Can we stop blaming sexism in the workforce for at least this issue? Please?”

I loved my career, but there are few days at work that are worth bundling up the baby, struggling with a car seat, dropping him off at a sitter/daycare where the woman in charge won’t love him as much as you do.

This 2016 article was cited in November 18 at a business journal, and may have caught the eye of the WSJ.

It says, and I concur: https://www.chicagobusiness.com/opinion/why-do-women-earn-less-we-choose

“Here's what Goldin's research shows: First, there's almost no gender wage gap among younger workers: Women in their late 20s make 92 cents for every dollar a comparable male worker makes. But women in their early 50s make just 71 cents compared to comparable male workers, according to Goldin's research. Why does that matter? Because it indicates that the gap is better explained by differences in experience between men and women over their life cycles than by gender.

Second, the gaps differ by industry. When Goldin analyzed college-educated, white-collar workers, she found that for those in science and tech, the gender wage gap is remarkably small, but for lawyers, along with those in business and finance, the gap is much wider. Goldin's research notes that female MBA holders with children shift to positions with lower pay but more flexibility. Half of female MBA holders studied who work part time are self-employed, mainly because of a lack of existing part-time opportunities. Similar trends hold true for women with law degrees.”

I’m surprised Goldin can keep her job! 

Pay equity for women

"According to a new analysis of 2,000 communities by a market research company, in 147 out of 150 of the biggest cities in the U.S., the median full-time salaries of young women are 8% higher than those of the guys in their peer group. In two cities, Atlanta and Memphis, those women are making about 20% more. This squares with earlier research from Queens College, New York, that had suggested that this was happening in major metropolises. But the new study suggests that the gap is bigger than previously thought, with young women in New York City, Los Angeles and San Diego making 17%, 12% and 15% more than their male peers, respectively. And it also holds true even in reasonably small areas like the Raleigh-Durham region and Charlotte in North Carolina (both 14% more), and Jacksonville, Fla. (6%)." 
From "7 facts you need to know to debunk the ‪#‎EqualPayDay‬ lie."

Patricia Arquette got it all wrong for several reasons

First of all, there is no longer a pay gap—and hasn’t been for a number of years.  A 2009 report commissioned by the Labor Department that analyzed more than 50 papers on the topic found that the so-called pay gap “may be almost entirely” the result of choices both men and women make.   In fact, in a number of cities, young college educated women are out-earning young college educated men.  Someone should complain.

Secondly, although I don’t see a lot of movies, I know they are based on the box office draw of certain stars.  If the women aren’t a draw, they don’t get the lucrative contracts—and they all have agents who do the negotiating. In the movie I watched last night Diane Lane made $6,000,000 for this movie, more than what’s her name who played her sister, or the guy who was John Cusak’s buddy. She probably made more than Cusak, since in 2005 she was a bigger draw. Most actors will fall into the $10 to $30 an hour range with the large part of that is around $16 hourly.  That’s a long way from $6,000,000 ten years ago. Tom Hanks made about $800 for a film he was in in 1980.

And third,  Meryl Streep (net worth $45 million) sitting in the front jumped up and stole her thunder, grabbing the camera’s attention, and thus the nation’s.  What is the pay difference between Streep and Arquette?  Is it fair?  Why always compare women to men.  Why not women to women?  There are great pay gaps there.  Nancy Pelosi is worth millions and Tina who works the cash register at Panera’s will probably never have much more than she has now. Patricia Arquette (net worth $24 million) sure makes a lot more money than veterinary medicine librarians—all of them put together.

“Women don't get equal pay in America, says actress Patricia Arquette, and she blames the Founders. "To every woman who gave birth, to every taxpayer and citizen of this nation, we have fought for everybody else's equal rights," Arquette said in her Oscar acceptance speech. "It's time to have wage equality once and for all. And equal rights for women in the United States of America." The supposed pay gap has been largely discredited, but never confuse a liberal (especially one from Hollywood) with facts. Worse, Arquette went on to blame the men who fought to secure Liberty and who authored our Constitution. "It's inexcusable that we go around the world and we talk about equal rights for women in other countries when we don't have equal rights for women in America," Arquette lectured. "And we don't because when they wrote the Constitution, they didn't intend it for women." In the Heritage Foundation's Guide to the Constitution, Tiffany Jones Miller explains, "Contrary to popular belief, the United States Constitution of 1787 is a gender-neutral document. Throughout the original text, the Framers refer to 'persons' -- as opposed to 'male persons' -- and use the pronoun 'he' only in the generic sense. The word 'male' did not even appear in the Constitution until the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1868." In other words, Arquette suffers from something common to men and women on the Left: ignorance.” Patriot Post, Daily Digest, Feb. 24, 2015

The gender gap is in clothing

The gender gap may be in clothing. Look at any ad or go into any place of business and tell me that a man in dress slacks and a nice shirt, doesn't look 50% more prepared to be an executive than a woman in slacks and a shirt/sweater showing cleavage. Ladies, if you mean business, then dress like it. Don't dress for a picnic if you want to be on the board.

Yesterday I was in 3 places of business. Observed working women in jeans and sweat pants. I saw no men dressed like that. It's not a salary difference, but goals. I'm not asking for girdles and high heels the way we did in the 1960s even at entry level, but just a little pride and modesty.

Twenty years ago I suggested to a 20-something clerk that she not wear jeans to work (in the veterinary medicine library).  She was quite insulted (although it was a written policy by the library manager above me), and said she didn’t have time to dress nicely for the job.  So I suggested she prepare her clothes the night before.  She soon left for another job.  Which was fine, because she also didn’t want to arrange the serials for binding in alphabetic order.

Lilly Ledbetter Act--It's not about equal pay

The 1963 Law already is the equal pay act--this is about comparable worth. And it's about destroying what's left of our economy so you can be even more dependent on the federal government. Here's a discussion at the Independent Women's Forum. Personally, I'm not fond of podcasts, so if you'd rather read about it, go here.