The gender pay issue, one more example of a con game

Oh the beauty of dividing and conquering. There are so many examples of male scoundrels. Let's start with sexual predators who routinely use their superior positions in power to influence sexual favors from younger females. But enough about Democratic Party icon Bill Clinton. Let's get to gender pay.

According to pop culture, ruthless business people exploit laborers every chance they get. They are obsessed with paying people the lowest wages possible. Hold that thought.

Women still make just 77 cents for every dollar a man earns claims Mr. Obama, the great defender of female equality. He suggests women should be able to sue any employer and have the burden of proof on the payroll maker be to prove there was NOT gender discrimination. Here are a few facts that easily explain away the difference in incomes.

1) Women choose to work fewer days and fewer hours than men.

2) Women choose to work less overtime than men.

3) Women tend to choose less valuable college degrees. These degrees yield lower wages in the labor market.

4) Dangerous occupations in oil fields, steel mills, and in the lumber industry pay more. It should come as no surprise that 92% of all work-related deaths in 2012 were men. Dangerous jobs pay higher salaries to compensate the worker for the risks. Don't hold your breath waiting for Obama to talk about how 92% of male deaths on the job is nothing more than lop-sided discrimination against men. It won't happen.

5) Men are more willing to accept more variability in their wages from year to year. Research reports shows that the average pay in the sorts of jobs with big swings in income is higher, due to the unpredictability of cash flows.

6) Since women have wombs, they (not men) carry and deliver babies. Pregnancies and child care often takes women out of the labor market. Sorry. Blame biology for that one.

7) Even when women who become mothers eventually return to the labor markets, they do so with less work experience than similarly-aged males due to their time off. Less experience equals less pay.

8) Women intentionally look for greater flexibility in their work schedules. Since flexibility has hidden value, it is never included in the labor statistics calculations. Only stats that can be used to get women to vote for Democrats are cited.

Let's go back to the apples to apples argument. We have two candidates for a job, a male and female equally qualified. if the gender pay gap is actually true, a profit-oriented firm (they are all ruthless right?) would be able to reduce labor costs by simply using an all female workforce. This would erase the gap.

Here is exactly where the con-artist Progressives talks out both sides of his or her mouth. On the one hand, they would have us believe that all businesses are hard ball negotiators with everyone including their suppliers, customers, and workers. This is not true, but fair enough. Let's pretend it is true. Next, Progressives would have us believe that these all ruthless business people purposely overpay men and ignore the chance to cut their labor costs by using women of equal value for 23% less wages.

We don't have a pay gap. We have a decision gap. And politically what we have here is yet another con game by Mr. Obama and every business hating-leftist in the world. They make claims that cannot be supported by the facts or even some basic logic related to hating business people.

Why does this absurd drivel get foisted on the American public? Because the long ago bankrupt education system and the corrupt news media willingly parrots what people like Mr. Obama say to a ever more gullible public. Millions of uninformed Americans are willing to lap up any lie that has a business-hating theme imbedded in it.

Gee, I wonder why fewer and fewer people avoid the hatred hurled at business people? Maybe it is because we have decided it is open season on business people, especially businessmen.