The Wage Gap Explained | Soshal Network, Social Circle Connection

The Wage Gap Explained

0

Enjoyed the video ladies check these swimsuits out

There is a means to lawfully pay females less than males. Hannah Cranston, Brett Erlich, as well as Francis Maxwell, the hosts of The Young Turks, tell you how. Tell us what you believe in the comment area below.

" A federal court ruled on Thursday that ladies can certainly be paid much less than males for doing the same job, based upon just what their previous salaries were.

Inning accordance with the Associated Press, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on Thursday to overturn a 2015 ruling from a lower court in California.

The 2015 choice, made by U.S. Magistrate Court Michael Seng, mentioned that basing females's wages on their previous wages was naturally prejudiced, given that they likely encountered pay discrimination as a result of gender prejudice at their previous jobs. However with this new ruling, that's no longer the situation.

( TL; DR: If a lady was paid much less in one task– from pay discrimination, as an example– she might currently encounter that very same discrimination in an additional, as well as it will certainly be entirely legal.)".

Learn more right here:.

Hosts: Hannah Cranston, Brett Erlich, Francis Maxwell.

Cast: Hannah Cranston, Brett Erlich, Francis Maxwell.

***.

The Largest Online News Show in the World. Hosted by Cenk Uygur and also Ana Kasparian. LIVE STREAMING weekdays 6-8pm ET.

Subscribe to The Young Turks on YouTube:.

Like The Young Turks on Facebook:.
Adhere to The Young Turks on Twitter:.

Purchase TYT Merch:.

Download sound as well as video clip of the complete 2 hr show on-demand + the members-only article video game program by ending up being a member at. Your membership supports the everyday procedures as well as is crucial for our ongoing success as well as growth.

Young Turk (n), 1. Youthful dynamic or anarchical participant of an organization, activity, or political celebration. 2. A young adult that rebels against authority or societal expectations.( American Heritage Thesaurus).

  • Covert Store Content
  • YouTube Traffic Grabber YouTube Traffic Grabber is the new and revolutionary software that makes creating old fashioned video websites obsolete! With YouTube Traffic Grabber, you can now build Video Websites on Autopilot...and grabbing Huge Traffic.
  • Profit Keyword Spy Profit Keyword Spy is the new and revolutionary software that makes old fashioned keyword research obsolete! With Profit Keyword Spy, you can now grab your competitor's best keywords like the top Gurus do. Bring Huge Traffic to your YouTube Videos the eas
  • Upsell: #1 in Google Webinar Training

Share Your Comments

98 comments

  1. Posted by quaxk, at Reply

    it doesn’t exist, the end

    • Posted by Of Woodbridge and Hedgely, at Reply

      It exists, but to fix it, you’d just have to convince 1/2 of women in rural parts of the country to accept stay-at-home dads as husbands get up on 150F roofs and nail on shingles for a living, or similar jobs, whilst their husbands took the kids to the dentist, to the grocery store, and fishing. It’s the rural parts of the country that create the largest part of the gap.

    • Posted by ssuuppeerrbbooyy, at Reply

      Stating that it doesn’t exist is just as ignorant as the bullshit 79 cents number.

    • Posted by Of Woodbridge and Hedgely, at Reply

      +Buried With You Music – he waits for the video to upload and soon as it gets published he writes a series of inflammatory comments within the first several seconds of it being available for viewing. Some trolls with multiple accounts seed their comment with sock puppet up votes. It basically guarantees a top comment status. They suffer under the delusion that somehow they’re affecting the TYT audience.

    • Posted by Jim is the man, at Reply

      The aggregate numbers they use are BS.

      The fact is that most companies will take advantage of ANYONE if they can pay them less.

  2. Posted by spoder man hates TYT, at Reply

    Fire Hannah.

    • Posted by Tyrion L, at Reply

      Jim is the man yeah ask many other leftists, they will agree with me.

    • Posted by Tyrion L, at Reply

      i never said zionist running things was a bad thing your morons. that is not bigoted, it is a complement. get out of here with your preconceived notions.

    • Posted by Jim is the man, at Reply

      @Tyrion: You misspelled “racists” as “leftists”.

  3. Posted by Superman Clark Kent, at Reply

    *Earnings Gap

    Please show me one business in America which pays women a lower *wage* than men.

    • Posted by Y2K, at Reply

      +ImSoAkai I attached the studies in my previous comment, tell me if you can see it or if Google marked it as spam.

    • Posted by Twostones00, at Reply

      Even a black man is worth 4 times more than Hillary (R)

    • Posted by ImSoAkai, at Reply

      Y2K no studies attached

    • Posted by Y2K, at Reply

      +ImSoAkai I guess it was marked as spam, so search “Explaining the Gender Wage Gap By Sarah Jane Glynn” and “In STEM Fields, Many Employers Hire John over Jennifer”

  4. Posted by l_AM_ONLlNE, at Reply

    If women perform just as well as men, and employers can get away with paying them less, then why don’t companies hire only/mostly women?

    • Posted by Übermensch, at Reply

      +Y2K oh how convenient that the entire premise of your argument revolves around an unprovable, unmeasurable and unquantifiable process of the human psyche. I guess you would have mountains of evidence to back this up?….. Wait for it…… That has been done by none feminist, SJW researchers who’s only goal is to confirm their own biases? Yeah, didn’t think so. It’s almost as bad as this patriarchy I hear so much about.

    • Posted by Y2K, at Reply

      +MaoTseFunkadelic​
      And I will post my rebuttal:
      1. Why is it fallacious reasoning? Why would the labor market be any different? Explain.

      2. Yes, 60% of the gap is explained, and 40% is not. I’ll note, however, that discrimination factors into the “explained” part, too. Why do you think traditionally female occupations, like teaching, pay less than traditionally male occupations? It’s not because they require less skills (and I have another study to prove that). It’s because male society simply presumes that female work is less valuable.

      3. Come on dude, it’s obviously mostly sexism. Yes, even if it’s partly because they are assuming that women will drop out of the workforce, it’s still sexism, and it still should be illegal. Do you think that centuries of oppressing women really left no mark on our society? You know, I’m sure, that our families and communities still promote rigid gender roles. Why is it so hard to believe that this leads to sexism in the workplace? It’s just denial at this point.

      4. 7.2 cents for every dollar is a massive amount. If you are making $50,000, it’s as if you suddenly had $3,600 chopped off your paycheck. Furthermore, I don’t know this for a fact, but the gap is probably even bigger for low-income women, who need their money the most.

      5. I already addressed this.

      6. There is a massive difference between the 40% and the 60%: the 60% is by choice. For example, many women don’t have child care services because they think it will be very detrimental for their child’s development. That’s not to say that we shouldn’t mitigate the factors that are not by choice. For example, women are often pressured to take care of their children rather than the husband. We can work on changing that attitude. Women may also want child care services, but can’t afford them. We should aid them financially to give them that option. But that doesn’t mean that we should ignore discrimination and act as if it’s not a serious problem.

    • Posted by TheAK47striker, at Reply

      Y2K “Do you think that centuries of oppressing women really left no mark on our society?” wow. i’m done. you have no idea how the world works and there is little to no hope that you ever will

    • Posted by Y2K, at Reply

      +TheAK47striker Is that an argument?

  5. Posted by MrRakah, at Reply

    Not even the TYT audience believes in the wage gap. LOL

    • Posted by Blair Schirmerx, at Reply

      This is mere special interest advocacy for women, having nothing to do with rights, just advantage. *_Women in the U.S. now do better than men in 9 of 10 critical quality of life area, often far better:_* Longevity, health, health care spending (even after accounting for maternal and reproductive care), suicide, homelessness, violent crime victimization, education, favoritism in the criminal justice system (where for identical crimes women do better than men than whites do compared to blacks), reproductive rights (for all the unjust assailing of women’s reproductive rights men have none, of course)… on and on.

      We also know that when you compare directly, as directly as possible, young unmarried men without children and young unmarried women without children, between 25 and 34, women actually make more for the same jobs, about $1.08 for every $1.00 men earn.

      There is no apples to apples wage gap, comparing the same jobs, beyond about 3%, which may be attributable to men negotiating harder. But you probably knew that.

    • Posted by Diva Artist, at Reply

      Imagine the talk is about RACIAL wage gap – and 97% of “not real shut up” are white.

    • Posted by Jak Sanchez, at Reply

      Diva Artist is a white supremacist troll.

    • Posted by havocmaster69, at Reply

      The TYT Bullshit Wage Gap Explained

    • Posted by Diva Artist, at Reply

      OK Jak if you insist! 🙂

  6. Posted by ImSoAkai, at Reply

    I am a fan of TYT but I wish they would consult with economists before making stupid videos like this.

    • Posted by Y2K, at Reply

      +Jak Sanchez Lol, OK, keep repeating it and it will make it true

    • Posted by MaoTseFunkadelic, at Reply

      Seeing as how you are repeating the same misinterpretation of the same studies on multiple threads, I will post the same rebuttal:

      +Y2K I checked your links.

      1. On the one link, the study was an experiment on attitudes of 100 scientists, not actual women. To generalize to the wider labor market is fallacious reasoning.

      2. On the second, most of the gap is explained by what people here are noting, hours, occupation choices, and time devoted to care giving.

      3. The unexplained portion does not mean it is sexism, it means it is unexplained. It is just as likely that employers anticipate women to drop out of the work-force and invest lest money in training them, for example.

      4. The unexplained gap, incidentally, amounts to 7.2 cents (1-77=33; 33*0.6 = 19.8; 19.8 +77 =92.8) So, in other words, 92.8 cents of every dollar of women’s pay is explicable.

      5. Such evidence does not account for where ‘discrimination’ comes from. For example, it is wholly reasonable of employers to anticipate that women are more likely to drop out the labour market, have less time to work, etc. owing to child care. That is prejudiced, insofar that any given women may not have children, but it is not sexist, or unreasonable. Changing attitudes will have no impact on it.

      6. Even if all the unexplained gap was naked sexism, for which there is no evidence, you are ignoring the circumstances which comprise the 60%, and hence distracting from initiatives which could be more pertinent in closing the gap (e.g accessible child care services)

    • Posted by Y2K, at Reply

      +MaoTseFunkadelic 1. Why is it fallacious reasoning? Why would the labor market be any different? Explain.

      2. Yes, 60% of the gap is explained, and 40% is not. I’ll note, however, that discrimination factors into the “explained” part, too. Why do you think traditionally female occupations, like teaching, pay less than traditionally male occupations? It’s not because they require less skills (and I have another study to prove that). It’s because male society simply presumes that female work is less valuable.

      3. Come on dude, it’s obviously mostly sexism. Yes, even if it’s partly because they are assuming that women will drop out of the workforce, it’s still sexism, and it still should be illegal. Do you think that centuries of oppressing women really left no mark on our society? You know, I’m sure, that our families and communities still promote rigid gender roles. Why is it so hard to believe that this leads to sexism in the workplace? It’s just denial at this point.

      4. 7.2 cents for every dollar is a massive amount. If you are making $50,000, it’s as if you suddenly had $3,600 chopped off your paycheck. Furthermore, I don’t know this for a fact, but the gap is probably even bigger for low-income women, who need their money the most.

      5. I already addressed this.

      6. There is a massive difference between the 40% and the 60%: the 60% is by choice. For example, many women don’t have child care services because they think it will be very detrimental for their child’s development. That’s not to say that we shouldn’t mitigate the factors that are not by choice. For example, women are often pressured to take care of their children rather than the husband. We can work on changing that attitude. Women may also want child care services, but can’t afford them. We should aid them financially to give them that option. But that doesn’t mean that we should ignore discrimination and act as if it’s not a serious problem.

    • Posted by asdfasdf, at Reply

      If you just look above you, there is a human subspecies known as a cuck.

    • Posted by MaoTseFunkadelic, at Reply

      +Y2K

      1. Firstly, you are comparing apples and oranges. Scientists cannot represent all employers, and it cannot be assumed that the criteria of selection that scientists would make are the same for all business and all sectors of the economy(ecological fallacy). Secondly, the sample size is absurdly small. Even if the sample was representative, you could not say anything meaningful.

      2a. If you say discrimination enters into the explained part and the explained part, I see no reason why other factors would not as well.

      2b. That part is unsubstantiated. Firstly, manual labour, traditionally, male is devalued far more than any other kind of work because of its particular susceptibility to productivity innovations. In fact, many such occupations have disappeared. Secondly, you are presuming that labour is valued arbitrarily, which is nonsense. If you subscribe to a labour theory of value (ala Smith, Ricardo and Marx) you would now that the cost of labour power is the cost of the commodities and services for its social reproduction. If you subscribe to a neo-classical viewpoint, then it is a simple matter of supply and demand. Your “wages are based on attitudes” approach is a baseless extension of your priors.

      3.”Come on dude” is not an argument. You don’t have any grounds to say it is sexism more than anything else, and simply asserting it doesnt make it so. As for the legacy of sexism, you dismiss out hand, and without reason, the possibility of the inverse, i.e not that inequality exists because of bad (sexist) attitudes, but that bad attitudes are reproduced because of inequality. The fact of childbirth means women in general will work less as a group, have much larger pressure on their time, and further pressure them to succeed early and/or invest heavily in social relationships, particularly with a potential partner and family to help mange the time of children and time out of the labour market. It is further denial of the reality of competition and capitalist economy that you believe that companies in general can afford to pay whatever they want irrespective of output. That’s not sexist attitudes, that’s commercial survival.

      And not there is a difference between observing sexism exists, and propositioning it to the main cause of something. You are leaping to the latter as an assumption.

      4. It is a big amount, but a much smaller amount than is propositioned by the 77 cents slogan. But in anycase, it doesn’t mean ‘sexism’ has taken it. It is equally possible that the arduousness of childcare prevents women in general from social mobility from their careers.

      5. You dismissed this point, you did not address it.

      6. You say its by choice, then mention several things which are not by choice at all: the non-existence of affordable, quality childcare services is not a choice; it is a circumstance people make choices around it. Again, you simply dismiss this reality of women’s lives out of hand.

      Maybe you are too young, but you can ask anyone with children, patrol message boards etc to see the extent of the pressure. You can ask women older than thirty about their concern about their biological clocks. These are real pressures structure women’s lives in very difficult ways. It is callous to pretend like they are unimportant, and simply could not make the difference.

  7. Posted by Jagged55, at Reply

    just stop. it’s not real.

    • Posted by MaoTseFunkadelic, at Reply

      Well, there are (self-titled) feminists organizations and outlets which do attempt to form pressure groups to advance various ’causes’. That is out in the open.

      The problem is that the mis’-conceptualization of the gap, firstly, focuses attention on the wrong problem. Secondly, it de-legitimizes left-wing positions because it is an argument which is easily defeated.

      In my view, however, the ultimate problem is a tendency in the US to understand social division as the product of legal obstacles and discursive practices and attitudes, rather than reproduced by class relations.

      The result is a false dualism between a right-wing vision where all division is product of immutable natural characteristics (class doesn’t exist), and a position where social division is only a consequence of ‘sexism’ and ‘racism’ (class is a discriminatory outcome).

      Both positions rest on either a highly ideological construal of capitalism as an intrinsically fair (if not equal) system , and/or a highly reductionist vision of economy distorted by autonomous forms of discrimination.

      The reality capitalism continually produces division, in fact depends on it, is not palatable to either the right or the liberal left.

    • Posted by Y2K, at Reply

      +MaoTseFunkadelic​ Alright, I’ll also post my rebuttal, for the third time.
      1. Why is it fallacious reasoning? Why would the labor market be any different? Explain.

      2. Yes, 60% of the gap is explained, and 40% is not. I’ll note, however, that discrimination factors into the “explained” part, too. Why do you think traditionally female occupations, like teaching, pay less than traditionally male occupations? It’s not because they require less skills (and I have another study to prove that). It’s because male society simply presumes that female work is less valuable.

      3. Come on dude, it’s obviously mostly sexism. Yes, even if it’s partly because they are assuming that women will drop out of the workforce, it’s still sexism, and it still should be illegal. Do you think that centuries of oppressing women really left no mark on our society? You know, I’m sure, that our families and communities still promote rigid gender roles. Why is it so hard to believe that this leads to sexism in the workplace? It’s just denial at this point.

      4. 7.2 cents for every dollar is a massive amount. If you are making $50,000, it’s as if you suddenly had $3,600 chopped off your paycheck. Furthermore, I don’t know this for a fact, but the gap is probably even bigger for low-income women, who need their money the most.

      5. I already addressed this.

      6. There is a massive difference between the 40% and the 60%: the 60% is by choice. For example, many women don’t have child care services because they think it will be very detrimental for their child’s development. That’s not to say that we shouldn’t mitigate the factors that are not by choice. For example, women are often pressured to take care of their children rather than the husband. We can work on changing that attitude. Women may also want child care services, but can’t afford them. We should aid them financially to give them that option. But that doesn’t mean that we should ignore discrimination and act as if it’s not a serious problem.

    • Posted by Jim is the man, at Reply

      @Fredrik Nielson: I’m not aware of the secret agenda. Maybe because it’s secret. The one I am talking about is much simpler: “Prove” there is still widespread wage discrimination and claim that it’s uniform across the board.

    • Posted by Fredrik Nielsen, at Reply

      In a country where one of the biggest TV networks stood by a male sexual assaulter, and paid off millions of dollars to keep their mouth shut, because he made the company money. Essentially sending a message that money is more important than how we treat women. When there is such a huge problem with sexual harassment of woman in the workplace, it is unreasonable to make a blanket statement about how all the data on the wage gap is a result of woman “choosing different” then men, and that it has nothing to do with sexism. That is not reasonable, and the subtext screams of certain mens fear of feminism and how the female race are planning to destroy the male race. Let me give you a tip, take your anger and frustration and concentrate on how females are being treated at the workplace. So that our daughters can have a career without having to deal with O’reillys private parts. That’s a real problem.

  8. Posted by Dougs2fresh, at Reply

    why would any company hire men if you can pay women less ?

    • Posted by MaoTseFunkadelic, at Reply

      Seeing as how you are repeating the same misinterpretation of the same studies on multiple threads, I will post the same rebuttal:

      +Y2K I checked your links.

      1. On the one link, the study was an experiment on attitudes of 100 scientists, not actual women. To generalize to the wider labor market is fallacious reasoning.

      2. On the second, most of the gap is explained by what people here are noting, hours, occupation choices, and time devoted to care giving.

      3. The unexplained portion does not mean it is sexism, it means it is unexplained. It is just as likely that employers anticipate women to drop out of the work-force and invest lest money in training them, for example.

      4. The unexplained gap, incidentally, amounts to 7.2 cents (1-77=33; 33*0.6 = 19.8; 19.8 +77 =92.8) So, in other words, 92.8 cents of every dollar of women’s pay is explicable.

      5. Such evidence does not account for where ‘discrimination’ comes from. For example, it is wholly reasonable of employers to anticipate that women are more likely to drop out the labour market, have less time to work, etc. owing to child care. That is prejudiced, insofar that any given women may not have children, but it is not sexist, or unreasonable. Changing attitudes will have no impact on it.

      6. Even if all the unexplained gap was naked sexism, for which there is no evidence, you are ignoring the circumstances which comprise the 60%, and hence distracting from initiatives which could be more pertinent in closing the gap (e.g accessible child care services)

    • Posted by Dougs2fresh, at Reply

      +MaoTseFunkadelic thank you

    • Posted by Y2K, at Reply

      +MaoTseFunkadelic I posted my response to this in three other comment sections. I won’t post it again, because Google will likely mark me as a spammer.

    • Posted by Y2K, at Reply

      +ImSoAkai Why would it be any different in the “real world?”

    • Posted by MaoTseFunkadelic, at Reply

      +Y2K

      Ok

  9. Posted by Heavenshaker, at Reply

    Consider this:

    If women got paid less simply because they are women, then wouldn’t every business discriminate against men because they could just fire all the men, hire all women, and save a huge % in labor costs?

    • Posted by Hey! Let's Do A Thing!, at Reply

      You think I didn’t “retort” because what you said was true? I didn’t say anything else because you didn’t respond to me at all in any decent way that necessitated it. You minimized my position without actually arguing against it at all and when called on using fallacies in your argument, your strategy was to double down on a strawman.

    • Posted by John Brown, at Reply

      +Hey! Let’s Do A Thing! So me pointing out your inconsistant stances in those 3 paragraphs is a strawman/fallacie?

      Also “you minimized my position”-bare in mind if you look up a few posts you’ll see you flat out ignored a lengthy post of mine and then minimized my post to “you partially agree with me”-a shocker i know but just another example of how inconsistant you are.

      Lol you are done kid.Just accept you are on the losing end of this and move on,perhaps rethink why it is no one agrees with you and try and break free of that victim narrative you seem so invested in.

    • Posted by Hey! Let's Do A Thing!, at Reply

      Yeah, you saying I’m whining and then SAYING I’m inconsistent is exactly the same as “pointing out inconsistencies”

      And then you liken my post where I actually accounted for every part of your position including the parts where we agreed, with your post where you said I was whining and then didn’t establish anything. I criticized you for making the same argument with no change, and you continued making the same argument with little to no change.

      You sure owned me.

  10. Posted by Serial Experiments Dave, at Reply

    left handed people make less then right handed people https://mic.com/articles/105850/the-global-economy-hates-left-handed-people#.BgIzFXp6O I guess we should get equally upset about bigotry towards left handed people in the work force?

    • Posted by Steve M, at Reply

      Serial Experiments Dave Turns out blondes earn more than brunettes and gingers too. Even though gingers work the most hours. I want equality now whether they have souls or not

  11. Posted by Ryan Swanson, at Reply

    How many YouTubers are salivating right now? I’ll name a few: Sargon, Armoured Skeptic, ShoeonHead, ChrisRayGun, Ranting Monkey, TJ Kirk, Barbara4u2c, SomeDumbAmerican, Bearing, Sugartits, Blaire White, Girl Does Rant, James Allsup, SecondClancy, TL;DR etc

    • Posted by Lord Albrus, at Reply

      Nero Cloud Ive been trying to forget about that wet mouthed moron Shives for a LONG time.

    • Posted by Nero Cloud, at Reply

      +Lord Albrus no one does at this point in time he’s just a big joke a low-hanging fruit to make videos on

    • Posted by Lord Albrus, at Reply

      June is warming up the “muh wage gap” button, lol.

    • Posted by Nero Cloud, at Reply

      +Lord Albrus I still say that The Young Turks don’t know how companies work if they want to make money just fire all men like I’ve always said and just hire women it’s cheaper labor and you can get away with it if the wage gap is real I no I would hire just women and make a killing

    • Posted by Ryan Swanson, at Reply

      *@Lord Albrus*
      Yeah, this one will be torn to shreds. Right out of the gate Hannah makes no sense. She’s assuming that the previous wage was based on misogyny without evidence. It’s simple, if gender is the *ONLY* reason for a lower wage it’s understandably illegal. The court ruling she’s speaking of seems to apply to both genders.

  12. Posted by acceptjesusorburn, at Reply

    Leftists claim scientific fact as they preach 50 genders and wage gap myth along with apocalyptic climate hysteria. Really sad to see.

    • Posted by acceptjesusorburn, at Reply

      SirMuttonChops Thanks for that nonsense. Did you get your degree at disney land?

    • Posted by acceptjesusorburn, at Reply

      Pick Collins Look at how the proceeding comment contradicted your defence.

    • Posted by Pick Collins, at Reply

      +acceptjesusorburn that’s a commenter. Not a member of TYT

      +SirMuttonChops thanks a lot for making me look bad

  13. Posted by Harry Christofi, at Reply

    I hate right wingers who say that there is no sexist wage gap, however I know that some women work less than men and that’s why they get paid less that’s understandable however in the best case for a man and a woman who work the same, the woman makes 96 cents on a man’s dollar, this is why we need the Paycheck Fairness Act to pass the house and senate and only the Justice Democrats to succeed and get a majority in both the house and the senate.

    • Posted by Harry Christofi, at Reply

      +Lord Albrus That’s still a problem and the solution for ALL people is The Paycheck Fairness Act

    • Posted by Lord Albrus, at Reply

      4% is a minor problem. I think id personally rather have the government focus on big problems…like climate change, failing infrastructure, foreign energy dependance, a failing healthcare system, wars of empire etc…

    • Posted by Ash Scott, at Reply

      Harry Christofi The same hours doesn’t mean a private business should pay the same to each employee. Studies suggest women are far less likely to negotiate their salary before and during their employment. That’s nobody’s fault other than the individual person who’s failed to develop the skills and courage to negotiate their pay. Stop claiming everyone other than the actual person failing to look out for their own personal financial interests. Women aren’t children.

    • Posted by Harry Christofi, at Reply

      +Ash Scott That’s bullshit man so you support the pay gap lol

    • Posted by Harry Christofi, at Reply

      +Lord Albrus Dude I agree so much the only way we can fix all of our problems is by passing the Wolf-PAC amendment by getting the Justice Democrats to a majority in both the house and the senate and then we can be like the Nordic nations on economic policy.

  14. Posted by Shaun Bradley, at Reply

    Seriously it’s illegal and illogical to pay women lower than men for the same work stop perpetuating this myth
    and in my opinion the wage gap is ideal, as majority of women​ shouldn’t be earning 6figures there ideal place is bearing children.

    • Posted by Morgan Violet Hart, at Reply

      Shaun Bradley The choices each gender makes is simply that white men pay each other higher wages regardless of what work they do, and women are discouraged from demanding higher pay for the same amount of work, which limits what they can accomplish within the company, if they don’t get as much value and livelihood out of their work.

    • Posted by Ryan o, at Reply

      Morgan Violet Hart

      TYT should just interview any economist but they would just make TYT look stupid. Men don’t pay men higher wages. It’s been illegal since the 1960s. We get the same wages for the same job. Men go into fields less people care to go into and those jobs demand premium pay. Men are competitive and try to be exceptional at their job. Men work dangerous jobs and are over 90% of workplace deaths. Men are more likely to be on call and work overtime. This is why there is an earnings gap. There is no wage gap. Do you believe in equal opportunity or equal outcome?

    • Posted by Morgan Violet Hart, at Reply

      Shaun Bradley Thank you for explaining white man economics to me. But everything that you said is simply a system in place that purely benefits white men capitalizing on the economy, and doesn’t involve anyone else being a part of it.

      Those are not the facts. They are just statistics that try to explain a reason for the wage gap being there and distract from the real issues that having a wage gap causes.

    • Posted by Ryan o, at Reply

      Morgan Violet Hart

      There is no White man economics there is just economics. You sound like a tinfoil hat conspericy theorist or a science denier. There are many women and minorities in this field of study.

    • Posted by Morgan Violet Hart, at Reply

      Shaun Bradley Yes but they don’t just support this rhetoric that benefits white men. And yes white male economics is real when the whole system of capitalism was created by and for white men to use. Who else created that system?

  15. Posted by Savage-American Imperialist, at Reply

    Let me explain the wage gap: Men work more hours, and they work in dangerous jobs, meaning, they get paid a lot of money for their hard work. Oh and one last thing, men don’t have babies, meaning, they aren’t a burden to a company. Women, well, they work less, they work more flexible hours and they have BABIES, meaning, less pay.

    • Posted by Morhy Soumahoro, at Reply

      @Savage-American Imperialist

      Hell yeah, this is reality that these idiots don’t understand.

    • Posted by Morgan Violet Hart, at Reply

      Nothing either of you have said proves that women are a burden in any of the work they do. Your speech just proves your sexism towards them and how you are trying to defend your irrationality towards women in the workplace.

    • Posted by Savage-American Imperialist, at Reply

      +Morhy Soumahoro They’ve already been told why men out earn women and they still can’t put two and two together… amazing display of cognitive dissonance.

    • Posted by Morgan Violet Hart, at Reply

      Morhy Soumahoro I think calling out the wage gap and why it is based purely on sexism against women is not a waste of time at all, and you have just proved why exactly. So thanks for that.

    • Posted by Morhy Soumahoro, at Reply

      @Morgan Violet Hart

      If the gender wage gap is predicated on sexist ideological world that we live in today, don’t you think from a business perspective that the employment rate of women would sky-rocket? Why men aren’t complaining about this? It’s a misrepresentation of facts because it is illegal to discriminate pay based on gender. The reality of the situation is, women generally work less and choose jobs that are less risky than men. Nearly 90% of work related deaths are men as in, men generally choose dangerous jobs. Men DIE, yet every person in the United States aren’t complaining about that, heh. Again, discriminate your feelings and look at the statistical fact.

  16. Posted by Aust duhe, at Reply

    This is this hoes logic:

    Prove discrimination happens in one place to justify that it happens in all places.

    • Posted by Michael Berthelsen, at Reply

      Aust duhe More like ‘there’s evidence that it happens in lots of places, so let’s do something about it.’

    • Posted by Aust duhe, at Reply

      Michael Berthelsen Like?

    • Posted by Michael Berthelsen, at Reply

      +Aust duhe Statistics? Actual figures from actual companies…? Or is that all faked to push an agenda too?

    • Posted by Aust duhe, at Reply

      Michael Berthelsen How can you prove that wage discrimination happens in all places? Because if that’s the case, wouldn’t all men be fired since companies pay women for cheap labor?

  17. Posted by Harry Butte, at Reply

    It’s bad when you’re viewers and trolls agree XD yikes!

    • Posted by Clorox Bleach, at Reply

      it’s bad when your fans are all weeaboos who don’t know the difference between your and you’re

    • Posted by S J., at Reply

      Clorox Bleach its sad when you waste your life trolling videos which you pretend to hate but watch every day. Without tyt your life would have no meaning. Watching tyt allows you to ignore the fact that you are a sad, loser and will probably die alone.

  18. Posted by Noble Savage, at Reply

    I’m starting a company. *ONLY WOMEN ALLOWED.*
    Why the hell should i hire men and pay them more.
    *Also i forgot to mention. It is a construction company located deep in the ARCTIC TUNDRA*.
    But don’t worry ladies i believe you can do it.

    • Posted by Noble Savage, at Reply

      +The Fatheland

      Something tells me she doesn’t want to work for me in my all women company in the Arctic tundra 🙁
      I could even throw in free designer handbags and makeup kits.
      Should i build a Starbuck ? …. Yeah i need to build a Starbucks.

    • Posted by The Fatheland, at Reply

      Noble Savage I can’t decide if you are a troll or serious but if you wan’t hotter weather just ask your boss.

    • Posted by Noble Savage, at Reply

      +The Fatheland

      Dude i’m not trying to troll you.
      I was just showing how women avoid difficult jobs as if they were the plague.
      *Although this is only see usually in North America and Western Europe.*
      *In my country women are hard workers.*

  19. Posted by Jasminewynja, at Reply

    Sometimes I wonder why I give TyT more chances…

    • Posted by Jasminewynja, at Reply

      *+Joel Rogers* I rarely use the word triggered and I certainly didn’t do it here. Was your question perhaps for “Lucifer”? Besides that, there is only one person with “integrity” on this show, Jimmy Dore.

    • Posted by Joel Rogers, at Reply

      Jasminewynja Oh my bad, meant that for lucifer. Jimmy Dore isn’t afraid to disagree with the rest of his tyt buddies which I commend him for, but the spitting in Alex Jones face thing really turned me off from him, to see how he reacts on a base level when things get heated. Not a defense of AJ either, the guys despicable but you gotta be better than that.

    • Posted by Jasminewynja, at Reply

      *+Joel Rogers* I agree.

    • Posted by asdfasdf, at Reply

      Hey maybe check out Ben Shapiro and wash out the TyT bacon grease off.

  20. Posted by Tchort Six Six Six, at Reply

    more fake news from the turkish turds. go stick your nose in the dirt and grovel to your pedo prophet.

    • Posted by Tchort Six Six Six, at Reply

      +Damian Dimock well a female doctor earns more than a male plumber. How is that for proof! Do you get it? Do you need a graph? Second muslims grovel in the dirt to their fairy muhammad. I mean we have the easter bunny and tooth fairy so they got allah. What?

    • Posted by Damian Dimock, at Reply

      “well a female doctor earns more than a male plumber. How is that for proof! Do you get it? Do you need a graph?” <= No, I don't "get it," is there a joke? Would a graph help explain this joke? "How is that for proof!" <= Evidence, not proof. We provide evidence for our arguments, not proof. Proof is something within mathematics. "Second muslims grovel in the dirt to their fairy muhammad." <= That comment, though extremely Islamophobic and anti-Semitic, is misplaced in the comment thread for this particular video. The video has literally nothing to do with religion, let alone Islam. "I mean we have the easter bunny and tooth fairy so they got allah." <= Neither of those characters have anything to do with religion, so the equivalency to Allah, (which is simply "God," referring specifically to the god of Abraham,) again, makes zero sense.

    • Posted by Tchort Six Six Six, at Reply

      +Damian Dimock what you going on about? I just told you! Some people are painfully dumb.

    • Posted by Tchort Six Six Six, at Reply

      +Damian Dimock are you a hooked nosed jew? Not like jews are men to be guilty of nothing.