Go listen to the radio and you might hear the same thing.
I heard it on the radio. There's no link I know of. No book to look up. Just a simple report on NPR that I heard during last summer.
I'm all in favor of people posting, and I link whenever possible. I read links you all post because I like to learn. I don't take a stance and protect it, I learn about a topic and support what I've learned. It's very simple.
As pretiege in the veterinarian field went down, men left. After men started leaving the field, salaries went down. Men didn't leave because salaries were going down, their leaving caused the salaries to go down.
Nursing has become a more prestegious field so men have moved in. Salaries started going up after men moved into the field.
If I had learned the opposite I'd gladly support the opposite argument. I can't say the same for a lot of you.
I heard it on the radio. There's no link I know of. No book to look up. Just a simple report on NPR that I heard during last summer.
I'm all in favor of people posting, and I link whenever possible. I read links you all post because I like to learn. I don't take a stance and protect it, I learn about a topic and support what I've learned. It's very simple.
As pretiege in the veterinarian field went down, men left. After men started leaving the field, salaries went down. Men didn't leave because salaries were going down, their leaving caused the salaries to go down.
Nursing has become a more prestegious field so men have moved in. Salaries started going up after men moved into the field.
If I had learned the opposite I'd gladly support the opposite argument. I can't say the same for a lot of you.
Hey I heard Bill O'Reilly on the radio say that all leftist are lying communists. I don't have to cite anything or prove it because it was on the radio.
Of course bunge men leaving a field or women entering a field would never change the requirements of those jobs and hence the pay requirements either right?
I use the example of the field I am in. Teaching has been trying to "professionalize" itself for years. They keep ratching up the requirements, work year, etc. If they someday begin wanting a full year and likewise begin paying about 25-40% more, it is likely more men would go into teaching. But of course it will no longer be the same job now will it.
Nursing hasn't become more prestigious. It has had a decade long shortage that hasn't been met even when allowing immigration from countries that seem to export nothing but nurses (like the Philipines for example.) Likewise there have been long standing fights between what doctors and nurses can do with the AMA trying to keep as many duties as possible to doctors. There are now, as a result several different types of nurses, with different responsibilities and it has arisen in part because doctors and their time has become profoundly expensive. This is due in part to the AMA which won't allow larger numbers of doctors to be accredited each year. (It has been stagnant for years)
So we now have doctors, some nurses that have taken doctor like responsibilities, and the lower types of nurses/medical assistants. This middle class of nurse is basically a quasi-doctor with much lower pay but it requires a degree, etc. Likewise the attitudes of men have started to change over the years and more men are starting to seek flexibility, and jobs that offer them a life outside of more pay. I even posted several links about it here in a thread about high earning women and their behaviors, and men who were taking "female" jobs.
I've taken a "female" job. The pay structure didn't change, my priorities did.
Umm, there has been a shortage of nurses that has been growing substantially the last few years and will continue to grow. Yes, more men have become nurses but the wage raises aren't due to the men. It's due to the high demand for nurses combined with the substantial shortage.
I'm not about to go out of my way searching for magical articles you quote but don't source. I'm not here to help you.
It's not about helping me, it's about helping yourself. You just don't get it. You take a stance and fight for it no matter how dumb you look. You can't assimilate information beyond anything that fits your preconceived notions. That's too bad for you, not me.
I'm more than willing to help you by pointing this out. Again, and again, and again. Hopefully one day you'll understand what I'm talking about.
It's not about helping me, it's about helping yourself. You just don't get it. You take a stance and fight for it no matter how dumb you look. You can't assimilate information beyond anything that fits your preconceived notions. That's too bad for you, not me.
I'm more than willing to help you by pointing this out. Again, and again, and again. Hopefully one day you'll understand what I'm talking about.
ok, that entire post is just eerie.
shawn, you have anything else to add. at least when you're posting it seems like there's logic and progress involved.
You guys don't have to be so dense. Go read the first couple of posts again and you'll see my point is clear as day. BR originally misunderstood me, and as usual nitpicking helps people avoid a valid point.
And is almost entirely attributable to factors related to personal choice as opposed to systemic discrimination by men.
Nick
Wrong. It's attributable to lots of factors, including discrimination. People hire for all kinds of stupid reasons but some of you people arguing here try and pretend it's not true.
You've already quoted them in this thread so why would I repost them? I've done enough reposting already. How about you take the advice I gave you earlier and reread some of the thread? You guys get so blinded you stop discussing and start attacking.
You've already quoted them in this thread so why would I repost them? I've done enough reposting already. How about you take the advice I gave you earlier and reread some of the thread? You guys get so blinded you stop discussing and start attacking.
Reread. It'll be good for your karma.
Present things in a clear, uncondescending manner including the sources from which your ludicrous assertions originate. It'll be good for your karma.
You obviously don't give a shit about convincing others because asserting something and then telling others to look up the damn source themselves isn't going to change anyone's mind.
The sky is neon brown. I heard it on the radio somewhere.
BR, you basically had to apoligize to me and admit I was right. That's back on page one as well. I guess that's embarassing enough for you that you don't want to revisit it.
BR, you basically had to apoligize to me and admit I was right. That's back on page one as well. I guess that's embarassing enough for you that you don't want to revisit it.
Don't be a dumbass. You're just throwing me forgetting one thing you said after I was up all night writing a term paper back in my face so you can avoid revisiting things. I asked if you thought the number was credible, not just real, anyway.
Just provide some fvcking sources like a good little nuttybuddy and people might respect you a little more.
Comments
Originally posted by alcimedes
what did you cite?
Originally posted by bunge
Go listen to the radio and you might hear the same thing.
I heard it on the radio. There's no link I know of. No book to look up. Just a simple report on NPR that I heard during last summer.
I'm all in favor of people posting, and I link whenever possible. I read links you all post because I like to learn. I don't take a stance and protect it, I learn about a topic and support what I've learned. It's very simple.
As pretiege in the veterinarian field went down, men left. After men started leaving the field, salaries went down. Men didn't leave because salaries were going down, their leaving caused the salaries to go down.
Nursing has become a more prestegious field so men have moved in. Salaries started going up after men moved into the field.
If I had learned the opposite I'd gladly support the opposite argument. I can't say the same for a lot of you.
Originally posted by bunge
I heard it on the radio. There's no link I know of. No book to look up. Just a simple report on NPR that I heard during last summer.
I'm all in favor of people posting, and I link whenever possible. I read links you all post because I like to learn. I don't take a stance and protect it, I learn about a topic and support what I've learned. It's very simple.
As pretiege in the veterinarian field went down, men left. After men started leaving the field, salaries went down. Men didn't leave because salaries were going down, their leaving caused the salaries to go down.
Nursing has become a more prestegious field so men have moved in. Salaries started going up after men moved into the field.
If I had learned the opposite I'd gladly support the opposite argument. I can't say the same for a lot of you.
Hey I heard Bill O'Reilly on the radio say that all leftist are lying communists. I don't have to cite anything or prove it because it was on the radio.
Of course bunge men leaving a field or women entering a field would never change the requirements of those jobs and hence the pay requirements either right?
I use the example of the field I am in. Teaching has been trying to "professionalize" itself for years. They keep ratching up the requirements, work year, etc. If they someday begin wanting a full year and likewise begin paying about 25-40% more, it is likely more men would go into teaching. But of course it will no longer be the same job now will it.
Nursing hasn't become more prestigious. It has had a decade long shortage that hasn't been met even when allowing immigration from countries that seem to export nothing but nurses (like the Philipines for example.) Likewise there have been long standing fights between what doctors and nurses can do with the AMA trying to keep as many duties as possible to doctors. There are now, as a result several different types of nurses, with different responsibilities and it has arisen in part because doctors and their time has become profoundly expensive. This is due in part to the AMA which won't allow larger numbers of doctors to be accredited each year. (It has been stagnant for years)
So we now have doctors, some nurses that have taken doctor like responsibilities, and the lower types of nurses/medical assistants. This middle class of nurse is basically a quasi-doctor with much lower pay but it requires a degree, etc. Likewise the attitudes of men have started to change over the years and more men are starting to seek flexibility, and jobs that offer them a life outside of more pay. I even posted several links about it here in a thread about high earning women and their behaviors, and men who were taking "female" jobs.
I've taken a "female" job. The pay structure didn't change, my priorities did.
Nick
Originally posted by bunge
No, you're a 'dork' for demanding anything when you've got the power to do something about it yourself.
Now that I've cited it, does it help any? I cite whenever possible, and when I can't, I don't. See?
If you can't use your brains, use google.
I'm not about to go out of my way searching for magical articles you quote but don't source. I'm not here to help you.
Correlation != Causation
Fvcknut.
Originally posted by BR
I'm not about to go out of my way searching for magical articles you quote but don't source. I'm not here to help you.
It's not about helping me, it's about helping yourself. You just don't get it. You take a stance and fight for it no matter how dumb you look. You can't assimilate information beyond anything that fits your preconceived notions. That's too bad for you, not me.
I'm more than willing to help you by pointing this out. Again, and again, and again. Hopefully one day you'll understand what I'm talking about.
Originally posted by bunge
It's not about helping me, it's about helping yourself. You just don't get it. You take a stance and fight for it no matter how dumb you look. You can't assimilate information beyond anything that fits your preconceived notions. That's too bad for you, not me.
I'm more than willing to help you by pointing this out. Again, and again, and again. Hopefully one day you'll understand what I'm talking about.
ok, that entire post is just eerie.
shawn, you have anything else to add. at least when you're posting it seems like there's logic and progress involved.
Originally posted by alcimedes
ok, that entire post is just eerie.
shawn, you have anything else to add. at least when you're posting it seems like there's logic and progress involved.
Indeed. Shawn has earned some respect from me in this thread. Bunge on the other hand needs to get laid or something.
Originally posted by BR
Compare apples to apples people.
wow...I think that's the first time I've ever read BR talk about apples
Originally posted by Wrong Robot
wow...I think that's the first time I've ever read BR talk about apples
I believe that I have three posts in future hardware and a couple in the OS X forum.
that would likely help with any misunderstaning.
Originally posted by bunge
...while the 74% figure might be wrong, the gap does exist.
Originally posted by bunge
..while the 74% figure might be wrong, the gap does exist
And is almost entirely attributable to factors related to personal choice as opposed to systemic discrimination by men.
Nick
Originally posted by trumptman
And is almost entirely attributable to factors related to personal choice as opposed to systemic discrimination by men.
Nick
Wrong. It's attributable to lots of factors, including discrimination. People hire for all kinds of stupid reasons but some of you people arguing here try and pretend it's not true.
Originally posted by alcimedes
have any links to back up your position bunge?
You've already quoted them in this thread so why would I repost them? I've done enough reposting already. How about you take the advice I gave you earlier and reread some of the thread? You guys get so blinded you stop discussing and start attacking.
Reread. It'll be good for your karma.
Originally posted by bunge
You've already quoted them in this thread so why would I repost them? I've done enough reposting already. How about you take the advice I gave you earlier and reread some of the thread? You guys get so blinded you stop discussing and start attacking.
Reread. It'll be good for your karma.
Present things in a clear, uncondescending manner including the sources from which your ludicrous assertions originate. It'll be good for your karma.
You obviously don't give a shit about convincing others because asserting something and then telling others to look up the damn source themselves isn't going to change anyone's mind.
The sky is neon brown. I heard it on the radio somewhere.
BR, you basically had to apoligize to me and admit I was right. That's back on page one as well. I guess that's embarassing enough for you that you don't want to revisit it.
Originally posted by bunge
It's all on page one I believe.
BR, you basically had to apoligize to me and admit I was right. That's back on page one as well. I guess that's embarassing enough for you that you don't want to revisit it.
Don't be a dumbass. You're just throwing me forgetting one thing you said after I was up all night writing a term paper back in my face so you can avoid revisiting things. I asked if you thought the number was credible, not just real, anyway.
Just provide some fvcking sources like a good little nuttybuddy and people might respect you a little more.