Added: 2 years ago
From: acluvideos
Views: 927
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (22)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • This woman is a thug idiot, if your marginal revenue product is higher than you are paid for then voluntarily ask for a raise or quit. Do not be a coercive thug idiot. Anyone like that thug that acts like a criminal should be charged as such.

  • Comment removed

  • What about the liberties of the employer? The employer should be able to pay their employees whatever they want. But here we go again, I'm in awe that the ACLU us supporting such a bill. Makes me wonder why I joined...

  • 'zactly! An' if an employer don't wanna hire no darkies or dotheads or homos, they got that right too!

  • While you might not agree that every case the ACLU takes on meets you're own definitions of "freedom", you do recognize that the freedom they fight for in general is important; which is why youre a member? No one wants to support pedophilia, but if the government suppresses speech supporting pedophilia, then where will they be forced to stop? Who holds the line? The ACLU.

  • You are right, however, in asking the question: When does an individuals freedom stop? Should the government recognize a corporation as an individual with the same rights as every human employee? If the corporation as a whole is working illegally, should they be able to legitimately suppress their employees speech? How about if people are just getting shafted for 10 cents? How about if the company is killing people? Wheres the line?

  • you ever pay them anything more than 70.1% of what men are paid EVEN IF their work is just as valuable? The problem is that a market distortion has effectively skewed the bargaining power in favor of employers.

  • Equal rights and laws aside - your argument favors market distortions and produces failures. You assume that the practice of paying women less is rational without supporting the idea. Recall that even as far back as w/ Adam Smith's WON, Smith cautioned that discrimination based on non-economic factors could produce inefficient results.

    Just think about it - you're an employer and you know the other employers pay women 70% of what men are paid. Regardless of how good they do. Why would

  • Not if it's a pervasive practice. If ALL employers are paying women (or a significant percentage of employers) less than men, there will be a distortion in the wages all women pay (because the discriminating employers have monopolistic power in the labor services).

  • Well, I disagree, and I think we SHOULD take away the liberty from an oppressor to oppress. I don't think that's what the founding fathers had in mind to protect.

    What really annoys me here is that someone marked your reply to me as SPAM. That's just low. I've marked it as NOT SPAM, and I hope others will too.

  • All men are created equal. You and I, as compassionate people in a nation founded on principles of equality and freedom, who care about others and not just ourselves, should insist on equality of both opportunity and condition. I should love that ideal much better than a maxim that each person should be awarded unequal pay based on some overall worthiness quotient, impossible to assess below and odious to endure from above.

  • Certainly there are some cases of discrimination, but the Dept. of Labor released a report on Jan. 12 last year debunking the wage gap, and other publications have as well.

    It's sad to see that the ACLU is selling itself out solely to PC leftism. There are a lot of opportunities for investigating civil rights abuses with laws like the Violence Against Women Act, and family court injustices. Why the looking the other way?

    Is it because the PC Feminists would disagree?

  • @Gogonostop

    The Wage Gap (Myth) as been debunked repeatedly since it's inception. The only reason it remains is because the supporters of it, and it's orbiting industries, need it for their stances to be "valid".

    I bet you if Good Year brought in an HR Specialist with a background in Accounting & Economics they would have won as I'll bet you again (double down) she has weak negotiation skills and over her career missed 10 - 20% of total work hours using male peers as then benchmark.

    Who's in?

  • Strange interpretation of the statue of limitations.

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more