[detbuch]

Originally Posted by scottw

"or perhaps women more often leave the work force to raise children. "


ding...ding....ding...ding

it'll be funny when they discover the greatest disparity is among unionized and government workers where longevity is the determining factor for wage scale rather than talent, ability and performance and patronage, discrimination and the old boy network are alive and well...insulated even...


these researchers completed another study recently where they, after several years of extensive research, determined that the sun actually rises in the east.....nice job!....they plan a follow-up study to try to determine why the sun shows bias toward the east when rising and west when setting and document the obvious discrimination displayed toward both the north and south

At least PaulS actually did a searchy thingy. Unlike others who wanted to simply claim Jim was wrong because his questions had already been "satisfactorily" answered. So they, apparently, did not require a "search" be done by themselves. Although it somehow supposedly required Jim to do the search in order to recover those reputed satisfactory answers. Very convenient, or lazy, to say the least. There is no possibility, of course, that there were no such "satisfactory" answers which actually disproved the "searched" conclusions which inspire Jim's over and over questions? Jim has already demonstrated, in this thread and others, that he is willing to accept a satisfactory answer. Others, apparently, either never do, or they just go away only to return another day with their same, over and over opinions, sometimes bolstered by a newfound "search" which is argued, debunked, requiring the same going away, only to return another day with a new AHA!

But, even the report that Paul posted, was not so much an answer to Jim's question, but more of a "well, maybe, possibility," needing some actual investigation of the "why." And, as admitted, the why might well support Jim's opinion.

So far, the searching on the topic that has been done in this thread supports Jim's contention, or hints that it may or may not be true. Or, that if it is not true, that is only so in the nursing field. Which may, or may not just be a counter balance to another field, as has been pointed out in this thread, where women are paid more on average than men, sometimes much more.

The most discouraging aspect of all this indeterminate back and forth, if indeed there really is a question, is that it can be used as a campaign talking point to divide and influence votes. No matter that the federal government has already answered the problem by prohibiting that which is supposed to be the problem. No doubt it was a talking point back when the legislation was passed, and will continue to be a talking point, after it was already solved, so long as it can be milked. Along with other questionable perennial talking points such as minimum wage.

No matter, also, that the federal government, at least in the prescribed manner by which it is supposed to act, is intruding in areas that should not be its business. It should not be regulating the nation's entire economy.

But, by creating evil straw men to knock down, it cunningly captures the peoples soft spots acting as the knight in shining armor who will slay the propped up bad guys. How can we resist? What good is a Constitution if it allows us to be trampled?

No matter, of course, that it's the Constitution which is being trampled, thus making us vulnerable to evils far beyond those which we already have the power to fight without central power intervention.

But that is the point of intervention. The federal government, by feeding us crumbs from the loaf we already own, takes possession of the whole loaf. It becomes the Constitution. And, as such, it becomes the supreme law of the land. And, assuming all powers, it, in actuality, becomes the only law. Things like the economy, are no longer the people's business. It becomes the governments business, to direct and regulate towards its ends rather than the ends of business owners, who, now, will only "own" what is allowed after central power regulation.

Sure, We the People will ostensibly still have many freedoms, and local governments will still function in different ways. But, as in all centralized governments, those freedoms can be trumped by the kingpin when it wants to. As in most dictatorships, the people must be given crumbs. But, when the Federal Government becomes the Constitution, there are no longer any guarantees of freedom. Only those which are allowed.

It is not even humorous that various "rights" will be touted as reasons to vote for candidates in the coming election if someone like Ted Cruz is the Republican nominee. Either vote for rights which are inalienable, or only those allowed by government.