Pete Buttigieg, a graduate of Harvard and Oxford, a Rhodes scholar, a retired U.S. Navy officer and a former consultant for McKinsey whose employees are considered some of the smartest in the business, wants Congress to pass a new law requiring a “simple annual statistic” that calculates “for every dollar paid to a man, how much less was paid to a woman.” He calls this a “bold yet simple” idea which might fly for another candidate, but for the wonkiest candidate in the 2020 bunch, there’s absolutely no way he believes his own BS:
A bold and simple idea on this #EqualPayDay: the US should pass a new law reporting a simple annual statistic for every large company: for every dollar paid to a man, how much less was paid to a woman? pic.twitter.com/vcdGHILdge
— Pete Buttigieg (@PeteButtigieg) April 2, 2019
He calls his plan, mandated gender transparency:
To all the women not being paid fairly, or who even have to wonder if they’re being paid fairly: I believe you deserve better. It’s time to ensure every American woman is paid fairly. Let’s mandate gender pay transparency. #EqualPayDay
— Pete Buttigieg (@PeteButtigieg) April 2, 2019
For starters, and Buttigieg knows this, it’s not “simple” at all:
But it’s not a simple comparison. Your proposed law is stupid. https://t.co/DY8FMcuX5x
— Steven Crowder (@scrowder) April 2, 2019
And he knows when you do any sort of legitimate statistical analysis, the pay gap all but disappears:
The problem is… There is no statistical pay disparity. https://t.co/K7OW0z9QSp
— Pradheep J. Shanker (@Neoavatara) April 3, 2019
For example, from his alma mater:
Harvard Study: "Gender Pay Gap" Explained Entirely by Work Choices of Men and Women https://t.co/n6fcpDmJLa
— Pradheep J. Shanker (@Neoavatara) April 2, 2019
Even some of his fans know this:
For the same job and qualifications, yes. Big supporter of yours, Pete, and there is a bit of pay inequality but it’s not as large as MSM paints.
— Kyle Brewster (@KBrews_Clues) April 2, 2019
Yes I do: https://t.co/bpuMZpApZv
p.s. – I work in 3rd party recruiting. It is a problem, maybe more of an issue and should be 1for1 $ but it's not as large of a gap of 7for10. pic.twitter.com/rMzHKlBII9
— Kyle Brewster (@KBrews_Clues) April 2, 2019
And remember when Google did this? Whoops:
Google's latest pay equity analysis found that male employees had a lower salary than women https://t.co/CwVaJCUAGj
— Inc. (@Inc) March 5, 2019
What’s frustrating is that Buttigieg seemed like the type of candidate who might talk about this issue in a way without pandering to his base. But, alas:
Not recruiting but offers. I am agreeing with Pete on transparency and it being an issue but it’s not as drastic of a statistic as MSM pushes…and what he’s pushing in his graphic
— Kyle Brewster (@KBrews_Clues) April 2, 2019
a
It’s quite easy to produce statistics that show a pay disparity. The picture gets a lot murkier when you factor in people who have made a conscious decision to trade slightly lower compensation for greater scheduling flexibility, and other concessions.
— (((Jeremy Posner))) (@jmp_nyc) April 3, 2019
Much more important to address are inequities in advancement opportunities, which are often the problem that’s really behind the perceived pay gap.
— (((Jeremy Posner))) (@jmp_nyc) April 3, 2019
And we’ll keep waiting:
And the search for a non-pandering candidate resumes.
— Walter Olson (@walterolson) April 3, 2019
***
Join the conversation as a VIP Member