As part of the ludicrous "war on women" idea that liberals have been pushing designed to scare educated females into voting Democrat, the old notion of a "pay gap" between men and women performing similar jobs has been resurrected. Unfortunately, as Kay Hymowitz wrote in the Wall Street Journal yesterday, it's a bunch of nonsense. While it's true that some women get paid less than men, that's because generally women with children are less likely to work longer hours at work. Take kids out of the picture, however, and it is women who actually earn more. Could it be that people are simply adjusting their own lives to fit their wants and needs? Perish the thought!
College professors are always assigning grades to their students but what would happen if the subjects they teach were graded in terms of income-earning potential?
Thanks to the Chronicle of Higher Education, we can now see what the average lifetime earning potential is for different majors. It probably comes as no surprise that majors like "community organizing" or counseling psychology make very little. What might surprise is just how little that is. Chart and commentary are below the fold.
Today's starter topic: The left has long believed that taxes and regulations don't have an impact on economies. Reality says otherwise as the current anemic economic recovery has proven but also as the mass exodus from the state of California has demonstrated:
Even though it was their party who rammed Obamacare through Congress, a number of congressional Democrats are publicly airing their own misgivings about the medical regulation law.
Are such misgivings related somehow to the fact that the U.S. Supreme Court might overturn the law?
For the third consecutive year, the Democratic-controlled Senate will not even attempt to pass a budget. This wasn't the first choice of the Senate budget committee chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) who appears to have been pressured into his decision by Senate majority leader Harry Reid who has been insistent that he doesn't want a budget.
But Conrad also seems to have had his own difficulties getting other Democrats onboard as well:
For years, we've heard from liberals that women of America are being deliberately discrimated against in the form of lower salaries at their workplaces compared to men. Conservatives have responded that things aren't that simple since in many cases, women like more flexible hours and office arrangements. Undeterred, the left has harped on this point.
Perhaps it won't any more, though, now that it's been revealed that the Obama White House pays its female employees less than its male ones:
Today's starter topic: Are liberals more likely to be "girlie men?" According to a study out of Australia across a number of countries, men who are more masculine tend to be more likely to support conservative political ideologies.
If that claim is true, does it mean that liberal men are less likely to be physically strong or have lower levels of testosterone? Somehow it seems unlikely you'll see a study touting this idea. But while we're waiting, here's the Daily Telegraph's summary of the masculine men study:
In his column today, Fox Business Network host John Stossel makes an interesting observation: Americans are suspicious of government and yet they seem unable to resist the impulse to grow it. This despite the manifest record of failure that Big Government has racked up for itself:
After decades trying to drum up fear about the impending end of the world, top climate alarmist James Hansen has admitted that the public is becoming less convinced by the antics of the global warmongers.
Naturally, before doing so in a recent lecture, he had to trot out the mythical 'scientific consensus' notion, per this report from the Daily Telegraph: