tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19962237.post624540070504460973..comments2024-03-04T16:39:30.609+13:00Comments on Lindsay Mitchell: Graph of the DayLindsay Mitchellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04437693272797130833noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19962237.post-81586980699776249502014-02-16T08:25:39.842+13:002014-02-16T08:25:39.842+13:00The whole idea of "equality" is leftism....The whole idea of "equality" is leftism. Pure and simple. <br /><br />People are not equal. The few on the narrow way are better than the masses on the broad way that leads to damnation. <br /><br />Even to talk about "equality" or "opportunity" or "fairness" yields the entire ground of the debate to the left. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19962237.post-38175653048555813032014-02-14T20:43:01.755+13:002014-02-14T20:43:01.755+13:00Mary,
A good chunk of men are married fathers. I...Mary, <br /><br />A good chunk of men are married fathers. In fact, married fathers are more likely to be paying higher taxes. <br /><br />Under the current economic set-up it is entirely understandable that overall, women contribute less in financial terms given 1/motherhood, 2/caregiving outside of motherhood, and 3/greater longevity. I don't have a problem with that. <br /><br />What I do have a problem with the gender equality advocates demanding equal pay, equal board representation, etc when clearly women are different beasts to men.Lindsay Mitchellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04437693272797130833noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19962237.post-33592562724504067832014-02-14T20:09:57.612+13:002014-02-14T20:09:57.612+13:00Reading theworking paper it would seem that the di...Reading theworking paper it would seem that the difference is driven by two things:<br />1. women earn less because they have a lower labour force participation rate probably due to raising children; and<br />2. women receive more taxpayer support because they are more likely to have dependent children.<br /><br />So essentially what this graph tells us is, if you attribute all the costs of having children to women, then they cost more.<br /><br />My basic problem with this is attribution. When I last checked it took two to create a child -- male and female.<br /><br />So why should the fact that women take responsibility for young children be seen as them being a "net fiscal drain" and the fact that men do not take responsibility for the consequences of their actions be lauded as fiscally responsible?<br /><br />MaryAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19962237.post-32857982681065707992014-02-14T18:58:33.538+13:002014-02-14T18:58:33.538+13:00women in 2010 were a net fiscal drain on the econo...<i> women in 2010 were a net fiscal drain on the economy</i><br /><br />As Peter Thiel would say: <b>NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION</b>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19962237.post-47827290850999043402014-02-14T18:57:39.637+13:002014-02-14T18:57:39.637+13:00So the current welfare state is completely unsusta...So the current welfare state is completely unsustainable. What else don't we know.<br /><br />National is lying when it says we "can't touch super".<br /><br />Labour is lying when it says we only need to increase the age limits a bit.<br /><br />And everyone except, perhaps ACT?, is lying when they say we can keep on having benefits, super, health & education.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com