Nearly 10,000 people graduated with MBAs from University of Chicago’s Booth School of Business between 1990 and 2006. In 2009, three economists decided to study a quarter of those graduates. They asked a detailed set of questions about the jobs they’d held since graduation, how many hours they worked, where they worked, and what they had earned each year. The researchers wanted to know how gender would affect the career trajectories of all these newly minted business school graduates. The survey of thousands of business school graduates showed that men had slightly higher salaries right out of the gate. Women earned an average salary of $115,000 right out of graduate school, while men earned $130,000. Men also averaged a few more weekly hours and a bit more prior experience as they entered the workforce. But the most astounding thing happened nine years later: The distance between men and women’s salaries more than doubled. Nine years into their careers, women saw their salaries rise to an average of $250,000 — while men's salaries averaged out at $400,000. Men were earning 60 percent more than women. http://www.vox.com/2016/8/1/12108126/gender-wage-gap-explained-real Study: http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/go...ls_in_the_financial_and_corporate_sectors.pdf
One consideration that is never mentioned, is connected to the concept of seniority. A new employee, doing the same job will not make as much as someone with 10 years of experience. The reason is, more years of company service means you have earned your employer more money over the years; profit sharing. You also have more experience, which typically amounts to earning the employer more money this year, due to the ability to deal with problems, faster, which can cost money. The workforce data says men tend to work more hours than women. The women have more flexible schedules for pregnancy, chid birth and the needs of children. The net affect is men build up seniority; more total hours of company service. If seniority does not count, we need to make the Unions aware of this when their union contracts come up.
This is mentioned again and again and again. Every time this issue gets brought up. One would have to be living in some kind of right-wing bubble not to notice this.
The United States is not the best place to live in. The best countries to live in to live are probably Norway, Denmark and Finland. Norway actually takes care of its citizens by providing them with a basic quality of life. That's what I admire about socialist countries with a strong welfare state in contrast to totally egoistic economic systems like that in the United States, for instance. The United States is a fully egoistic economic system. Norway and Denmark are probably the best countries to live in because these countries have the best societies and the best quality of life. These countries have the best quality of life and the most progressive societies: https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/quality-of-life-rankings https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legatum_Prosperity_Index https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Progress_Index https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index
