NationStates Jolt Archive

Recently, I had to decide on gender rights. I abolished all discrimination, ad what do I get in return?

"...women earn less than half the salary of men if they can even find a job.." as an employer in real life, I can guarantee you that the men won't be able to find jobs in such a situation, not women.... Who's to blame?

Do you by any chance have/use a web accelerator? The result in your nation description comes from choosing this option on that issue 2. "Hey, my business is treading a thin enough profit margin as it is," complains @@RANDOMNAME@@, CEO of Heavy Lifting Incorporated. "Women just aren't as good as men at certain jobs, it's a probably proven fact! Take firefighting - if you were dying from smoke inhalation and collapsed on the floor unable to move, who would you prefer to attempt to rescue you? A man with superior muscular strength or some weakling female? Go on, you decide. Let the businesses decide what they pay and who they pay it to - after all, the economy depends on us."
Given what you say you chose, a web accelerator seems the most likely culprit.

Yes, this is the option I chose. The logical consequence of my decision in favour of liberal labour market should be that many men are thrown out of work, because women with lower wages take their places (like in textile industry in the real world) and this would lead to better labour market and better performance of the overall economy. More, the industries that my nation supports - IT, Cheese exports and Gambling are not physically demanding, so the women must be a serious factor of the work force, as in real life. As an employer, I sometimes dream of finding employees for half wages, but they never come true. So what's the problem?

Komitite, you missed Erastide's point. This isn't an economics problem, it's a technical problem. Your use of a web accelerator is causing your issues selector to pick the wrong choice. Turn off your web accelerator software for this site, and it shouldn't happen again.

Actually, I believe Komitite does not have a technical problem; as s/he did choose the issue option in question, rather than having it mistakenly chosen for him by a web accelerator. Komitite is merely questioning the [effect] part of the issue option, as s/he is under the impression that the option would have the opposite effect than it actually did. So I suppose this one is more of a misunderstanding than anything else.

Mauvasia, thanks for clearing the question for me. Yes, I expect the opposite effect from the decision, it's not a technical problem (and I am not using a web accelerator and never have used one) Me is him, 10x ;-)

Yes, this is the option I chose. The logical consequence of my decision in favour of liberal labour market should be that many men are thrown out of work, because women with lower wages take their places (like in textile industry in the real world) and this would lead to better labour market and better performance of the overall economy. More, the industries that my nation supports - IT, Cheese exports and Gambling are not physically demanding, so the women must be a serious factor of the work force, as in real life. As an employer, I sometimes dream of finding employees for half wages, but they never come true. So what's the problem?

The underlying assumption in your logic is that choices made are entirely rational and economically based. In the case of discrimination this assumption doesn't hold. The issue starts off with:

The Issue
The women of @@NAME@@ are demanding an end to wage discrimination in the workplace.

The women are complaining they are already being discriminated against, and you chose an option which simply said that the government isn't recognizing it as a problem and letting businesses decide for themselves whether or not they discriminate against workers. Note discrimination based on skin color, religion, etc... doesn't vanish either as soon as the government decides to ignore it is happening.

Ballotonia

Even in the most discriminating societies, nobody denies the cheap labour of the discriminated group. The slaves in the USA did not have any rights, but were the major work force in the industry. Actually the discrimination is tightly connected to the cheap labour and exploitation of the discriminated group. So, Ballotonia, I completely do not agree with you. A possible consequence of the decision would be the spontaneous appearance of illegal sweatshops around the country, where women work for tiny wages, but not jobless women. Have you heard about a jobless slave in the Confederation?? This is not logical. OK, I'll give you a chance - give me an real life example for your assumption.

I believe that's they don't have work partly because they believed to have much less qualification for most work, and partly because they prefer to become housewives. Sorry for my English.