Topic: Donald Trump currently has a 35.8% chance of winning the USAmerican Presidency
beckyderp !Hi.HILLARY started this discussion 10 years ago #56,766
Jesus Christ, you retards.
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 6 minutes later[^] [v] #731,106
I'm voting for the Donald.
beckyderp !Hi.HILLARY (OP) replied with this 10 years ago, 2 minutes later, 8 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #731,107
dw joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 7 minutes later, 15 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #731,108
Probably would have been less if the other party had a better candidate
RWBY Rhubarb? !!iNo3FkiZx joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 2 minutes later, 18 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #731,110
Trump's kind of politician already managed to stick a knife in my country. I hope you can avoid it, Becky.
At least 65/35 is better odds than 50/50.
At least 65/35 is better odds than 50/50.
Anonymous B replied with this 10 years ago, 29 minutes later, 47 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #731,115
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 4 minutes later, 52 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #731,116
GO TRUMP!!!!
Hillary Clinton2016-2024 joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 2 minutes later, 54 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #731,117
It gets higher then it gets lower. At this rate, his chances of winning will be at 13% come election.
Kid Rock joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 9 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #731,120
@OP
> Jesus Christ, you retards.
Yes.
Jesus/Matthew 2016
Make America Christian Again
> Jesus Christ, you retards.
Yes.
Jesus/Matthew 2016
Make America Christian Again
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
RWBY Rhubarb? !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 10 years ago, 1 hour later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,141
Jubilee Starshine joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 1 hour later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,148
@731,110 (RWBY Rhubarb? !!iNo3FkiZx)
seriously, if trump wins we can't hold the brexit against you. all we'll have left is winning the war and saving your asses
seriously, if trump wins we can't hold the brexit against you. all we'll have left is winning the war and saving your asses
Anonymous G replied with this 10 years ago, 15 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,149
What good is Hillary gonna do? She's terrible
Jubilee Starshine replied with this 10 years ago, 6 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,151
Sheila LaBoof joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,152
I disagree. I say he either has 100% chance or 0% chance. We just don't know which yet.
@731,149 (G)
Have a crew working in the government that aren't Republicans, one would imagine. The body of the party is more significant here. I don't know if you've noticed, but the Republicans have been acting like half retarded sociopaths for a few decades.
@731,149 (G)
Have a crew working in the government that aren't Republicans, one would imagine. The body of the party is more significant here. I don't know if you've noticed, but the Republicans have been acting like half retarded sociopaths for a few decades.
(Edited 5 minutes later.)
Metæ joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 2 hours later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,169
@OP
Nate Silver also gave Trump 2% chance of winning the primary.
> retards
Also didn't you get upset about Trump mocking that disabled reporter?
Nate Silver also gave Trump 2% chance of winning the primary.
> retards
Also didn't you get upset about Trump mocking that disabled reporter?
(Edited 1 minute later.)
hamfist !0Ynig1RSDc joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 13 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,173
actually he has a 50% chance. either he wins or he doesnt. thanks
buto joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 1 minute later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,174
Anonymous M joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 42 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,176
@731,173 (hamfist !0Ynig1RSDc)
@731,152 (Sheila LaBoof)
@731,169 (Metæ)
Retards one and all. Thanks.
@731,152 (Sheila LaBoof)
@731,169 (Metæ)
Retards one and all. Thanks.
Sheila LaBoof replied with this 10 years ago, 1 hour later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,177
@previous (M)
oh, you think that if we ran the exact same universe from now till Tuesday, you'd get people magically voting differently than they would have at some specific frequency of universe subsets? jackass
oh, you think that if we ran the exact same universe from now till Tuesday, you'd get people magically voting differently than they would have at some specific frequency of universe subsets? jackass
beckyderp !Hi.HILLARY (OP) replied with this 10 years ago, 11 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,178
@previous (Sheila LaBoof)
what
@731,169 (Metæ)
> Also didn't you get upset about Trump mocking that disabled reporter?
no
what
@731,169 (Metæ)
> Also didn't you get upset about Trump mocking that disabled reporter?
no
Sheila LaBoof replied with this 10 years ago, 34 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,182
@previous (beckyderp !Hi.HILLARY)
Like, probability of an occurence of an outcome is based on the ratio of the size of the set of matching outcomes to the size of the set of all outcomes. How many universes are there, and how many of those have trump the winner? The very question makes no sense if there is only this universe, and besides, we only have access to this universe even if there were others that are just like this one except for somehow becoming different on voting day for some mystifying reason. makes no sense. he wins or he doesn't, that's all we know
Like, probability of an occurence of an outcome is based on the ratio of the size of the set of matching outcomes to the size of the set of all outcomes. How many universes are there, and how many of those have trump the winner? The very question makes no sense if there is only this universe, and besides, we only have access to this universe even if there were others that are just like this one except for somehow becoming different on voting day for some mystifying reason. makes no sense. he wins or he doesn't, that's all we know
Anonymous M replied with this 10 years ago, 5 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,183
@previous (Sheila LaBoof)
> Like, probability of an occurence of an outcome is based on the ratio of the size of the set of matching outcomes to the size of the set of all outcomes. How many universes are there, and how many of those have trump the winner? The very question makes no sense if there is only this universe, and besides, we only have access to this universe even if there were others that are just like this one except for somehow becoming different on voting day for some mystifying reason. makes no sense. he wins or he doesn't, that's all we know
Are you dumb or misinformed or just bursting full of shit?
I smell shit.
> Like, probability of an occurence of an outcome is based on the ratio of the size of the set of matching outcomes to the size of the set of all outcomes. How many universes are there, and how many of those have trump the winner? The very question makes no sense if there is only this universe, and besides, we only have access to this universe even if there were others that are just like this one except for somehow becoming different on voting day for some mystifying reason. makes no sense. he wins or he doesn't, that's all we know
Are you dumb or misinformed or just bursting full of shit?
I smell shit.
Sheila LaBoof replied with this 10 years ago, 8 hours later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,200
DasSheeple joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 36 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,202
@OP
> Jesus Christ, you retards.
Being this mad, lol. Pls read the Podesta emails before voting. Thanks.
> Jesus Christ, you retards.
Being this mad, lol. Pls read the Podesta emails before voting. Thanks.
RWBY Rhubarb? !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 10 years ago, 4 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,203
buto replied with this 10 years ago, 5 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,204
@731,202 (DasSheeple)
> > Jesus Christ, you retards.
>
> Being this mad, lol. Pls read the Podesta emails before voting. Thanks.
which ones
> > Jesus Christ, you retards.
>
> Being this mad, lol. Pls read the Podesta emails before voting. Thanks.
which ones
DasSheeple replied with this 10 years ago, 5 seconds later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,205
@731,203 (RWBY Rhubarb? !!iNo3FkiZx)> putting words in my mouth
Not surprised coming from Hillary supporters tho. Her mental gymnastics are mind boggling. Pic related, somehow equality is bad when it's not coming from Hillary who is "fighting for equality".
buto replied with this 10 years ago, 54 seconds later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,206
DasSheeple replied with this 10 years ago, 2 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,207
@previous (buto)
Please enlighten me. Or did she sell you some Orwell lever equality, where everyone is equal, some are just more equal than others?
Please enlighten me. Or did she sell you some Orwell lever equality, where everyone is equal, some are just more equal than others?
RWBY Rhubarb? !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 10 years ago, 1 minute later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,208
@731,205 (DasSheeple)
Son, if you like mental gymnastics, Trump supporters are the gold medalists.
At least you aren't dumb enough to buy into his self-serving lies about election rigging. That's certainly something.
Son, if you like mental gymnastics, Trump supporters are the gold medalists.
At least you aren't dumb enough to buy into his self-serving lies about election rigging. That's certainly something.
Metæ replied with this 10 years ago, 22 seconds later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,209
@731,203 (RWBY Rhubarb? !!iNo3FkiZx)
He does have a point. This is information about Hillary Clinton that people should take into account when making their voting decision. Most of the Podesta emails are terribly boring but it gives people a rare, unfiltered, unscripted glimpse into how Hillary and her team operate.
He does have a point. This is information about Hillary Clinton that people should take into account when making their voting decision. Most of the Podesta emails are terribly boring but it gives people a rare, unfiltered, unscripted glimpse into how Hillary and her team operate.
RWBY Rhubarb? !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 10 years ago, 1 minute later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,210
Metæ replied with this 10 years ago, 1 minute later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,211
Metæ double-posted this 10 years ago, 1 minute later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,212
@731,210 (RWBY Rhubarb? !!iNo3FkiZx)
Of course. And there have been Trump leaks like the "grab them by the pussy" video which people should also take into account when they consider Trump.
Of course. And there have been Trump leaks like the "grab them by the pussy" video which people should also take into account when they consider Trump.
DasSheeple replied with this 10 years ago, 4 seconds later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,213
@731,208 (RWBY Rhubarb? !!iNo3FkiZx)
Still no explanation, and that one is the most harmless one. Thanks for playing, I guess...
Still no explanation, and that one is the most harmless one. Thanks for playing, I guess...
RWBY Rhubarb? !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 10 years ago, 5 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,216
@previous (DasSheeple)
What are you expecting me to explain? Are you expecting me to get cagey about and try to downplay her emails?
I know that politicians say and do questionable things behind closed doors, Sheep. That isn't a huge revelation. By no means do I like it.
I simply think that Trump is so unstable and incompetent, that he's far more dangerous as President than Hillary.
What are you expecting me to explain? Are you expecting me to get cagey about and try to downplay her emails?
I know that politicians say and do questionable things behind closed doors, Sheep. That isn't a huge revelation. By no means do I like it.
I simply think that Trump is so unstable and incompetent, that he's far more dangerous as President than Hillary.
DasSheeple replied with this 10 years ago, 6 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,219
@previous (RWBY Rhubarb? !!iNo3FkiZx)
No, you called me an idiot for posting what Hillary posted on twitter. Not explaining what she meant with what she tweeted, and give any rational explanation as to how Trumps statement puts him in a bad light in any way.
Instead you kept on going how Trumps PR guys and girls are gold medalists in mental gymnastics, yet you didn't provide a single example. And now this backpedaling.
Are you trying to pull a Hillary on me?
No, you called me an idiot for posting what Hillary posted on twitter. Not explaining what she meant with what she tweeted, and give any rational explanation as to how Trumps statement puts him in a bad light in any way.
Instead you kept on going how Trumps PR guys and girls are gold medalists in mental gymnastics, yet you didn't provide a single example. And now this backpedaling.
Are you trying to pull a Hillary on me?
RWBY Rhubarb? !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 10 years ago, 13 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,220
@previous (DasSheeple)
Buton was the one who called you an idiot. I actually complimented your intelligence by saying you aren't completely dumb.
Don't agree with the principle of Hillary's tweet. Still don't think it makes her anywhere near as bad as Trump.
A good example of Trump's Olympian mental gymnastics comes from his claims of election rigging. No concrete evidence of it, but he uses it to reject his country's democracy and to encourage thugs to go intimidate voters. Since you don't think the election is rigged, surely, you can agree that this is some impressive and dangerous mental gymnastics?
Buton was the one who called you an idiot. I actually complimented your intelligence by saying you aren't completely dumb.
Don't agree with the principle of Hillary's tweet. Still don't think it makes her anywhere near as bad as Trump.
A good example of Trump's Olympian mental gymnastics comes from his claims of election rigging. No concrete evidence of it, but he uses it to reject his country's democracy and to encourage thugs to go intimidate voters. Since you don't think the election is rigged, surely, you can agree that this is some impressive and dangerous mental gymnastics?
(Edited 20 seconds later.)
DasSheeple replied with this 10 years ago, 8 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,221
@previous (RWBY Rhubarb? !!iNo3FkiZx)
Dangerous mental gymnastics is when Trump says USA/NATO should team up with Russia and nuke ISIS off the planet, and Hillary interprets it as "OMG Trump wants to start a war with Russia". Yet, she's the one most likely to ignite WW3 with her arms deals under the table, providing service to anyone who donates enough to her foundation including countries like Qatar who did arm ISIS with these weapons.
All in all, there's much more at stake for Hillary, and it can be seen in her campaign. I wouldn't be surprised if she ends up in jail if Trump gets elected.
And sorry for mistaking you and buto, haven't had much sleep lately. Syncing up with partners from USA keeps me awake during wrong hours :(
@OP
http://extras.denverpost.com/charts/politics/2016/mail-ballots/ballot-table/
Let's get the party started.
Dem 554,340 vs. 547,775 Rep, can't wait for election day.
Elections unfolding to be a 10/10 event, lol.
Dangerous mental gymnastics is when Trump says USA/NATO should team up with Russia and nuke ISIS off the planet, and Hillary interprets it as "OMG Trump wants to start a war with Russia". Yet, she's the one most likely to ignite WW3 with her arms deals under the table, providing service to anyone who donates enough to her foundation including countries like Qatar who did arm ISIS with these weapons.
All in all, there's much more at stake for Hillary, and it can be seen in her campaign. I wouldn't be surprised if she ends up in jail if Trump gets elected.
And sorry for mistaking you and buto, haven't had much sleep lately. Syncing up with partners from USA keeps me awake during wrong hours :(
@OP
http://extras.denverpost.com/charts/politics/2016/mail-ballots/ballot-table/
Let's get the party started.
Dem 554,340 vs. 547,775 Rep, can't wait for election day.
Elections unfolding to be a 10/10 event, lol.
Metæ replied with this 10 years ago, 1 hour later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,231
@731,220 (RWBY Rhubarb? !!iNo3FkiZx)
I really am confused by Buto's reply. What is wrong with Trump's tweet "You're gonna make the same if you do as good a job". It seems to me to be pretty fair. The only alternative would be women making less money than men for the same work (unfair) and women making more money than men for the same work (also unfair).
I realize it was Buto who called Sheep an idiot and not you, but I know I'll never get a meaningful answer from Buto.
I really am confused by Buto's reply. What is wrong with Trump's tweet "You're gonna make the same if you do as good a job". It seems to me to be pretty fair. The only alternative would be women making less money than men for the same work (unfair) and women making more money than men for the same work (also unfair).
I realize it was Buto who called Sheep an idiot and not you, but I know I'll never get a meaningful answer from Buto.
buto replied with this 10 years ago, 6 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,236
@previous (Metæ)
> I really am confused by Buto's reply. What is wrong with Trump's tweet "You're gonna make the same if you do as good a job".
that's not a policy. that's just trump talking out of his ass. how is his claim enforceable? it also seems to be operating on bootstraps and the premise that women simply don't do as good a job as men. 'just do as good as men and you'll be paid the same' is the message I get from that language
> It seems to me to be pretty fair. The only alternative would be women making less money than men for the same work (unfair)
current situation
> and women making more money than men for the same work (also unfair).
fantasy hypothetical
fuck you idiot
> I really am confused by Buto's reply. What is wrong with Trump's tweet "You're gonna make the same if you do as good a job".
that's not a policy. that's just trump talking out of his ass. how is his claim enforceable? it also seems to be operating on bootstraps and the premise that women simply don't do as good a job as men. 'just do as good as men and you'll be paid the same' is the message I get from that language
> It seems to me to be pretty fair. The only alternative would be women making less money than men for the same work (unfair)
current situation
> and women making more money than men for the same work (also unfair).
fantasy hypothetical
fuck you idiot
RWBY Rhubarb? !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 10 years ago, 7 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,238
@731,231 (Metæ)
I actually agree with that line of thinking. In my mind, egalitarianism is at its best when everyone has equal opportunities and treatment. No discrimination, no special treatment, just talented and experienced people being able to work where their skills deserve.
Reading Hillary's tweet, I think she's just saying that she is better able to achieve this outcome than Trump. Even if not, I don't trust Trump to actually work towards such an America, given his attitude towards women and people from other cultures. So maybe buto found the idea of him saying that laughable?
@731,221 (DasSheeple)
I would like to think that both Hillary and Trump would try hard to avoid WW3. As unstable as I think Trump is, I at least have faith in him (or at least his Republican wranglers) to not do that.
"Partners from the USA"? This in relation to your start-up thing? I will say, I don't agree with you often on political stuff, but I think it's cool how much international experience you've gotten. Looks very good on a CV.
I actually agree with that line of thinking. In my mind, egalitarianism is at its best when everyone has equal opportunities and treatment. No discrimination, no special treatment, just talented and experienced people being able to work where their skills deserve.
Reading Hillary's tweet, I think she's just saying that she is better able to achieve this outcome than Trump. Even if not, I don't trust Trump to actually work towards such an America, given his attitude towards women and people from other cultures. So maybe buto found the idea of him saying that laughable?
@731,221 (DasSheeple)
I would like to think that both Hillary and Trump would try hard to avoid WW3. As unstable as I think Trump is, I at least have faith in him (or at least his Republican wranglers) to not do that.
"Partners from the USA"? This in relation to your start-up thing? I will say, I don't agree with you often on political stuff, but I think it's cool how much international experience you've gotten. Looks very good on a CV.
DasSheeple replied with this 10 years ago, 25 minutes later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,242
@731,236 (buto)
> trump says something
> that's just trump talking out of his ass
> Hillary says the same
> she'll deliver, she's Hillary
Thanks for the clarifications, I have been enlightened.
@previous (RWBY Rhubarb? !!iNo3FkiZx)
Ehhhh, not so sure about Hillary not wanting a war. Before I get called an idiot again, let's kick back, wait for the elections, and have a grate pre-WW3 party in 4 days if shit hits the fan!
As for my USA partners, yes. They have users I need, and I have technology they need, so we're working together. As I said multiple times, I don't give a fuck about nationality as long as it provides me value. But let's stay on topic...
> trump says something
> that's just trump talking out of his ass
> Hillary says the same
> she'll deliver, she's Hillary
Thanks for the clarifications, I have been enlightened.
@previous (RWBY Rhubarb? !!iNo3FkiZx)
Ehhhh, not so sure about Hillary not wanting a war. Before I get called an idiot again, let's kick back, wait for the elections, and have a grate pre-WW3 party in 4 days if shit hits the fan!
As for my USA partners, yes. They have users I need, and I have technology they need, so we're working together. As I said multiple times, I don't give a fuck about nationality as long as it provides me value. But let's stay on topic...
Metæ replied with this 10 years ago, 8 minutes later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,243
@731,236 (buto)
> how is his claim enforceable?
How is any claim from any politician enforceable? If campaign promises were legally enforceable, I think every president since Washington would have been impeached by now.
> 'just do as good as men and you'll be paid the same' is the message I get from that language
Looking at it from the ruthless capitalist libertarian perspective: if men produce 1 unit of work per $, and women produce 1.28 units of work per $, then a business owner would be absolutely insane to hire men. If a business did hire men, they'd be undercut by a competitor who hires only women and saves 28% on labor. Something doesn't add up.
> how is his claim enforceable?
How is any claim from any politician enforceable? If campaign promises were legally enforceable, I think every president since Washington would have been impeached by now.
> 'just do as good as men and you'll be paid the same' is the message I get from that language
Looking at it from the ruthless capitalist libertarian perspective: if men produce 1 unit of work per $, and women produce 1.28 units of work per $, then a business owner would be absolutely insane to hire men. If a business did hire men, they'd be undercut by a competitor who hires only women and saves 28% on labor. Something doesn't add up.
RWBY Rhubarb? !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 10 years ago, 8 minutes later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,244
@731,242 (DasSheeple)
Yep, not long now. I'm not even American, but I'm feeling a bit of suspense. I'm just gonna try not to think about it so the day will come quicker.
Hey now, I wasn't saying anything about your feelings towards America, I just think it's cool that you work with people from across the world.
I've come across a good number of international colleagues myself these past few years, and I too like how, these days, people can easily combine their abilities regardless of nationality.
Yep, not long now. I'm not even American, but I'm feeling a bit of suspense. I'm just gonna try not to think about it so the day will come quicker.
Hey now, I wasn't saying anything about your feelings towards America, I just think it's cool that you work with people from across the world.
I've come across a good number of international colleagues myself these past few years, and I too like how, these days, people can easily combine their abilities regardless of nationality.
Metæ replied with this 10 years ago, 5 minutes later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,245
@731,238 (RWBY Rhubarb? !!iNo3FkiZx)
I could understand if people felt Trump's policy was insincere but Hillary seemed to be mocking the idea itself.
I do believe Hillary is more likely to start a war with Russia than Trump. I know America can kick Syria's ass to the stone age and back, but Russia is a real country with a real military. Trump is willing to work with Russia, and detente looks like the best option for America right now.
I could understand if people felt Trump's policy was insincere but Hillary seemed to be mocking the idea itself.
I do believe Hillary is more likely to start a war with Russia than Trump. I know America can kick Syria's ass to the stone age and back, but Russia is a real country with a real military. Trump is willing to work with Russia, and detente looks like the best option for America right now.
RWBY Rhubarb? !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 10 years ago, 13 minutes later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,246
@previous (Metæ)
I don't know enough to comment properly on the likelihood of a war with either candidate. Fake anon would be the man to discuss that with, I think.
All I can do is reassert my assumption that, surely, neither of them wants a huge war.
I don't know enough to comment properly on the likelihood of a war with either candidate. Fake anon would be the man to discuss that with, I think.
All I can do is reassert my assumption that, surely, neither of them wants a huge war.
Sheila LaBoof replied with this 10 years ago, 13 minutes later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,249
trump talks out of both sides of his ass
dw replied with this 10 years ago, 40 minutes later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,269
@731,231 (Metæ)
Because that tweet is saying that the reason women are making less is because they are worse at their jobs than men.
Because that tweet is saying that the reason women are making less is because they are worse at their jobs than men.
beckyderp !Hi.HILLARY (OP) replied with this 10 years ago, 13 minutes later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #731,273
Honestly Trump should consider publicly disavowing DasSheeple's support
This is worse than the KKK supporting you
This is worse than the KKK supporting you
Metæ replied with this 10 years ago, 16 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #731,276
@731,269 (dw)
I think something got lost in translation.
Thought experiment:
A man does a job and gets paid $1
A woman does the same job and gets paid $0.72
Therefore, an employer should not hire a man, because a woman would do the same job for 28% less money. This would cause male unemployment until male wages fell to the point of female wages.
Why would an employer pay 28% more than necessary for the same product?
I think something got lost in translation.
Thought experiment:
A man does a job and gets paid $1
A woman does the same job and gets paid $0.72
Therefore, an employer should not hire a man, because a woman would do the same job for 28% less money. This would cause male unemployment until male wages fell to the point of female wages.
Why would an employer pay 28% more than necessary for the same product?
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
buto replied with this 10 years ago, 13 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #731,278
Metæ replied with this 10 years ago, 24 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #731,282
buto replied with this 10 years ago, 31 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #731,288
dw replied with this 10 years ago, 24 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #731,304
@731,276 (Metæ)
We can't be sure what Trump actually meant because these retards are using a platform with a maximum of 140 characters as their main campaign focus
We can't be sure what Trump actually meant because these retards are using a platform with a maximum of 140 characters as their main campaign focus
DasSheeple replied with this 10 years ago, 4 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #731,325
@731,273 (beckyderp !Hi.HILLARY)
I still like you beckarony. Sorry for the late reply and good night, dream something lovely. ❤
I still like you beckarony. Sorry for the late reply and good night, dream something lovely. ❤
Metæ replied with this 10 years ago, 5 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #731,341
@731,304 (dw)
I don't think that's an excuse because Hillary could have linked to a more detailed article on another site. Like this "Trumps equal pay plan totally sucks and he hates women. See why: bit.ly/drumpfsuxlol" with a link to a more detailed analysis.
I don't think that's an excuse because Hillary could have linked to a more detailed article on another site. Like this "Trumps equal pay plan totally sucks and he hates women. See why: bit.ly/drumpfsuxlol" with a link to a more detailed analysis.
(Edited 35 seconds later.)
Killer Lettuce? !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 10 years ago, 45 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #731,343
@731,304 (dw)
It's what a lot of voters use these days, dw. They would be stupid not to use it as a platform.
It's what a lot of voters use these days, dw. They would be stupid not to use it as a platform.
dw replied with this 10 years ago, 2 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #731,346
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 2 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #731,357
@731,276 (Metæ)
That's because any wage gap is caused by total amount of money earned,not by amount per hour. Women work less hours, leave for pregnancy and child raising, and don't go after as many high powered and dangerous jobs.
That's because any wage gap is caused by total amount of money earned,not by amount per hour. Women work less hours, leave for pregnancy and child raising, and don't go after as many high powered and dangerous jobs.