WHERE DID ROMNEY SCREW UP?

Women are paid significantly less than men are in nearly every occupation. Because pay equity affects women and their families in all walks of life, it is not surprising that many women consider the issue important. Many business leaders also believe that pay equity is “good business,” because it improves morale and productivity. Yet progress in closing the gap between men’s and women’s pay has been slow and, in recent years, has stagnated.

For more than 130 years, the American Association of University Women (AAUW) has advocated for gender equity in education and the workplace. During this time, women have gone from a small minority on college campuses to a majority of the student body. Today, women make up half the workforce, but they continue to earn less than men do throughout their careers.

Why does this gender pay gap persist? This question is a focal point of AAUW’s research and advocacy work. Graduating to a Pay Gap finds that women working full time already earn less than their male counterparts do just one year after college graduation. Taking a closer look at the data, we find that women’s choices—college major, occupation, hours at work—do account for part of the pay gap. But about one-third of the gap remains unexplained, suggesting that bias and discrimination are still
problems in the workplace.

I don't believe that blacks have issues separate from the rest of the country, so when I see them voting to that drastic a degree - over 90 percent - it's wrong to me.

so when I see them voting to that drastic a degree - over 90 percent - it's wrong to me.

Why does this gender pay gap persist?

Lash wrote:

I don't believe that blacks have issues separate from the rest of the country, so when I see them voting to that drastic a degree - over 90 percent - it's wrong to me.

What about it is wrong though, and how does that link to "in the pocket"?

But I think, going forward, maybe the person he can learn from now is Franklin Roosevelt. If we assume the recession is not simply a problem that’s slowly recovering but that there’s a deeper problem with the economy, then Obama should possibly bring some CEO into the government in a senior-level position the way Roosevelt did. He needed to mobilize for the war, so he brought in the head of Sears Roebuck and the head of Chrysler, in addition to those two Republicans in his Cabinet. He was able to create the greatest business-government partnership probably in the history of our country, as business guys came through building ships, tanks, weapons and planes that were used by our allies in all corners of the world.

It’s hard for some of today’s business leaders to go through the whole process of what they have to reveal in order to come into the government. Yet just as it was true for the CEOs in Roosevelt’s time—who felt like they wanted to give back to their country, which had given so much to them—I think for some top business leaders, the chance to really help get our country mobilized for the future in a better way would be a great honor and a great challenge.

Do you think he should extend the invitation to Mitt Romney in some form?

You know, I had thought he would. But I think it just depends now on what Romney takes away from the election, and if he takes away what he said the other day—that he simply lost because Obama had given gifts to various segments of the population—that kind of thinking would make it hard. I had originally thought that it would be a good idea. He could come in and deal with a lot of the export-import issues. But I think it’s now a challenge for Romney himself to figure out what went wrong and if he really has the power within him to see that perhaps part of it had to do with the Republican primary system. It will take him acknowledging what happened, before he can take the next step of contributing going forward.

President Barack Obama is welcoming Mitt Romney to the White House on Thursday for a private lunch, their first meeting since the election. But welcome him onto his Cabinet?

"No," White House press secretary Jay Carney said Wednesday.

Still, "it will be a substantial lunch, if not on the plate, then in the discussion," Carney said.