But even if most do comply, from everything we know about inequality after decades of never-ending research, we know that knowing the facts doesn’t lead to action. There is nothing we don’t know about gender, race and social immobility, but policy-makers pick the knowledge that suits them. Women are poorer? This week Damian Green, the work and pensions secretary most responsible for impoverishing them, offered £30m in counselling to stop poor women rowing with their partners as it spoils their children’s employment prospects. Good idea maybe, but no recompense for the £12bn taken mainly from women’s pockets in benefit cuts beginning this week.
We know that women get less money from their employers. We don’t know, because absolutely no one has ever calculated it, whether women have less money after the welfare state kicks in. Thus is Worstall’s Fallacy again, looking at the pre-things we do about a problem not the post-.
Actually, the only person I know of who has even tried to calculate this is me. the answer being that for the median or even mean woman the combination of child benefit and child care credits or whatever they’re called is larger than the gender pay gap.
Good. British employers are notorious for investing too little in training, while our education system has utterly failed on technical skills.
That’s the one that closed down the technical schools in favour of comprehensives, is it?