A simple economic premise makes the whole discussion moot. If women earned only 77% of what men earn for DOING THE EXACT SAME WORK then why wouldn’t greedy capitalists simply fire all the men and replace them with women, thus increasing profits by 23%?
Solving the “wage gap”, like solving poverty, is one of those conundrums that is just not amenable to legislation, or jawboning, or even any kind of rational argument.
First of all, there is a problem with definitions. Why must the contributions be measured only in terms of dollars? And what defines “equal work” for a given job position? Some people just bring more to any given job than others, and the very definition of ANY job changes on sometimes a day to day basis.
No position of employment exists at all except for the fact that having an employee enables the proprietor to more efficiently achieve objectives, in terms of goods or services, in dealing with the public, be it in civil affairs, or some kind of commerce. To justify any wage, the employee must be producing more than the amount of value added by presence in and fulfilling the demands of the position. Only in this excess margin of productivity over wages and benefits paid, does there exist any possibility of profit to the employer (the only reason the job exists in the first place), and any future wage increases for the employee.
Now, some people have never worked a day in their lives, simply because the satisfaction they get from carrying out the assigned duties by their employer is a source of great satisfaction, and they even derive pleasure from this satisfaction, to the point they are so surprised that they may exclaim, “I get paid for this too?”
Sadly, there are too few people who find this situation in their own lives, but of those who lack such inspiration, they continue to plug along each day, a workhorse striving mightily, because of perceived obligations. Because these obligations weigh heavily, they respond by working that much harder, and thus provide the margin of productivity that justifies their wages and benefits.
Then there are the marginal workers, starting at a minimum wage, lacking skills and many times, motivation, who may resent the very demands put upon them, and in truth, cannot justify their presence in terms of productivity at that level. It is only from the excess productivity that the enthusiasts and the workhorses provide, that there is any funding left to cover the salary and start-up costs of turning these newbies into productive workers. If they never “catch fire” and become self-starters, they are soon to find themselves “disemployed”, and probably unemployable until an attitude shift takes place.
And that, dear people, is why raising the minimum wage above $0.00 does not work, either in the short or longer term.
None of this is new or original. It was discovered when people were living in tribes and clans, and the wisdom has been passed down through the ages. Sure, there have been “egalitarian” schemes proposed (usually by and for the benefit of the very marginal workers), but one by one, every one of these schemes has failed. There shall never be “the right person” to make these “new deals” work.