Not exactly. While there is some truth to that analysis, it completely ignores the much larger effects of marketing and fashion. A Rolex doesn't cost 3 orders of magnitude more than a Chinese knockoff because it delivers 3 orders of magniute as much "quality"; the price is a reflection of fashion rather than functionality. Similarly, a basic Starbucks coffee costs 2-3 times as much as a coffee at the local diner, but certainly doesn't deliver 2-3 times the "quality". And don't get me started on the absurd amounts of money people are willing to pay to scam artists and frauds (eg. Sylvia Brown, "psychic", ~$700 per hour) who deliver absolutely nothing other than vague promises.

tl;dr: people will buy expensive shit for reasons that have nothing to do with quality.

As it happens, I was just wondering to myself this morning how much of our present right-wing enthusiasm for our current economic system is rooted in capitalist democracy being far, far, far superior to pre-COBOL Stalinism. The true test arrives when some Asian economic model arises, one very different from our own historical model, and kicks us in the pants.

It's sad, really, that "market-based" turned into such a horrible cliche. Most of the damage was caused by so many people putting it in front of "solution" (market-based solution) when what they really meant was market-based approach.

Many don't even realize that these two phrases are different, because they've defined "market-based approach" as being the solution, as it was and ever shall be, dating all the way back to pre-COBOL Stalinism.

It is, in fact, possible to design markets—markets are a human construction—that create more problems than they solve.

Ideology is when you play epsilon-delta with an infinite sleeve of mulligans. If this market fails, that just means we need to change something and try again. Even market failures are characterized as stepping stones to progress.

Personally, I'm not willing to drink mulligan Kool-Aid. I love markets that work. I hate markets that don't. It sure would be nice at the outset if it was more obvious which was which, without greater society picking up the tab for all the hooks and shanks.

What's a hipster, and why is it a bad thing?

Bear in mind that my personal observation is that pretty much any definition of 'hipster' would automatically include anybody that uses the term in a derogatory way.

It took me several years and a lot of conscious thought to keep eye contact with people while talking to them. Even now that's the case.

It's got fuck all to do with gender; clearly she was discriminating against the socially inept by calling out their problem.

Fuck you and your associating of inarticulate incoherence with Aspergers Syndrome.

Here's a thought for you: People with Aspergers are highly articulate online as they don't need to deal with the complex and difficult non-verbal conversational cues that cause them issues in face to face conversations.

Do you earn more than your female colleagues?

Irrespective of whether you feel teachers are paid enough or not, "teachers get low pay" is a recognised phenomenon and anybody entering the profession should know in advance that they wont be getting rich from it.

In other words, low pay for teachers is not a gender issue, irrespective of whether it's a profession dominated by one gender, as people deciding to become teachers are consciously choosing to enter a low paid job.

They could choose instead to embark on a career that has above average salaries. It's not mens' fault that female teachers don't make that choice.

And yet the feminist response to CEO pay is to demand quotas for women in the boardroom.

Which means that as a man my already miniscule chance of ever getting a C level position would get reduced further as if I ever do get to the level of experience, capability and contacts needed for such a role, I may still miss out purely because of my gender.

You are highlighting 'female' professions; how does your assessment change when we throw in some 'male' professions such as street cleaning, mining and military service?

Surely you meant "When men stop putting women down"?

The fact that his salary lost parity due to time out of the workforce is the reason some of us don't give any credibility to the alleged gender issues to which you refer.

It should be perfectly normal for a woman to make the same as a man, for doing the same job, working the same hours, making the same contribution, having brought the same level of experience to the role.

In fact, it is.

I refute the suggestion that any pillow fight is inexplicable.

There are people. Pillows are present. Pillow fights are a logical outcome.
The alternative is that there are pillows. People are present. Pillow fights are almost obligatory.

Sufficiently advanced maths is hard for anybody. It's a great leveller: Everybody eventually bumps into a maths problem that they find hard.

Make her watch Clerks and learn a far superior way to get her nails done.

I find that curious. My manager couldn't do my job - he's happy to admit it, his background doesn't give him the skills or experience for it, he's shown no desire to learn it and he just can't do it.

What he can do, exceedingly well, is his job. I really like that, I consider it a great attribute, it means I can learn new and interesting skills from him and it means I can delegate shit I can't be arsed with to him too.

I'm much happier than if he could only do my job.

Explain the pay discrepancy between unmarried women with no children, and unmarried men with no children of the same age?

Note : the women earn more. Are you telling us they're more aggressive, or are you just full of shit?

Hang on. Someone working pseudo-part time (whatever the fuck that means) remotely is paid less than someone working fulltime in the office, and you're blaming that on gender?

Just fuck off with your ill informed misinformation, bigoted perspective, flawed belief that men get paid more for equal work and pretence getting to stay at home with the children is a "battle" for women.

It's bigoted cunts like you that perpetuate the current disparities in employment. I'd fucking love to be working part time on a partial wage, supported by someone working my current hours earning my current wage.

Trust me, I know several women that would have to work more for less pay to match. But that's fine, apparently it's because expectations are less on them. I don't give a flying fuck, I expect them to deliver more value than me to reflect their higher pay.