The most Pressing Economics Research All Year
If you want to see how estranged and completely out of touch our elites are, look no further than the 2023 Nobel Prize in Economics recipient:
Nobel economics prize goes to Harvard’s Claudia Goldin for research on the workplace gender gap
STOCKHOLM (AP) — Claudia Goldin, a Harvard University professor, was awarded the Nobel economics prize on Monday for research that helps explain why women around the world are less likely than men to work and to earn less money when they do.
Fittingly, the announcement marked a small step toward closing a gender gap among Nobel laureates in economics: Out of 93 economics winners, Goldin is just the third woman to be awarded the prize and the first woman to be the sole winner in any year.
Her award follows Nobel honors this year in medicine, physics, chemistry, literature and peace that were announced last week
Only about half the world’s women have paid jobs, in contrast to 80% of men. Economists regard the gap as a wasted opportunity: Jobs have often failed to go to the most qualified people because women either weren’t competing for work or weren’t being properly considered.
In addition, a persistent pay gap — women in advanced economies earn, on average, about 13% less than men — discourages women from pursuing jobs or continuing their education to qualify for more advanced job opportunities.
Did you read that? Only half of the world’s women have paid jobs! Can you believe it? We’ve only convinced half of the world’s women to be wage slaves for corporations. Such a missed opportunity to snatch them all away from their families in pursuit of more gender-inclusive globalized economic zones and higher GDP, darn it.
And—gasp—what did she find out with this decades of research?
Goldin, 77, explored the reasons behind such disparities. Often, she found, they resulted from decisions that women made about their prospects in the job market and about their families’ personal circumstances. Some women underestimated their employment opportunities. Others felt overwhelmed by responsibilities at home.
“And we realize that these differences, although some are found within the labor market, are really reflections of what happens within individuals’ homes, and they’re an interaction between what happens in the home and what happens in the labor market.”
So… what we have known since the beginning? Women earn less because they choose to stay home and raise kids instead, as they are designed to do?
Wow. Shocking. Definitely worth a Nobel Prize. It’s not like everyone knew this three decades ago or anything.
This has everything you would expect from the Woke Prize: Woman recipient, an Ivory Tower leftist topic, research of absolutely no benefit to anyone in any capacity whatsoever, with results that we already knew decades ago.
Certain things in clown world you really just cannot make up. This is one of them.
The press release by the Nobel Foundation is even more hilarious:
The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences has decided to award the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel 2023 to
Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA
This year’s Laureate in the Economic Sciences, Claudia Goldin, provided the first comprehensive account of women’s earnings and labour market participation through the centuries. Her research reveals the causes of change, as well as the main sources of the remaining gender gap.
Women are vastly underrepresented in the global labour market and, when they work, they earn less than men. Claudia Goldin has trawled the archives and collected over 200 years of data from the US, allowing her to demonstrate how and why gender differences in earnings and employment rates have changed over time.
And hidden toward the end is this gem:
Historically, much of the gender gap in earnings could be explained by differences in education and occupational choices. However, Goldin has shown that the bulk of this earnings difference is now between men and women in the same occupation, and that it largely arises with the birth of the first child.
“Birth of the first child”.
“Historically, used to be because of occupational choices”.
Wow. Astonishing. Who could have ever figured that out? So glad we have an economist to let us know, three decades later after everyone has already argued this point to death.
It’s stuff like this that just shows you how old, outdated, and completely out of touch these people are. Out of everything in economic research for the entire year, this is the highlight? This is Nobel Prize worthy? This, information we all knew already?
The 2023 Economics Nobel Prize went to research that is irredeemably obvious to anyone with a brain, is completely purposeless, and will serve to only further eviscerate the family past what it already has been by the market/GDP worshippers? Yep, this sure sounds like economics in 2023.
You all know I have a soft spot for econ. I have a graduate education in it, after all. I still love my field, but it is sad how far it has fallen, even since I escaped.
Nonetheless, it is lucky for us they are showing everyone how archaic they are. The market-god cultists are becoming more irrelevant as every day passes by.
Stop trusting or listening to them. We are not an economic zone. GDP is not the highest thing of importance. And no, we should not be striving to force more women out of families and into wage slave status. These are all lies of modernity; a corruption of the true purpose of a nation toward one focused around wealth and greed. A desire for the material to triumph over the spiritual. Resist it.
It is sad for me to say, but mainstream economics research is just as worthless as the Nobel Prize itself, at this point.
No wonder they paired up for this year’s cameo.
If you enjoyed this article, bookmark the website and check back often for new content. New articles most weekdays.
You can also keep up with my writing by joining my monthly newsletter.
Help fight the censorship – Share this article!