Why? Are the economic forces that relate to consumer goods and services subject to different rules of elasticity than the market for labor?

Are you serious? I’m amused that you seem to think they are subject to the same rules. I will switch peanut butter brands if there is a few cents difference in the price. But there is a lot of friction with the job market. You may not be able to easily switch jobs, even if you know you are being underpaid. You may not know you are being underpaid because of your employer’s “privacy” policies. You might know, but still want to stay with the employer because you are used to the work, or you like your co-workers, etc. A lot more goes into the average job-switch calculation than goes into the average peanut butter-switch calculation. So yes, there are different rules of elasticity. Labor doesn’t work with the Econ 101 supply and demand model.

More importantly, it is wrong to discriminate on the basis of gender. Just because someone may have some small degree of choice in accepting a salary does not make it right for a business to make their salary decisions based on gender. The law agrees that this is wrong! Right now, it offers redress if you find out within a few months of the start of the discrimination. But discrimination is discrimination even if you find out much later, and that is why Congress needs to extend the time period.

Please provide evidence for this statement: “Never mind that her company (as most companies do) in some companies it is a firing offense to discuss your pay with another employee?”

Your state “you assume that Ledbetter (or other employees) are ‘happy with their compensation.’ You have no basis for that assumption of fact at all.”

Actually, by accepting the job, there is an implicit assumption of satisfaction, or else they would not have taken the job or would have left.

Finally, you state that we have discovered “that pure ‘capitalism’ doesn’t work so well in the real world, for real people.”

I would respectfully disagree. We are discovering that being the least socialist economic system in the world detrimentally effects the country. We have never had anything close to a pure capitalist system in this country. You should not use a defined macroeconomic term such as “pure capitalism” without knowing what it means.

Efficiency is fine as long as you are not among the “efficientated”. Ah my own skin is so sensitive, it just wouldn’t bear the lash.

When wages are kept down, the wage is spent on the basics of food, shelter, healthcare.

The only way there is a consumer market for goods is when wages are high enough to allow for the excess to be spent for consumer products. Depress wages, depress consumer purchases

Yes, hythloday, check the opinion. It does indeed say that she had to file within 6mos of the beginning of the discrimination. Never mind that her company (as most companiesdo) went to some lengths to keep her from finding out that she was being paid less. Do you know that in some companies it is a firing offense to discuss your pay with another employee?

You also make a helluvan assumption – well, more than one.
One, that company and employee have equal bargaining power. This assumption is almost always false. The employee never has all the information necessary to make a rational decision,therefore the power in the bargaining for pay is inherently unequal.
Two – you assume that Ledbetter (or other employees) are “happy with their compensation.” You have no basis for that assumption of fact at all.

Last comment- we are all discovering, are we not, that pure “capitalism” doesn’t work so well in the real world, for real people. Have you not been paying attention?
Inequality of bargaining power between empoyer and employee is a big reason for the failure of so-called capitalism. Just because we can now see the problems of that ‘ism doesn’t mean we’ve become socialists. But fairness and the market don’t have to be incompatible – it just requires some regulation and enforcement. Enforcement includes the ability of individuals and groups to bring suit against employers for unfair, illegal practices. Laws are only as good as the enforcement of them.

There – dakine01 – I see what you mean – now I’m doin’ it too!

Which of course, does not and cannot exist in an imperfect world due to all the variables that affect economics.

Like the individual humans and the need for SOME folks to be capable of purchasing the product.

If all wages are kept down, who is around to be the consumer?