The wage gap is the gap between a male and female doing the same job and the male earning more money typically between 70 and 80 cents on the dollar. Statistically, minority women are even paid less than this. Indiana has a 76% earnings ratio compared to the national average of 80%. This pay gap has a trickle down effect, women are more likely to pay more in student loan interest over the life of the loans, and take longer to pay the loans off, this is due to lower paying careers. The rose-colored glass ceiling can be interpreted as an invisible barrier "glass ceiling" that keeps women from rising up through the ranks of an organization. In practice, nothing is disallowing women to rise through the ranks and reach positions of power, but women are able to see that the higher pay, benefits, bonuses, promotions is something they should have. The fact is though they will never have the same pay, benefits, bonuses, etc.. as their male peers. These women are hitting the glass ceiling and are being stopped from reaching their full potential. The marital asymmetry hypothesis attempts to explain the existence of wage gaps for the following reasons. Women are still expected to be homemakers, taking care of the household; while the husband can relax playing video games, reading or working more hours for more pay. Women are less productive during motherhood because they place their family before their career. Women tend to limit their job choices by seeking a job close to home with flexible hours. Men look at the bottom line and how to increase profits, where women, in general, will emphasize personal fulfillment when choosing their field of study.   Meritocracy suggests that people in government and holding positions of power are given to the most talented and hardworking people in our society. Social inequality can be seen in many aspects of meritocracy society. Standardized testing, students that excel in the standardized tests are often given more opportunities to reach a higher potential. My daughter placed very high, so she in 3rd grade started attending an accelerated learning program, that alone gave her more skills than her peers. (I am proud of her, don't get me wrong!) This can even come down to the local mom and pop store, who would like to hire from their community, but with meritocracy, they would be expected to hire someone of higher ability. This next part I kind of struggled with this week. My opinion that it is brought about by our own circumstances. We choose to hire or surround ourselves with the elite. We keep the elite in power, we kowtow to the elite. If the elite are only allowing the best of the best to join them, then this starts to push others down the ladder, which leads to poverty. We could also theorize that since the Davis-Moore Thesis suggests that rewards are allocated for socially important and difficult jobs. Then only a select few will obtain these jobs, leave the majority of people not receiving any rewards. Though I agree we want the most talented people in a position but sometimes I have to question, do we want someone who can run my business and make me very profitable, but is rude, arrogant, and obnoxious or do I want someone that can make money just not as much for my company, but this person is compassionate, hardworking, and humble. Which do you choose? I would be worried that the first person is doing it all for the wrong reasons, and gives a higher chance of questionable actions. This all leads back to the poorer, less educated, becoming poorer and increasing the number of people living in poverty.