One more reason to hate Dave

Dave is reported as saying that "Action to reduce the pay gap between men and women is a 'vital part' of this family agenda" in today's FT.

Dave, you complete idiot, a few facts of life:
1. The last thing businesses need is more 'action' i.e. regulation and inspection.
2. This equal pay stuff is more of less unenforceable.
3. The main driver for lower pay for women is because they take a few years off to have children. Women who never have children earn roughly the same as men.
4. This could be sorted out very easily by increasing child benefit (non-contributory, non-taxable, non-means tested) to £30 or £40 per child per week (and scrapping all the tax credit nonsense), payable directly to the mother* which would make a mother's net disposable income much the same as a man's.
5. Finally, and this is the killer logic that the Oxford-educated twat overlooks, if you forcibly increase women's pay, you'd have to drive men's down. So my wife would win and I would lose. But as we basically share all income and expenses, it'd make bugger all difference to us (as a married couple). The people who would benefit most would be working unmarried mothers. So actually this equal-pay doolally discourages marriage/cohabitation**. And I thought the Tories were 'pro-marriage'? At least they should be.

Dave, I am starting to really despise you for the vacuous knob that you are!

*Which all ties in neatly with the Citizen's Income approach to welfare reform.

** An even more hard-hearted argument is that if women earn a lot less than men, they are less likely to want to be single mothers, but a married woman is more likely to have children, because the fall in household income is not so big. But let's not go there.