[josho]

That's fair. Then don't read the search result from the economist. Read the result from the Census, or the Forbes article, or HuffPo if you don't like their stance.

My point is simply that your question is valid, but has been asked and answered a thousand times before. Nothing in your question is specific to this audience that we'd have a twist on the answer that isn't represented in any of the thousand existing answers.

I'm curious, since you didn't get much discussion on your question here, did you take a minute to answer your question elsewhere?

[pizzafeelsright]

I am almost entirely surrounded by either professional people who do not discuss their income or people who share my position. The few discussions I have with people is they tend to agree that people are not conscripted or enslaved so they end up agreeing that they pay gap is caused by the acceptance of an offered compensation.

I am not discussing whether this is fair, equitable, or even kind. I just do not care for the misrepresentation of the situation.

I could argue I am both overpaid or underpaid based upon my perspective. Having been on the other side of the negotiations with friends and strangers the situation is the same. They want as much value as they can extract. I too want as much value as I can extract - within agreement. Now that I am back to being an employee I have requested more compensation. They were open and asked why: apart from desire, I have not provided additional value (yet) and thus am not entitled nor deserving.