After reviewing these unsatisfactory explanations for the wage-gap between men and women, Thurow turns to his offered reason. In this section he argues that most individuals become either economically successful or fail to between the ages of 25-35. Short of achieving economic success in this period, Thurow argues that "For those who fail earnings will remain flat for the rest of their lives" (189). Thurow then notes that the economic and business environments offer the most promotion and skills acquisition during these critical years. However, his explanation for the wage-gap is that this is exactly the period when many women must leave the work force or interrupt their careers due to family obligations, "precisely when women are most apt to leave the labor force or become part-time workers to have children" (Thurow 189). Therefore, the final paragraph asserts "male-female earnings differentials are apt to persist for the next 40 years" if individuals do not make changes in family planning patterns and society does not extend the period for promotions and skills acquisitions.
Thurow tries to use the rhetorical device of logic to persuade us that his support is valid, but there are a couple of places where his selection of details and his logic appear flawed. For example, he makes the assertion that between the ages of 25-35 those who are not economically successful "are very unlikely" to be so in future (Thurow 188). Despite such a sweeping claim, however, he gives no statistical point to prove one of the main pieces of his support for the wage-gap. There are many examples of individuals who achieve economic success past the age of 35, and even if this is not true for a majority of them Thurow uses no empirical evidence to support his claim. Further, Thurow claims men are not discriminatory against women with respect to wages because they would be repressing the incomes of their wives an