The opponents of comparable worth rely principally upon economic arguments to discredit the concept. The main charges against comparable worth can be stated succinctly: that the market is not inherently discriminatory; that the asserted wage gap of 40% is grossly inflated; that it would be too expensive to implement; that it would disrupt the U.S. economy by increasing inflation, driving up unemployment, and making U.S. products less competitive on world markets; that it would harm women’s employment by over-pricing their services; that it would hurt blue-collar workers because comparable worth evaluation schemes favor education over manual labor; and, finally, that reading such a standard into current antidiscrimination legislation would penalize employers for wage-setting practices over which they have little control.