IMF loses the plot

What the hell is the IMF doing undertaking a study on women in the workforce?

But here’s is the triumphal press release:

LAGARDE: WOMEN CAN HELP GROW THE WORLD ECONOMY

So there you are, ladies.  Our role is to help grow the world economy.

Of course, if you adopt a holistic wellbeing framework, it is not at all clear that substituting home based production for paid employment does anything.  In fact, it could reduce wellbeing in many instances.

And isn’t there an assumption in Christine’s gushy assertion that women who are currently not in the paid workforce are not contributing.  Just hanging out watching Ellen and the like, all day long.

And wouldn’t you know it – labour market regulation is part of the way of forcing more women into work.  Really?

Here’s the IMF blurb (isn’t the IMF about maintaining global financial stability?):

“Hot off the press: a new study out today from our economists pointing to the striking economic benefits that could come from increased female participation in the work force.

IMF Chief Christine Lagarde, calling attention to the findings of the paper, “Women, Work, and the Economy,” made the case for policymakers to shift into high gear and give women equal opportunities to participate in the work force.

“Our latest study shows that despite some improvements, progress toward leveling the playing field for women has stalled,” said Lagarde. “Raising women’s participation in labor markets would benefit all in a number of ways.” For example, she noted, if the number of female workers was raised to the same level as that of men in the United Arab Emirates, GDP would expand by 12 percent, in Japan by 9 percent, and in the United States by 5 percent.  (This sort of comparative static analysis is complete tosh, by the way.)

The paper points to a variety of obstacles to participation.

The number of women in the workforce remains far below that of men the world over—only about half of women of working age are employed. Women account for most unpaid work, and when they are paid, they are overrepresented in the informal sector and among the poor, and they continue to be paid less than men for the same jobs,” Lagarde said.

Lagarde urged policymakers around the world to take action and implement policies that tear down obstacles for women, laying out some key recommendations from the paper:

Government tax and spending policies as well as labor market regulation can be reformed to help boost female employment,” Lagarde said. “For example, taxing individual rather than family income—which in many economies imposes a higher marginal tax on the second earner in households—would encourage women to seek employment.”

Linking social benefits to participation in the workforce, training, or active labor market programs can also help increase female employment, she said, as would the availability of good and affordable childcare and greater opportunities for paternity and maternity leave.

For more recommendations and to read the whole analysis, check out the study.

The IMF study was launched on the eve of Lagarde’s appearance on a panel in New York with Bill Clinton, Sheryl Sandberg, and Mo Ibrahim, as part of the Clinton Global Initiative. (What is this?  Sounds sinister.  Isn’t like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation?)

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

54 Responses to IMF loses the plot

  1. Badjack

    Women who sit on their acreage at home and watch Ellen are not contributing???
    Try telling that to a generation of women who chose to raise their children themselves instead of handing that responsibility to some teenager who is being ripped off by some greedy child care owner (think of Fast Eddy G)
    I think those women have contributed as much if not more to society than those who chose to work.
    Why do these Legardes of the world feel the need to denigrate their fellow sisters because they choose a different lifestyle.

  2. Tinta

    For example, she noted, if the number of female workers was raised to the same level as that of men in the United Arab Emirates, GDP would expand by 12 percent,

    Whew, so it’s the United Arab Emirates she’s talking to, what a relief. Now I am sure His Royal Presidential Highness Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahyan will be most appreciative of Ms Legarde’s advice and exhortations.

  3. Jazza

    Another outburst from the blinkered sector that values a vagina way above experience, education or ability?
    Just what I need–and i ahve my own vagina as well as education experience and ability ‘Why doesn’t someone waste their time examining how it sucks to grow old–that I would find interesting–and bugger off with the same old meme that “there aren’t enough women in the workforce or in higher paid positions
    Maybe it’s news to them that a woman is meant to be a mother,according to biology and some women enjoy it,even to the delaying of any “climb up the opportunity ladder”
    God now I’m sounding like that idiot Mark Latham–SHUDDER!-off to washout my n mouth with Solvol!!!

  4. Tinta

    Lagarde is twice divorced and has two sons, Pierre-Henri Lagarde (born 1986) and Thomas Lagarde (born 1988).[19] Since 2006, her partner has been the entrepreneur Xavier Giocanti from Marseille. She is a vegetarian and very rarely drinks alcohol.[8][20][21][22] Her hobbies include regular trips to the gym, cycling and swimming.

    Gee obviously someone else raised her sons because she’s obviously unaware probably half the world’s mother would prefer to raise their own children. Hence at any given time half the world’s women might be in the maternity ward or does Christine actually believe they should just squat by the desk and do their partum and post-partum squatting by the desk and just re-schedule meetings and lunch.

  5. Ellen of Tasmania

    What has any of that got to do with the IMF anyway? Don’t they have enough problems to keep them busy? I reckon we’d be better off with more women at home and less (much less) IMF.

  6. Tinta

    I reckon we’d be better off with more women at home and less (much less) IMF.

    Hear! Hear! Ellen

  7. H B Bear

    Largarde? She’s the one who isn’t a rapist right?

    That Bill Clinton knew a bit about keeping women in their place too. Hallways mainly.

  8. one old bruce

    The more women getting regular wages, the more clothes and shoes sold. My mother used to have a small cupboard for her clothes and shoes in the 50’s. When my daughter moved back in for a year, I did not realise she would need a room just for her wardrobes, not counting all the stuff she just threw out without even wearing (we took it to Vinnies). Progress? I should be thankful women don’t wear hats anymore, where would we put them?

  9. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.

    The number of women in the workforce remains far below that of men the world over—only about half of women of working age are employed.

    Because babies, babies, babies, babies, we love ’em. This is a factor. Undeniable.
    Not doing anything when we are looking after them though. Not at all. Of course not.

    Many women want to take paid employment. Good on them.
    Only when women are legally restricted from taking employment is that a problem.
    Many don’t want to take paid employment. Good on them too.
    Only when women are forced out into employment when they don’t want it is that a problem.

  10. Bons

    Forgive her Lord for she is a French commie. I actually know her but there is nothing to like – classic graduate of the l’Ecole Administrative. Literate, bureaucratic, dumb.

  11. Token

    So more women working us good for the economy. Which consultancy cashed in providing that epoch making insight?

  12. Toiling Mass

    Wow! Tony Abbott is driving people nuts all over the planet.

  13. Boy on a bike

    They’ve obviously run out of things to do, so they’re desperately trying to create some problems which they will then be asked to solve.

    Which will require a bigger budget. And more staff.

    Pity Abbott can’t fire these pricks too.

  14. Aliice

    Gee Omigosh!!

    Thats really astonishing news.

    How much did they pay for this study?

    No doubt about it. You suddenly learn something new. That women can help out when here was me thinking thats what women had been doing since time immemorial….and well before that.

  15. So increasing the numbers of people in the workforce makes the economy grow.

    So let’s get children involved as well. After all, the more the merrier. The little tykes are just sitting round playing with Lego right now.

    “Hot off the press: a new study out today from our economists pointing to the striking economic benefits that could come from increased child participation in the work force.

    IMF Chief Christine Lagarde, calling attention to the findings of the paper, “Children, Work, and the Economy,” made the case for policymakers to shift into high gear and give children equal opportunities to participate in the work force.

    “Our latest study shows that despite some improvements, progress toward leveling the playing field for children has stalled,” said Lagarde. “Raising child participation in labor markets would benefit all in a number of ways.” For example, she noted, if the number of child workers was raised to the same level as that of men in the United Arab Emirates, GDP would expand by 12 percent, in Japan by 9 percent, and in the United States by 5 percent.

    The paper points to a variety of obstacles to participation.

    The number of children in the workforce remains far below that of adults the world over—only about half of children are employed. Children account for most unpaid work, and when they are paid, they are overrepresented in the informal sector and among the poor, and they continue to be paid less than adults for the same jobs,” Lagarde said.

    Lagarde urged policymakers around the world to take action and implement policies that tear down obstacles for children, laying out some key recommendations from the paper:

    Government tax and spending policies as well as labor market regulation can be reformed to help boost child employment,” Lagarde said. “For example, taxing individual rather than family income—which in many economies imposes a higher marginal tax on the second earner in households—would encourage children to seek employment.”

    Linking social benefits to participation in the workforce, training, or active labor market programs can also help increase child employment, she said, as would the availability of good and affordable childcare and greater opportunities for paternity and maternity leave.

  16. Aliice

    Badjack

    Why do these Legardes of the world feel the need to denigrate their fellow sisters because they choose a different lifestyle.

    Have some pity. Maybe her two husbands dumped the workaholic.

  17. 3d1k

    Mmmmm. And now we have Gillard in NY doing the revisionism show and expounding on her commitment to women’s issues including all business and governments having 50% female workforce…I wonder if Lagarde has just the job for a failed female PM?

  18. Cynic

    So if all of the currently unpaid work becomes paid work, the measured economy doubles and if it’s measured they can tax it. It’s a tax grab.

  19. Aliice

    Now I for one am a little tired of these workaholic women suggesting all businesses and governments should have 50% women in the workforce.
    You know some of these female tryhards really make my blood boil. I know women working full time who would love to work part time to spend more time with their kids but cant get part time work from their companies and are unwilling to give up their jobs completely. I know quite a number of women who would love to job share in order to spend more time with their children.

    Oh what an old fashioned idea – spending more time with your children, something the childless one and the divorced one forgot all about.

    They are both outliers and really have no place pontificating on women’s issues at all IMO.

    I could be really bitchy at this point and suggest perhaps Julia preferred to spend time with other peoples husbands than children per se (wicked Aliice just plain wicked). But really I just dont know whether econorobot boffins with the wacko models write this stuff and these bland women just get handed what to read and recite it without thinking?

  20. dan

    Philippa – well done

    The funny thing is…my wife wants to stay at home with the kids (for the first few years) and if the law was changed to tax HOUSEHOLD incomes that would help her achieve her goals. Funnily enough the IMF hasn’t taken my personal circumstances into account

  21. Mick Gold Coast QLD

    She looks like a bloke, all leathery and aged.

    Has she ever considered writing a paper “Women Who Whinge” I wonder?

  22. Paul

    This assumes the IMF ever had a plot to lose.

  23. flathead

    The reality is that work is for people who can’t fish……………..and……….women are no good at fishing………………………..so dare I say it; the Frenchy is right, get to work you lazy bitches because I’m gone fishing/a joke.

  24. Nato

    It sounds like an old economics joke punchline.

    …closed the door, came back to the desk and whispered “What do you want them to be?”

  25. “Hot off the press: a new study out today from our economists pointing to the striking economic benefits that could come from increased female participation in the work force.

    How do you increase economic benefits without increasing the workforce? Or are they implying women are more productive than men?

  26. Christine Lagarde pays no tax on her salary.

    That’s right. NO tax.

  27. So if all of the currently unpaid work becomes paid work, the measured economy doubles and if it’s measured they can tax it. It’s a tax grab.

    What if I earn an income for both me and my wife, split it 50/50 then pay income tax on each? Sounds good, but if not, why not??

  28. and if the law was changed to tax HOUSEHOLD incomes that would help her achieve her goals.

    Aah, income splitting. Now that’s something that would reward actual working families: $100k coming in, for example, becomes four lots of $25k when split between the parents and two kids, shifting that money down a couple of tax brackets and giving the family a lot more in hand. But watch the Lefty howler monkeys howl when it’s limited to cohabiting married couples and their offspring.

    “Why yes, we are making a cultural and economic stand on behalf of traditional families. Suck it up, sweethearts; it’s the way things are going to be from now on.”

    And then you will see the howlers REALLY explode in rage when they realise that attacking mum, dad and the kids also means attacking Muslim immigrants.

  29. wreckage

    So if you don’t get paid your contribution to society is zero. Why are we wasting time educating our children past literacy when they could be working? Phillipa’s right. There’s no actual reason to limit this to women, none at all. Everyone who’s in the education system is not being paid, and could be working.

  30. wreckage

    “Why yes, we are making a cultural and economic stand on behalf of traditional families. Suck it up, sweethearts; it’s the way things are going to be from now on.”

    But if we do that, populations and economies might stabilise. Nobody in their right mind would want that!

  31. HK_Brother

    Has anyone notice this Feminist ideology never asks what women want?

    It presumes women want what Feminists want. In fact, they even act like they speak for ALL women!

    Women need to ask themselves: “Did I vote for you to represent me? If not, who the hell gave you the right to speak for me? I’m not a child, I can speak for myself!”

    However, they are disappointed to find women of the real world want something else!

    But that’s not good enough, (as women aren’t following the Feminist Utopian Ideology); so they keep pushing out nonsensical crap like this. ie: Businesses should shove more women into various high management positions because its good for the economy. (This is the same bullshit tone used by the taxpayer funded Workplace Gender Equality Agency! Except its to justify adding compliance burden to businesses over 100 employees for collecting “gender data” of workers. Its good for investors they say!)

    So the IMF, WGEA, etc are saying that a woman’s vagina is most important in the workplace. Hike your skirts up ladies, its a gender workplace pass! It trumps experience, skill, competence, etc.

    …And yet, the 40% gender quota of the ALP has achieved what exactly? Mediocrity? Incompetence? Delusional Feminist Cult Demonstrations? (See Women for Gillard example.)

    You know what pisses me off the most? Julia Gillard still talking like she’s a victim! ie: Privileged white woman is now set for life on the taxpayer’s dime. Has $2 million dollar beach-side home with a spa to fit 12 people. Has a book deal where she will “tell all”. (More like revise history to make herself look good!). Did you see her in New York with her book deal? She leaves in a high priced car, driven by someone else as if she’s royalty!

    And what of others like Penny Wong? Miss “Triple Whammy” of political correctness! Female-Asian-Homosexual. (Gender-Race-Sexuality)…Completely incompetent! As Financial Minister, Wong was always WRONG!

    Seriously, as a Chinese-Australian myself, I expect her to be at least competent in mathematics and financial estimation for future projection and forecasting. Instead, she’s completely f**king clueless and tries to make up for it by spinning BS!

    I’m sick of this Feminist BS. Its now a bunch of Left leaning progressive white women in privileged positions; “old goats” who long the return of the Radical 1960s/70s and are desperately reviving it…They hold positions of privilege and power, while they whine like they are victims.

    Equality? My arse! Its about doctored studies to produce a result to support a narrative they’ve created! This is typical behaviour from the Left. Which itself is based on a faux ideology of hate, penis envy, privilege, victimhood, outright lies, selective evidence, etc. These people use emotional manipulation to get their way. Notice how they NEVER talk about getting more women into positions like garbage collection? Its simple, because Feminists see it as beneath them! Only high status positions are promoted as being fit for women!

    The only good news about Feminists is that they rarely have children. So statistically, they are an unsustainable population of losers who make regular women look bad. Through simple mathematical extrapolation, one can figure out Feminists will eventually die out. Nature is harsh, in its own wonderful way!

    I realise what Gillard will write in her book…

    Chapter 1: I’m a victim.
    Chapter 2: Its because I have a vagina.
    Chapter 3: All my problems are because I have a vagina.
    Chapter 4: Its not my competence, its my vagina! Its a curse!
    Chapter 5: I am a victim because I’m a woman. (Part I)
    Chapter 6: I am a victim because I’m a woman. (Part II)



    Chapter 99: I am a victim because I’m a woman. (Part XCIV)
    Chapter 100: I’m a successful Prime Minister because I pass Legislation no one wants.
    Chapter 101: I like to spend taxpayer’s money on initiatives that achieve nothing tangible in return.
    Chapter 102: I like to take taxpayer’s money upon retirement.
    Chapter 103: It’s Kevin Rudd’s fault.
    Chapter 104: It’s Tony Abbott’s fault. (Part I)



    Chapter 199: It’s Tony Abbott’s fault. (Part CXCV)
    Epilogue I: Vagina = Victim.
    Epilogue II: All women are victims.
    Epilogue III: I’m a Victim! And I love it!
    Epilogue IV: Profit by being a Victim!

  32. Mooka

    The biggest threat to advanced economies is population
    decrease. When women are out working they don’t have
    enough babies to maintain the population. Western countries are
    hiding the problem by importing people from the third world, while
    countries like Japan are stagnating.
    In Australia much of the increase in household income brought
    about by having the wives out working, is swallowed up by the increase
    in house prices caused by the increase in the size of the debt that can
    be serviced by two incomes.

  33. Popular Front

    Yet another Christine spouting nonsense. Is ‘Christine’ the new euphemism for ‘dumbass’?

  34. Ellen of Tasmania

    “Hot off the press: a new study out today from our economists pointing to the striking economic benefits that could come from increased female participation in the work force.”

    If more women (and, as Philippa so cleverly points out, children) in the workforce gives “striking economic benefits”, then I don’t think we’re measuring economic benefits properly.

    I know Keating got into trouble for saying it, but I still think we’re going backwards if fewer families can survive comfortably on a single wage.

  35. Michaelc58

    Under the communists, all citizens had a right to (read that ‘were expected to’) work, men and women, no difference. Child rearing (and indoctrination) was taken care of by the state. Legarde is just too scary.

  36. Tinta

    I should be thankful women don’t wear hats anymore, where would we put them?

    I wore hats from when I was 19 years old, I have them in boxes in the garage, and on hat stands, they aren’t that hard to store and you don’t need that many. At peak-hat I had 40 but have scaled back considerably since my life changed dramatically some 20 odd years ago, (and odd it’s been and continues to be).

  37. .

    Mooka #1014238, posted on September 26, 2013 at 5:19 am
    The biggest threat to advanced economies is population
    decrease. When women are out working they don’t have
    enough babies to maintain the population. Western countries are
    hiding the problem by importing people from the third world, while
    countries like Japan are stagnating.
    In Australia much of the increase in household income brought
    about by having the wives out working, is swallowed up by the increase
    in house prices caused by the increase in the size of the debt that can
    be serviced by two incomes.

    Mooka

    45% of a new home price is tax. Taxation is wreaking havoc on the economy and society.

  38. You’re on fire, HK Brother. You go, guy!! Is that misogynist?

  39. .

    Brilliant stuff, my HK Brother.

    And what of others like Penny Wong? Miss “Triple Whammy” of political correctness! Female-Asian-Homosexual. (Gender-Race-Sexuality)…Completely incompetent! As Financial Minister, Wong was always WRONG!

    Seriously, as a Chinese-Australian myself, I expect her to be at least competent in mathematics and financial estimation for future projection and forecasting. Instead, she’s completely f**king clueless and tries to make up for it by spinning BS!

    She’s a white-boned devil!

  40. Tapdog

    Conspiracy theories and those who hold to them, are generally not well regarded by thinking people. But dammit, this stuff is right in line with Agenda 21 and Club of Rome orthodoxy.

    There. I said it. :shrugs:

  41. Since feminism was captured by the left, it is no more than a branch office of Marxism.

  42. Tinta

    Since feminism was captured by the left, it is no more than a branch office of Marxism.

    If you really want to give yourself a scary hairdo just read the UN Convention for the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women

  43. Mick Gold Coast QLD

    From HK_Brother at 4:39 am:

    “Has anyone notice this Feminist ideology never asks what women want?

    So the IMF, WGEA, etc are saying that a woman’s vagina is most important in the workplace. Hike your skirts up ladies, its a gender workplace pass! It trumps experience, skill, competence, etc.

    And yet, the 40% gender quota of the ALP has achieved what exactly? Mediocrity? Incompetence? Delusional Feminist Cult Demonstrations? (See Women for Gillard example.)

    …”

    Good work HK_Brother.

    You’d reckon they’d cease chanting the failed mantra after demonstrating so clearly that Labor women ought to be kept as far away from publicly funded lead roles as is humanly possible.

    Apart from being demonstrably utterly useless these pretenders are so far behind history they should expect to be derided and ridiculed as clowns when out in public. Israel and India and the rest of them didn’t hide behind quotas, they didn’t need to because the talent was self evident.

    Golda Meir finished up in 1974 when Comrade the Fat Bummed Tart was still in primary school, Indira Gandhi ten years later, Margaret Thatcher in 1990 and Corazon Aquino in 1992. Even those quaint little brown folk Comrade G’lardArsks was fond of insulting had Megawati Sukarnoputri in charge well before she entered government.

    The Australian Labor uglies are not good enough. Go away. You have even less pretensions to greatness than the Qantas Harmless Wallabies.

  44. Tinta

    Golda Meir finished up in 1974 when Comrade the Fat Bummed Tart was still in primary school, Indira Gandhi ten years later, Margaret Thatcher in 1990 and Corazon Aquino in 1992. Even those quaint little brown folk Comrade G’lardArsks was fond of insulting had Megawati Sukarnoputri in charge well before she entered government.

    and the proud history of Australian women in parliament, the real trailblazers is hidden, the real trailblazers like Dorothy Tagney, Enid Lyons, Annabelle Rankin, Edith Cowan. They did not need a leg-up (or a leg-over) to get a seat in parliament. They were magnificent women who did more for families than they did for women. Their history is white-washed by Emily’s List as if women in parliament did not exist prior to Ms Gillard and the cabal of Gal Quoda entered the house of the people.

  45. Mick Gold Coast QLD

    From Tinta at 9:59 am :

    “and the proud history of Australian women in parliament, the real trailblazers is hidden … Their history is white-washed by Emily’s List as if women in parliament did not exist prior to Ms Gillard and the cabal of Gal Quoda entered the house”

    I didn’t mention that grand hypocrisy Tinta, and you can bet Miss doesn’t let the school children in on the contribution of those women either. We are surrounded by inveterate liars, mostly women.

  46. Max

    Brilliant HK Brother

    but

    “Notice how they NEVER talk about getting more women into positions like garbage collection? “

    We have a woman at our work who reports on the Percentage of incorrect rubbish placement in the recycling bins bins every week.

    I shit you not.!

  47. struth

    I think you all have covered the issue quite well so I am left with asking, why are these left wing radicals so silent when it comes to the true sexual discrimination in Islam?

  48. Dan

    Labour force participation rates among women are higher in countries like Vietnam, Uganda, Thailand, Norway than Australia, The US, UK…..

    I’ll go out on a limb here….Women in these countries probably don’t agree with Lagarde

  49. Struth, because to the left what matters is not what you are, but who you are. If you are the right (left) side of the fence, you can be a paedophillic, wife-beating, alcoholic, perverted degenerate, baby seal-beating, misogynist racist and still be one of the good guys. Alternatively you could be a clean-living, charity-raising, respectable Rhodes scholar and be satan himself, if you only so much as dissent from their self-asserted, groupthink approved “correct” opinions.
    Seeing Labor supporters change long-held opinions 180 degrees to the approved party line then Facebook that Abbott is the devil for holding the same views they held 5 minutes ago, I realise that it is a disease from which there is no escape.

  50. Beer Whisperer, that bit reminds me of the part in 1984 when the Party member addressing the crowd about the ongoing war with Eastasia gets the word that the war is over and they were now at war with the other mob. The crowd goes crazy and riot because they are all holding the wrong signs…

  51. In 2013 they’d all have the right signs in advance, except that because they couldn’t organize a chook raffle, or a piss-up in a brewery, or a root in a brothel with a fist full of 50s…..

  52. HK_Brother

    struth
    #1014418, posted on September 26, 2013 at 11:02 am

    I think you all have covered the issue quite well so I am left with asking, why are these left wing radicals so silent when it comes to the true sexual discrimination in Islam?


    Because its easier to whine and play victim in the Western world (where they are entrenched with Govt power/backing and in privileged positions). Its easier to stay in the comforts and luxury of Western society than to travel to a developing, violent crap-hole and actually fight/die for the rights of others. Feminists will always want women in operational front-line roles of the military…They prefer it be someone else’s wife, mother, daughter, etc to die, than themselves!

    Just look at how the Left handle Radical Islam.
    (1) Appease.
    (2) Self-guilt. ie: They hate us because its all our fault.
    (3) Poltical Correctness. Portray them as victims or children. ie: If we just talk, understand them, and ignore their poor behaviour; it’ll all just work out!

    …Yeah, and the global utopia of everyone holding hands in a grand Leftist collective of munching on Gaia’s snatch (aka: Climate Change); is working out real well. *rolls eyes*

    See the falling popularity of Climate Change since 2006/2007 to today.
    eg: Australia => 33% to 8%; Germany => 62% to 39%

    The Left will ALWAYS fail because they believe they have to LIE and impose via Govt policy to get what they want. “The ends justifies the means”.

    They think it works as it achieves its goal in the short term. However, they are dumb-founded as it all falls apart in the long term. eg: Most Australian women (approx 70% in the last survery of Australian Bureau of Statistics), still prefer to be stay-at-home mothers and part-time work. This is despite 50+ years of loony Feminist rhetoric. (Although, it could be the fact that most men don’t like Feminists. A simple mention of the word greatly shrinks down a female’s options for a male partner! Hell, it killed Gillard’s support as the ALP male supporters turned away from her, after her “blue ties” speech.)

    In fact, what I said in the previous paragraph in regards to short and long term perspectives applies to the policy of “Affirmative Action”. It works in the short term to fill ranks. It completely fails in the long term. Because in the long term, its about the individual. NOT a politically defined narrative or group. You’ll find an organisation with Affirmative Action policies perform poorly in the long run.

    …The more I observe and study Leftists, the more I realise they are children who mentally refuse to grow up! In fact, they are WORSE than children because children know not to remain friends with people who lie all the time! If a 12 yr old knows to end a relationship with a liar and no longer listens to them, what does that really tell you about the Left?

  53. Greg Byrne

    Well it’s a bit like the OECD increasingly left-wing. Does nobody speak for children who need their mother in the home. How about maximising freedom of women to work in the workforce or be homemakers”? Of course Cattalaxy would prefer that neither working mothers nor stay at home mothers get any money from the taxpayer. On balance that is far and away the best policy.

Comments are closed.