Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ten years on from Norway's quota for women on corporate boards

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 60 posts

Re: Ten years on from Norway's quota for women on corporate boards

#41

Post by Double_a_92 »

abusoufiyan wrote: post #32
Double_a_92 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No but we shoulnd't create a law that randomly takes the wealth of every second heir, and gives it to an orphan kid instead. Technically they are equal, they just happened to be born somewhere different. So it should be fair, right? That kid when he grows up might indeed feel weird about all the undeserved money...

>That kid when he grows up might indeed feel weird about all the undeserved money... Are you serious? How is taking money from one person who never worked for it and giving it to another person who never worked for it going to make one feel self-conscious and sympathetic to the other?

There are people who refused lottery winnings... Minds are different and weird.

Edit: To directly answer your question, It's not about being sympathetic to the other. They just didn't deserve the money. You "feel" they envy of other people and ask yourself why you and not somebody else. At least if you were the legitimate heir you knew that your family earned it somehow...

Re: Ten years on from Norway's quota for women on corporate boards

#42

Post by matt4077 »

mvdwoord wrote: post #11

Equality of outcome vs equality of opportunity... Many things have been said by other, better informed and more eloquent people than me. I noticed this however: “At least ten more years” And that makes me wonder if and when this will turn into something akin the "Communism / Captialism / Whatever concept has never been tried/implemented _properly_" Personally, I don't think striving for equality of outcome will do so…

The idea of diversity on corporate boards isn't to mandate equal outcomes, it's that a more diverse board may be more inclined to provide equality of opportunity to the next generation.

That's why it's not a requirement for diversity in CXO positions. The board is a rather hands-off institution in most companies. They hire the CEO, on mostly just hold them accountable afterwards.

Re: Ten years on from Norway's quota for women on corporate boards

#43

Post by abusoufiyan »

Double_a_92 wrote: post #41
abusoufiyan wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>That kid when he grows up might indeed feel weird about all the undeserved money... Are you serious? How is taking money from one person who never worked for it and giving it to another person who never worked for it going to make one feel self-conscious and sympathetic to the other?

There are people who refused lottery winnings... Minds are different and weird. Edit: To directly answer your question, It's not about being sympathetic to the other. They just didn't deserve the money. You "feel" they envy of other people and ask yourself why you and not somebody else. At least if you were the legitimate heir you knew that your family earned it somehow...

Okay, can you answer what I asked?

Re: Ten years on from Norway's quota for women on corporate boards

#44

Post by ramblerman »

abusoufiyan wrote: post #29
mvdwoord wrote: post #11

Equality of outcome vs equality of opportunity... Many things have been said by other, better informed and more eloquent people than me. I noticed this however: “At least ten more years” And that makes me wonder if and when this will turn into something akin the "Communism / Captialism / Whatever concept has never been tried/implemented _properly_" Personally, I don't think striving for equality of outcome will do so…

>Personally, I don't think striving for equality of outcome will do society any good. Well, isn't it just convenient that if we don't strive for equality of outcome then life will just have to remain tilted in favor of white/asian men

Does the fact that asian men are included not rule out racism and open the door to examine the issue further?

Re: Ten years on from Norway's quota for women on corporate boards

#45

Post by badosu »

mvdwoord wrote: post #11

Equality of outcome vs equality of opportunity... Many things have been said by other, better informed and more eloquent people than me. I noticed this however: “At least ten more years” And that makes me wonder if and when this will turn into something akin the "Communism / Captialism / Whatever concept has never been tried/implemented _properly_" Personally, I don't think striving for equality of outcome will do so…

> And that makes me wonder if and when this will turn into something akin the "Communism / Captialism / Whatever concept has never been tried/implemented _properly_"

I see this as the 'No True Scotsman' fallacy of ideologies

> The essayist Spengler compared distinguishing between "mature" democracies, which never start wars, and "emerging democracies", which may start them, with the "No true Scotsman" fallacy. Spengler alleges that "political scientists" have attempted to save the "US academic dogma" that democracies never start wars from counterexamples by declaring any democracy which does indeed start a war to be flawed, thus maintaining that no true democracy starts a war. [0]

0 : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

Re: Ten years on from Norway's quota for women on corporate boards

#46

Post by b6 »

mvdwoord wrote: post #11

Equality of outcome vs equality of opportunity... Many things have been said by other, better informed and more eloquent people than me. I noticed this however: “At least ten more years” And that makes me wonder if and when this will turn into something akin the "Communism / Captialism / Whatever concept has never been tried/implemented _properly_" Personally, I don't think striving for equality of outcome will do so…

This is what bothers me the most. The thinking seems to be that by deliberately employing "positive" discrimination, someday we'll detect that bias has been eliminated, and then the government will instruct all institutions throughout the country to dismantle their discriminatory policies. Having deliberately practiced discrimination for 10, or 20, or 30, or however many years, someday we'll see it isn't needed anymore, and stop. To me, that's absurd.

For one, I doubt we'll ever detect that bias has been eliminated. Secondly, even if we did, we'll never dismantle the institutional policies of discrimination, because at that point, far too many people would be benefiting from them. We seem to be deliberately implementing institutional discrimination on the assumption that differences of outcome necessarily represent oppression.

Re: Ten years on from Norway's quota for women on corporate boards

#47

Post by Shivetya »

peterlk wrote: post #20
praha14 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Gender quotas at board level in Europe have done little to boost corporate performance or to help women lower down" Isn't the article saying that they didn't work?

I think the article is saying that the results are inconclusive. They have had little effect in either direction, so now that they are the status quo, there's no reason not to keep them. Arguments of excessive regulatory overhead may or may not be compelling, but they have an uphill battle to fight.

keeping stuff that doesn't show results but feels good seems an awfully dumb thing to do. instead they need to determine why it does not do what they expected. The reason I take this view is that too many will accept a state "we feel good about it" and never work to solve the actual problem.

Its the #hashtag way of life, the lazy.

Re: Ten years on from Norway's quota for women on corporate boards

#48

Post by ghthor »

b6 wrote: post #46
mvdwoord wrote: post #11

Equality of outcome vs equality of opportunity... Many things have been said by other, better informed and more eloquent people than me. I noticed this however: “At least ten more years” And that makes me wonder if and when this will turn into something akin the "Communism / Captialism / Whatever concept has never been tried/implemented _properly_" Personally, I don't think striving for equality of outcome will do so…

This is what bothers me the most. The thinking seems to be that by deliberately employing "positive" discrimination, someday we'll detect that bias has been eliminated, and then the government will instruct all institutions throughout the country to dismantle their discriminatory policies. Having deliberately practiced discrimination for 10, or 20, or 30, or however many years, someday we'll see it isn't needed anymo…

Exactly. While there absolutely is discrimination due to systemic and personal bias, reaching for equality of outcome is much to heavy handed. The result is many innocent people being hurt at best, at worst istitutional tyranny.

Re: Ten years on from Norway's quota for women on corporate boards

#49

Post by bgie »

robert_foss wrote: post #9
Chris2048 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which things?

Are you asking what sexist biases exist within society that are working against the interest of Women? How about: - Income inequality - Unequal domestic workload - Only 22% of elected parliamentarians being female

Income inequality? Does risk of dying on the job count as something worth higher pay? If so, then I think you should reconsider the mantra of "wage gap".

Have a look at the death gap!

https://www.investors.com/politics/commentary/how-come-nobod...

Note: this is just the first hit on google, I'm a bit reluctant to write down an entire arguement here because you have very like already made up your mind...

Re: Ten years on from Norway's quota for women on corporate boards

#50

Post by bgie »

abusoufiyan wrote: post #3
staticelf wrote: post #2

No matter how effective, I will always believe that this is outright wrong and sexist. I am amazed that my home country, Sweden, has not followed since it is basically the feminist capital of the world.

Yeah but most of the outright wrong and sexist things our societies allow seem to disadvantage women. This doesn't make it even, but it's a good step.

Like the workplace death gap? How about quota for that?

Men and women both suffer, yet men suffer in silence...

Post reply on HN