A piece published on the website of Justice for Men & Boys (and the women who love them), the political party of which I’m the chairman, in July 2016:
In today’s edition of The Times (p.39) there’s a woeful article by Philip Aldrick, Economics Editor, titled, ‘It pays to have more women in work, so policy must reflect this’. His analysis is feminist throughout, though I doubt he realises this. A particular gem:
Women are good for the bottom line. Companies with more women in senior management deliver higher returns on assets. No economist has taken a stab at the reason, but the evidence, most recently from IMF research into two million companies across 34 European countries, is simply that it does. More profits means more cash to invest, which means higher productivity and better prosperity for all.
I honestly cannot be bothered to check out the ‘IMF research’, because I’m 100% sure – after working on this issue for 4+ years – that it would report a correllation between more women in senior management, and higher returns. What it would NOT demonstrate – no research ever does – is a causal link, because it’s been known for years that a causal link exists between more women in senior positions, and corporate financial decline. I outlined the evidence of a causal link to House of Commons and House of Lords inquiries in 2012, and that evidence is here.
If any of this blog’s followers has more energy and time than myself to direct Philip Aldrick to this blog piece, I thank them warmly in advance. His email address might be email@example.com. Then again, it might not be. I could be wrong. It happened once before.
Please support Mike Buchanan’s work on Patreon. Thank you.