How Big Government Hurts Women|5 Minute Video European femal…
How Big Government Hurts Women|5 Minute Video
European females are already paying the rate, and American females may be next. Carrie Lukas, President of Independent Women’s Forum, explains how keeping the government out of the work environment goes a long method towards keeping females in it.
Donate today to PragerU! http://l.prageru.com/2eB2p0h
To see the script, sources, quiz, and study guides, go to https://www.prageru.com/video/how-big-government-hurts-women
GO TO PragerU! https://www.prageru.com
Join Prager United to get new swag every quarter! http://l.prageru.com/2c9n6ys
Sign up with PragerU’s text list to have these videos, totally free merchandise free gifts and breaking statements sent directly to your phone! https://optin.mobiniti.com/prageru
Do you go shopping on Amazon? Click https://smile.amazon.com and a percentage of every Amazon purchase will be donated to PragerU. Same fantastic items. Exact same low rate. Shopping made meaningful.
FOLLOW us!
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/prageru
Twitter: https://twitter.com/prageru
Instagram: https://instagram.com/prageru/
SIGN UP WITH PragerFORCE!
For Students: http://l.prageru.com/2aozfkP
JOIN our Educators Network! http://l.prageru.com/2aoz2y9
Script:
The larger the federal government, the better for females.
Is that declaration real or false? Well, if celebration association is any indicator, the majority of women under the age of 40 would state “true.”.
Girls, specifically single women, are among the left’s most devoted advocates. This isn’t unexpected given that programs like government-subsidized childcare and government-mandated paid family leave seem like things that make life much better for females. Do they really?
Most European governments offer aids that allow women to stay home for months– even years– following the birth of a child. And some European countries require employers to use female employees part-time and versatile work plans.
Have European females benefited from these programs? The answer is no– unless you believe lower wages, fewer jobs, and less management chances benefit ladies.
Why is this the case? Because these supposedly women-friendly federal government mandates change the method companies assess female employees. It encourages companies to presume that women will not only cost them more, but they’ll be less productive than men.
Spain is a fine example. In 1999, that country passed a law giving females with kids the right to work decreased hours. But a research study by economists at the IE Business School in Madrid and at Queens College of the City University of New York discovered that women paid a huge rate in lost opportunities: Companies were less likely to work with women of childbearing age, less likely to promote them, and more likely to dismiss them compared with men.
When Chile tried comparable policies, similar outcomes resulted.
A study of 22 nations by two Cornell economic experts showed that in countries with the most extensive benefits for ladies, women are most likely to be in dead-end jobs, and less likely to end up being supervisors or magnates. This is because once the government mandates fringe benefits for women, employers place them on the “mommy track,” meaning they presume ladies will want to work less hours whether that’s real or not.
This may explain why in the United States, where these benefits are not mandated, females represent more than 40 percent of senior supervisors while in more “progressive” Europe, that number is a little over 30 percent.
But Big Government doesn’t throw challenges just at females attempting to get ahead. It tosses barriers at ladies having a hard time to get by. Here, we do not have to go to Europe to discover examples; there are plenty in the United States.
Take the problem of occupational licenses– government policies needing a license to pursue specific occupations. Sure, people running harmful and complex devices should need to get special training, take tests, and be licensed. However why are occupational licenses needed for hair shampooers and braiders?
In some states, licenses are even needed for interior designers and flower shops. Getting licenses can require hundreds of hours of schooling and involve significant fees. That’s not about securing consumers or public security. That’s a source of earnings for city and state federal governments, and a way for some politically effective lobby groups to keep out competition. And considering that more females obtain occupational licenses than guys, females are disproportionately harmed.
So what’s the solution? Less federal government, not more.
For the complete script, see https://www.prageru.com/video/how-big-government-hurts-women.
source
European women are currently paying the cost, and American females may be next. Young women, especially single ladies, are amongst the left’s most faithful advocates. A study by financial experts at the IE Business School in Madrid and at Queens College of the City University of New York found that females paid a big cost in lost chances: Companies were less most likely to hire women of childbearing age, less likely to promote them, and more likely to dismiss them compared with men.
Big Government does not toss obstacles just at women trying to get ahead. And given that more women obtain occupational licenses than guys, ladies are disproportionately harmed.
