|
 Originally Posted by ImSavy
This is where I disagree, most policies don't address things the way I want them do. That's the whole point of a lower bound & that lower bound should raise issues not dictate them. For example if I own a company of 200 people and only 5 of them are women you should be able to explain why. Whereas explaining why it's not 50/50 is stupid.
Even the most well-crafted and well-functioning policy and agency for this would provide results less good than having none in the first place. The economic principle at work is that when a company discriminates on things like this, it increases their costs and lowers the costs of their competitors, which undermines the poorly discriminating company's ability to continue to do so and rewards the competing companies better behavior. Governmental policy is not that good at undermining bad behavior (it inadvertently supports bad behavior more often than not), but the free market has undermined bad behavior consistently.
|