Creative Finances

Read something interesting in an old Economist (from September) about the financial system spiralling out of control:

American politicians have a lamentable record of intervening in setting [bank] executive pay. In the early years of the Clinton administration, Congress imposed a salary cap of $1m, beyond which firms faced a tax penalty. Pay rose, as one set of executives, beneath the cap, realised thay were 'underpaid' and another set gained from an outpouring of creativity, as consultants invented myriad option schemes, perks and pension benefits to get around the limit. This only made it harder for shareholders to know what was getting what.

I'm usually optimistic but when it comes to the financial crisis I think that unfortunately, once this recession is over and we're back to happy days again, those finance guys (the same or new ones) are going to grease the same old wheel again.

Mr Boss

Continuing on the gender equality topic...

Read a report from the (Swedish) Institute for Labour Market Policy Evaluation (IFAU), which concluded "dads become bosses - not mums". According to their research, when men become fathers their chances of getting a managerial position increase while the mothers' chances do not change. In other words, the family situation affects men and women differently. Men and women without children have equal chances of becoming manager, but as soon as parenthood enters the equation things change.

One reason for this is that fathers maintain a stronger link to the workplace than mothers after they have become parents. But the correlation is also there when other factors have been taken into account; working hours, education, civil status (i.e. married or not) and whether the person works in the private or the public sector. The study is the first one that has showed a clear correlation between change in people's family situation and change in their management responsibility.

I think this report just goes to show that even if we have the best parental leave provision in the world, it can also be bad for women. As long as parents do not split the leave more evenly, employers will see women as more of "risk" and not promote them in the same extent as they would men. And in a way I understand them. If you are an employer and you are choosing between promoting a man and a woman who are equally good at their job, as ambitious, etc., but you know that the woman will stay home for a year once or twice or maybe more times and also perhaps take more of the responsibility when it comes to caring for a sick child (so-called VAB or temporary parental benefit), then it is natural to opt for the man. Sorry you women out there who take long parental leave, but it's true. And perhaps you do not mind, this is a sacrifice you are personally willing to make, but unfortunately your actions affect all women, women as group. This means it cannot be a choice for the individual or the individual family.

So, the only way to even start changing this situation is to split the parental leave allowance 50-50 between women and men. The leave entitlement is so generous anyway, 13 months (and longer if you count the 90 guarantee days paid at a much lower rate, but paid). That is minimum 6½ months per parents, and 8 months per parent if you include the guarantee days. Compare that to 2-3 months, often unpaid, leave in most other countries, and for just one parent. And the argument "but we can't afford that, my husband earns more", etc. is not a valid argument. Yes, it costs money to have children. If you did not know what you should not have had them in the first place. And in terms of the second argument, yes, then we have to go into reasons why many women earn less than men in the first place...

So, 50-50 by law is the only way to go! Now (today literally) even the usually conservative Moderate party is talking about earmarking more months to the father in the name of gender equality so maybe it is not such an unrealistic idea anymore.

Some facts
Despite the fact that Sweden is one of the world's most gender equal countries women are still very underrepresented in managerial positions. Over the last 30 years the share of bosses among female employees has increased from 15% to 20% while the share for men has been around 30% over the same time period.

Managerial positions are defined as jobs with leadership functions, i.e. that the individual has subordinates.

....Ask What You Can Do for the Climate

Our problems are man-made, therefore they may be solved by man.
No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings.
John F Kennedy

Granted, things might be changing in the midst of the financial crisis, but the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency's yearly survey on people's attitudes to climate change that was presented three weeks ago did have some uplifting information.

• 8 in 10 Swedes think that they can contribute personally to putting a halt to climate change, which is a clear increase since 2002 when "only" 68% said yes and roughly the same response as last year

So how do people contribute*?

• by choosing public transport - 54%, up from 45%
• by taking the train instead of air travel for long-distance journeys - 76%, up from 71%
• by car-pooling - from 54% to 59%
• by leaving the car at home - 57% compared to 33% seven years ago
• by lowering the indoor temperature - from 36% to 59%
• by driving slower (eco-driving) - 63%, up from 41%

What other measures wouldn't people mind taking?

• buying energy-saving domestic appliances - 86% answered "absolutely"
• driving a car with a better fuel-economy - 77%
• taking the train instead of a plane - 76%
• decreasing the energy use in the home - 75%

But when asked if people were willing to eat less meat, only 40% said yes.

67% wants more information on climate change, especially help with choosing goods and services that reduce CO2 emissions.

What else did people say?

• 100% said that they knew or had heard about climate change
• 96% thinks that Sweden has already been affected or will be affected by climate change
• 71% thinks that it is very important that Sweden takes action against climate change
• 84% thinks that Sweden is able to do something to halt climate change
• 80% thinks that they themselves can do something
• 67% wants more information on how they can reduce their own carbon footprint through news in the media, while other information sources are preferred by between 21 and 46

Finger crossed that the EU agrees its Climate & Energy package (the 2020 package) in the coming weeks!

* Figures compare 2002 and 2008 if not otherwise indicated

Abort now!*

* i.e. stop this development now

I'm a bit worried by the latest developments on the issue of abortion in the EU. European Parliamentary Forum (EPF) has just published a new survey of European parties' view on abortion, which concludes that 36 out of 75 parties, mainly Social Democrat, Liberal and Left parties, are in favour of the right to abortion. EPF defined this as "still big support for" the right to abortion, as some of the parties that don't specifically express the right to abortion in their party manifesto implicitly support the right, but to me, that isn't good enough. Actually I don't know what the views of the party was last year or five years ago or ten years ago, but it feels like people are questioning this fundamental right for women to decide over their own body.

Belgium, Denmark, the Netherlands and Sweden are some of the countries where there is broad consensus on the right to abortion (though one wonders sometimes what the Swedish Christian Democrats really think), while parties in Ireland, Poland and the UK are more divided. For example, in the UK there are differing opinions within the Labour party if the right to abortion on socio-economic grounds should be extended or restricted.

24 of the 75 surveyed parties want to reduce the number of abortion, which is not obviously the same as wanting to ban them, but it depends how (and why) you want to reduce them. The Swedish Christian Democrats, Liberals, the Centre Paty and the Left party belong to this category although the Christian Democrats want to restrain the grounds for the right to abortion. I can also support measures that reduce the number of abortions if these concentrate on the causes of unwanted pregnancies, increasing access to and use of contraceptives and discouraging the use of abortion as a type of contraceptive, but any means that try to limit women's right and access to abortion is really a no-no for me. I think it's probably safe to say that countries where abortion is banned or restricted have as high number of abortions as countries where access is free, and more women in dying in the process.

Some facts about the right to abortion in the EU
Completely free until at least twelve weeks into pregnancy: Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, France, Greece, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, Czech Republic, Germany and Hungary
Allowed on socio-economic grounds (also to save the women's life and on physical and psychological grounds): Cyprus, Finland, Luxembourg and Great Britain
Allowed only to protect physical health: Poland
Allowed only to protect mental health: Spain, Northern Ireland
Allowed only to save the woman's life: Ireland

Sources: Europaportalen and Political Party Mapping by European Parliamentary Forum on Population and Development