Frauenquoten

Die Taz suggeriert in diesem Artikel einiges über die Frauenquote. Die Effekte sind stets positiv. Die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung ist überdurchschnittlich. Wir sollten das gesetzlich machen. Dazu ein Bildchen aus einer McKinsey-Studie.

Naja, aber so einfach ist die Sache nicht, wie man zB. an diesem Artikel im Economist erkennen kann:

Numerous studies show that high proportions of women directors coincide with superior corporate performance. But there is little academically accepted evidence of a causal relationship. It may be that thriving firms allow themselves the luxury of attending to social issues such as board diversity, whereas poorly performing ones batten down the hatches.

Women do seem to be particularly effective board members at companies where things are going wrong. A 2008 paper on the impact of female directors by Renée Adams and Daniel Ferreira of the University of Queensland and the London School of Economics found that bosses of American firms whose shares perform poorly are more likely to be fired if the firm has a relatively high number of women directors. On average, however, the paper concluded that firms perform worse as the proportion of women on the board increases. There is certainly no shortage of companies capable of producing stellar results with few or no women on the board.

Aber natürlich wäre es unfair, die lausige Qualität der Taz auf ihre Frauenquote zu schieben.

Finanztransaktionssteuer

Oh, eine Finanztransaktionssteuer. Das klingt ja nicht schlecht, was Heike Makatsch da so erzählt.

Aber erstens darf bezweifelt werden, daß das Geld wirklich dazu genutzt wird um den Armen zu helfen.

Zweitens, hey, gucken wir doch mal auf die Erfahrungen mit sowas:

FTTs have a negative impact on economic efficiency through two channels: on the production
side, it encourages vertical integration[...], and in consumption, it increases the relative price of multi-stage goods [...]. The welfare cost (deadweight loss) of the tax was estimated, for Brasil, to be quite significant, at the equivalent of 13 percent of the tax’s gross revenue, or 0.2 percent of GDP [...].

Also, wer große Konzerne mag, der mag eine Finanztransaktionssteuer.

Und wem schadet so eine Steuer?

They present, however, an interesting element of horizontal inequity: in less secure parts of the country, the
holding of cash (to avoid the tax) is riskier, forcing people to rely more on bank transactions, thus suffering a tax burden higher than average. [...]

Another study [...], using household consumption data and the incidence of the FTT through the price system, found that it falls proportionately more on lower-income families, supporting the claim of regressivity. [...]

The claim of regressivity is strengthened by the existence of channels for tax avoidance that are not evenly distributed: as detailed by Allain (2003), the FTT promotes the migration of savings abroad (for instance, ADR negotiated in New York) and the development of FTT-proof investment mechanisms such as exclusive funds—investment funds whose shares are all held by a single investor. Such schemes are normally available only to large investors.

Doch, klingt nach einer total großartigen Idee, um armen Leuten zu helfen.