*Are you disputing women have been appointed as Prime Minister and heads of two of Iceland's major banks?*

What a silly question is that? Iceland has a population of
a large country town, or similar, hardly lots of talent to
choose from. Their banks gambled and came unstuck. So
now its back to fishing. Global investment banking is
indeed risky!

*The perception that women are the best senior management option in the current crisis *

Some people may well have that perception and they well may be wrong,
for they have no evidence to back up their claims. What we can
show is that there are both women and men who are high risk takers
and low risk takers. In fact there were many men who warned that the
proverbial manure would hit the fan, already some years ago

To blame this whole thing on high risk taking is a furphy. Fact is
there was downright crookery going on and fact is that those
in charge of enforcing the rules were not enforcing them. Fact
is that many of those were women.

Wall St, US politics etc, are all loaded with women. How many
rang the alarm bells as to what was going on?

Crooks will exist if rules are not enforced.

Once again, there is no evidence that women are better economic
managers then men, so your argument simply does not stand up

Just as an aside, the CEO of Pacific Brands during their scam to get Government funding before sacking all their workers and giving the CEO and other executives a pay rise was, you guessed it, a woman...

Yabby, this thread has already disposed of your theory it was a failure of women to regulate a testosterone soaked industry caused the global economic collapse.

US Senators have every right to inquire as to whether women under male supervision were at cause without such aspersion.

If you supervised supervisors wouldn't you?

US citizens put the blame squarely on the shoulders of a weak incumbent government, which was, and still is, shackled with men's legislatures in which women and men conduct individual bargaining.

a weak government failed enforcement.

if you're looking for evidence women are better economic managers than men you won't find it here.

this discussion is about reconciliation of difference, not supremacy of an illusionary same.

an Australian solution with provision for women's legislatures explains the collapse of the global economy as an absence of collective bargaining between women and men.

> Their banks gambled and came unstuck. So now its back to fishing.

men collapsed fishing.

whistler:"this discussion is about reconciliation of difference"

hahahaha. Which one of your personalities wrote that?

*men collapsed fishing.*

Whistler you really do seem to have a chip on your shoulder about
men. That is your problem, not my problem.

In the West anyhow, decisions made about fishing, economics etc
are made in parliaments littered with women, people of both genders
vote for politicians of both genders.

For you to run off and blame it all on men, shows your bias.

Sorry dear, you are peeing in the breeze on this one, for more
rational people will not take you seriously.

yes Yabby, parliaments comprised of men's legislatures littered with women produced weak government which oversaw the collapse of the global economy by a male dominated industry.

individual bargaining between women and men is a recipe for disaster.

other than a spectacular and broadely welcomed success in giving women the experience to operate their own legislatures, individual bargaining is an abject failure.

yes, people of both genders do vote for politicians of both genders in the election of parliaments which produce weak government.

an Australian solution with provision for women's legislatures provides strong government through collective bargaining.

yes Anticeptic, women and men do have different life experiences.

the Australian solution reconciles difference.