Hacker News Reader

Comment by Someone1234 | Hacker News Reader

It is worth noting that Nima Sanandaji, the author of that and many similar books, is a proponent of small state, free markets, low tax, self determination and responsibility.

In other words, he is a libertarian type, that doesn't support the welfare state, and by extension doesn't support requiring employers to offer maternity and paternity leave.

He has also argued that Scandinavia is doing well due to the free markets, in spite of its social policy, in his book Scandinavian Unexceptionalism.

PS - Just trying to give some context. "Nordic Gender Equality Paradox" isn't an apolitical academic study, it is a book trying to push a certain political agenda.

View on HN

I downvote you because the research withstands your attempted ad hominem attack. If the result is good we should not cast dispersion just because the researcher has a particular bias.

In fact those times when your ideology does not line up with scientific results are precisely when you should sit up and take notice that perhaps your ideology is failing you.

I wasn't commenting on academic research, I was commenting on the book The Nordic Gender Equality Paradox by Nima Sanandaji. Which is what the comment I was responding to was about.

You downvoted because you either didn't read the comment I responded to or didn't read my own in the context for which it was given.

Nima Sanandaji isn't a researcher and doesn't product academic, scientific, or sociological research. He's a political commentator who writes books and produces opinion pieces for political think-tanks.

As far as I know the research doesn't say much, and therefor doesn't withstand much either.

They can't tell you why preferences are different. It is all implied. A much more straight forward explanation is that developed countries have long histories. To become developed you need to have developed industries for a long time without too many wars. The idea that the preference of Indian women, were many industries are being developed as they get into job market, is remotely comparable to the preference of Swedish women were industries have already been developed for centuries isn't credible. It simply isn't an equal comparison. Yet, that is exactly what people are drawing these conclusions from.

> that doesn't support the welfare state, and by extension doesn't support requiring employers to offer maternity and paternity leave.

The second doesn't follow from the first. I generally support the welfare state, but I don't think that employers should pay for it directly; doing so significantly hinders smaller companies where a single ill/pregnant/vacationing person can cause a serious productivity disruption (especially if unplanned), even if they don't have to pay for it! Instead, I think the society/government should pay for social security, via taxes, that way it works like a very distributed insurance policy.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com