Affirmative Action & US GDP Per Worker

	The reduced productivity of ONE EXTRA female in the workforce equals the positive productivity of 14 males.
	Affirmative Action put 18.3 million EXTRA women in the workforce.
	US GDP per Worker declined by 57% since Affirmative Action was implemented, plunging from three times higher than Japan to one third lower.
	As our workforce grew 12.2% faster than Japan's, the number of females in the workforce almost doubled while the number in Japan tracked population growth.
	Compounded annually, per year growth rates of GDP per Worker were: Japan--14% in US dollars, 2.7% by the gold standard. US--7% in dollars, declined 3.8% by the gold standard.

The following chart shows how the differences in cultural values between Japan & the US affected economic outcomes.  The primary difference is that the US implemented Affirmative Action and all kinds of gender and race based preferences, while Japan stuck by its traditional moral and religious values.   Affirmative action, "sexual discrimination" & "sexual harassment" litigation, the harassing atmosphere and the chronic anti-male bias in the workplace created by unwanted and counterproductive female employees, the rapid increase in the rate of breakdown of the family, counterproductive "child support payment" laws and policies, etc., resulted in the net negative contribution to productivity of each of the extra 18.3 million employees being greater than the positive contribution of more than 14 US employees.  The contrast between US and Japanese social & economic policies resulted in significant differences in the changes in workforce size, productivity, GDP, etc.  Comparing the differences in the rates of change provides an opportunity to quantify their impact on both economies.

1. Between 1970 and 1992, Japan's inflation rate remained much lower than ours, suggesting that inflation was a national rather than a global problem.
2. There were 18.3 million more female employees in 1992 than there would have been had the percentage of females in the workforce remained equivalent to that of 1970, suggesting that Affirmative Action was a "success".
3. Had the percentage of the US population in the workforce remained at 37%--its 1970 level--there would have been 94.3 million employees rather than 122 million in 1992--18.3 million fewer female employees and 9.4 million fewer male employees.
4. Had US GDP per worker in ounces of gold grown at the same rate as Japan's grew between 1970 & 1992--2.7% per year--it would have been 614.6 ounces of gold in 1992--466.6 ounces greater than than the 148 ounces it was.
5. If these 94.3 million employees had produced the equivalent of 614.6 ounces of gold each (57,957 million ounces total), their combined productivity would have been 39.9 billion ounces greater than the productivity of the 122 million employees who produced the equvalent of 148 ounces each (18,056 million ounces each).
6. If there are no other factors, if this reduction in worker productivity was due solely to the EXTRA females in the workforce due to Affirmative action, and all else being equal, the extra 18.3 million female employees reduced potential US productivity by 39.9 billion ounces of gold, or 2,180 ounces of gold each.
7. At the 1992 gold price of $380, the reduction in output in dollars was (2,180 ounces gold x 18.3 million extra female employees x $380/ounce = ) $15.2 trillion.
8. 2,180 ounces of gold is 14.7 times greater than the current average productivity per US employee of 148 ounces of gold.

Copyright @ 2007 by Fathers' Manifesto & Christian Party