ESG Investing

[basballguy]

(02-10-2023, 01:26 PM)Stewy Wrote: Then plz explain?

I explained already and even added more reasons and detail.

It’s fine if people want to oppose it and not make any real attempt to understand simply because “GOP agenda”. Those people can work until the day before they die.

[Stewy]

(02-10-2023, 01:37 PM)basballguy Wrote: I explained already and even added more reasons and detail.  

It’s fine if people want to oppose it and not make any real attempt to understand simply because “GOP agenda”.  Those people can work until the day before they die.

You quoted Fox News FFS, which is why I asked for someone to explain the ACTUAL LAW as post by Nati Bengals.  DId you read that or just go with the Fox News summary?

BTW - I'm a conservative, but I know shyt (Fox) when I smell it.

[basballguy]

(02-10-2023, 01:51 PM)Stewy Wrote: You quoted Fox News FFS, which is why I asked for someone to explain the ACTUAL LAW as post by Nati Bengals.  DId you read that or just go with the Fox News summary?

BTW - I'm a conservative, but I know shyt (Fox) when I smell it.

The fox article is a conversation starter.  I provide my own words, and examples, which i guess nobody took the time to read or comprehend.  

Blackrock and other money mangers will say their ESG standards are on par with how they invest in other funds..thus adhering to the rule of the law.  

The data says otherwise...it's that simple.  

[basballguy]

Now to go off on a little tangent for this forum. Some of y'all (no names specifically) will see an opposing political party view and will spend time trying to figure out "why is he wrong" versus trying to understand "why does he think it's a problem". So you ignore posts from the OP and spend time trying to refute the claim versus understand it.

That's makes for incredibly shitty conversation.

[Stewy]

(02-10-2023, 02:06 PM)basballguy Wrote: The fox article is a conversation starter.  

No it's not.  Fox is shyt.  if you start from there you have no credibility.  Start with facts.  With an actual reference to the material.  Fox is not a legitimate news source.  If you think it is, your ALWAYS going to be disappointed with the narrative of the conversation because referencing FOX leaves you starting with NO credibility.  Period.

[basballguy]

(02-10-2023, 02:51 PM)Stewy Wrote: No it's not.  Fox is shyt.  if you start from there you have no credibility.  Start with facts.  With an actual reference to the material.  Fox is not a legitimate news source.  If you think it is, your ALWAYS going to be disappointed with the narrative of the conversation because referencing FOX leaves you starting with NO credibility.  Period.

That's your take away from everything i said outside the OP?

Good lord man, i thought you were reasonable.

[Stewy]

(02-10-2023, 02:54 PM)basballguy Wrote: That's your take away from everything i said outside the OP?  

Good lord man, i thought you were reasonable.

Give me an opinion based upon the law as it is written.  Not Fox's take on it.  Where is your information coming from?  Why should I take anything you've said (or anyone else) as viable opinion when all you've referenced is FOX.

Where is your source?  Where is your opinion based upon the law?  All you've done is quote fox and given a bunch of opinions based upon what?  Followed by shyting on someone's opinion after they read the law and gave the summary I asked for.  I'm a scientist friend.  I work on evidence and data and facts.  Tell me the source of your opinions outside of FOX and we can move forward.

[HarleyDog]

(02-09-2023, 02:50 AM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Very thrilling and interesting Department of Labor stuff. I guess this is what all the commotion is about.

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/12/01/2022-25783/prudence-and-loyalty-in-selecting-plan-investments-and-exercising-shareholder-rights

Not sure if everyone knows this, but daily, several departments of the federal government issue NPRM’s (notice of proposed rule making) notifying citizens of possible amendments or changes in laws, to include how the law is written. You can subscribe to the federal register and receive these notices via email while also having the opportunity to submit comments and suggestions. The comment received by the public often mold how the laws are written. I encourage everyone to subscribe to FR and select those departments you would like to receive NPRM’s. It gives you a say in everyday governance which usually happens under the radar of those uninformed until it’s too late.

[*Nately120*]

(02-10-2023, 01:37 PM)basballguy Wrote: Those people can work until the day before they die.

I plan to drop dead at work and make sure my last words are "My only regret is that I didn't buy more avocado toast."

[BIGDADDYFROMCINCINNATI]

(02-08-2023, 03:21 AM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Not something I am too familiar with.

This was a decent read.
https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2023/02/02/esg-investing-after-the-dol-rule-on-prudence-and-loyalty-in-selecting-plan-investments-and-exercising-shareholder-rights/

I see a few things.

Sounds like fear mongering. And yet another chance to cry woke.

Biden is concerned about democracies ability to keep up with autocracies. This sounds like it could improve competition and allow the free market to do it's thing.

And isn't a diversified portfolio ideal?

Exactly, this is fear-mongering just like the tabloid news that has declared itself as "For entertainment purposes only, " channel Fox always screaming about "Biden's woke agenda," when most ppl who don't watch the garbage spewed on Faux news have zero clue about what "Woke" means.  The people who believe this garage are the same who think the WWE is real.  There isn't a financial advisor out there who's promoting ESG investing as a main strategy.  It could be a fund or a strategy out there, but there are 1,000s of funds and strategies offered by 100 different companies.  If it's used then the client requested it or it is just a minor part of a larger portfolio.   President Biden's main agenda is defending democracies E.g., Ukraine, and trying to tackle the inflation Trump created by printing $ 15 trillion to bail out businesses and the stock market to keep the investor class happy. 

Fox is all about fear-mongering and trying to gin up their audience over nonsense to get ratings. After all, Sean Hannity just gave a sworn deposition that he knew Trump's election lie was false but he knowingly promoted trump's big lie to retain viewership from going over to NewsMax or ONN.  If Hannity is going to swear under oath he knowingly reports things that he knows are false to retain viewers, and Fox continually uses the Tabolid defense to keep from being sued then why would any reasonable person with any common sense whatsoever believe much less repeat their nonsense?   GTFO of here with the Bull Sh!t.

[basballguy]

(02-10-2023, 10:03 PM)Stewy Wrote: Give me an opinion based upon the law as it is written.  Not Fox's take on it.  Where is your information coming from?  Why should I take anything you've said (or anyone else) as viable opinion when all you've referenced is FOX.

Where is your source?  Where is your opinion based upon the law?  All you've done is quote fox and given a bunch of opinions based upon what?  Followed by shyting on someone's opinion after they read the law and gave the summary I asked for.  I'm a scientist friend.  I work on evidence and data and facts.  Tell me the source of your opinions outside of FOX and we can move forward.

i'm not trying to be a dick man but shit you're making it impossible to discuss this with.  

None of my points are based on the fox article dude.  if you read the fox article (which you clearly didn't) then read my points (which you also clearly didn't) you'd find they are completely unrelated.  

I started making some tables yesterday to show the difference in performance between funds but then i reminded myself the people on this forum read what they want to read so what's the point?  ESG = bad for your wallet and should not be forced upon anyone....and should also be disclosed.  Blackrock (among other companies) has been accused of not disclosing it in their practices with their non ESG funds but publicly says they use it.  

1) There is no standard, so ESG shouldn't be used unless the fund manager says "Hey this is an ESG fund."

2) The returns are not on par with normal funds despite what you think you know (if that's what you want, cool...it's up to the individual investor because it should be a PERSONAL preference, not a fund preference (which you already agree upon)

3) Ignoring the "E" in ESG, the "S" and the "G" are completely subjective and not based upon any financial facts and are completely a personal opinion.  I mean, the E isn't either but at least there's some science behind it. 

How hard is that to understand?

I also linked to an article outside of fox news....i didn't ask anyone to read it because i used it as a reference point for my points of discussion but it's pretty abundantly clear you also skipped over it.  

So now i'm exiting this thread so it can die.  

[NATI BENGALS]

Um I'd rather not have a guy making rules prohibiting considering the ethics of a business before my money is invested.

https://www.flgov.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/ESG-Resolution-Final.pdf

Makes a whole lot of sense to me
The massive power of America's retirement funds should only be able to invest in mega corps who are best at keeping wages low, trimming the fat, and maximizing profits. ZERO FU&^% GIVEN ABOUT ANYTHING ELSE

F it. You can make more with child labor in Asia and the workers sleep at the factory... Stock price up. money money money money
Probably have robot McDonald workers running off the beggar homeless humans hanging out front.

We can do better than that.

[basballguy]

I do not know where this site lies in the political spectrum but this also explains it from a diff point of view then some of my points

https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/3852712-to-rein-in-esg-and-protect-investors-follow-the-florida-model/amp/

[NATI BENGALS]

This is one that is really burning my ass right now. And I guess this could be considered an ESG opinion of mine.

https://www.abc15.com/news/local-news/intel-outlines-2023-pay-cuts-for-employees
Cutting the 401k match hurts the stupid working stiffs like me more than anything.

Ohio has signed up for something like $2 Billion in incentives to give Intel. Then they knife the workers in the back

[NATI BENGALS]

I dug around a little. It's definitely in there clear as day.

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/12/01/2022-25783/prudence-and-loyalty-in-selecting-plan-investments-and-exercising-shareholder-rights

Paragraph ©(1) of the final rule addresses the application of the duty of loyalty under ERISA as applied to a fiduciary's consideration of an investment or investment course of action. The primary benefit of this provision to plan participants and beneficiaries is that it clarifies in no uncertain terms that a plan fiduciary may not subordinate the interests of participants and beneficiaries in their retirement income or financial benefits under the plan to other objectives, and may not sacrifice investment return or take on additional investment risk to promote benefits or goals unrelated to the interests of participants and beneficiaries in their retirement income or financial benefits under the plan. By ensuring that plan fiduciaries may not sacrifice investment returns or take on additional investment risk to promote unrelated goals, paragraph ©(1) protects the investment returns that accrue to participants and sponsors of ERISA-covered plans. Over the years, the Department has stated this bedrock principle of loyalty many times in non-regulatory guidance, and this final rule, like the current regulation, incorporates the principle directly into title 29 of the Code of Federal Regulations. This incorporation will result in a higher degree of permanency and certainty for plan fiduciaries, relative to periodic restatements in non-regulatory guidance, and as such is considered a benefit.



Shows about as much as I trust a Republican. Because now I feel like Desantis was probably up to something with this charade and subsequent $2 billion he pulled from Blackrock. His "buddy" probably runs an investment firm.