The Market Ticker
Commentary on The Capital Markets - Category [Investing]
Logging in or registering will improve your experience here
Main Navigation
Sarah's Resources You Should See
Full-Text Search & Archives
Leverage, the book
Legal Disclaimer

The content on this site is provided without any warranty, express or implied. All opinions expressed on this site are those of the author and may contain errors or omissions. For investment, legal or other professional advice specific to your situation contact a licensed professional in your jurisdiction.

NO MATERIAL HERE CONSTITUTES "INVESTMENT ADVICE" NOR IS IT A RECOMMENDATION TO BUY OR SELL ANY FINANCIAL INSTRUMENT, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO STOCKS, OPTIONS, BONDS OR FUTURES.

Actions you undertake as a consequence of any analysis, opinion or advertisement on this site are your sole responsibility; author(s) may have positions in securities or firms mentioned and have no duty to disclose same.

Market charts, when present, used with permission of TD Ameritrade/ThinkOrSwim Inc. Neither TD Ameritrade or ThinkOrSwim have reviewed, approved or disapproved any content herein.

The Market Ticker content may be sent unmodified to lawmakers via print or electronic means or excerpted online for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given and the original article source is linked to. Please contact Karl Denninger for reprint permission in other media, to republish full articles, or for any commercial use (which includes any site where advertising is displayed.)

Submissions or tips on matters of economic or political interest may be sent "over the transom" to The Editor at any time. To be considered for publication your submission must include full and correct contact information and be related to an economic or political matter of the day. All submissions become the property of The Market Ticker.

Considering sending spam? Read this first.

2022-11-23 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Investing , 1632 references
[Comments enabled]  
Category thumbnail

Read this Twitter thread in full.

Today, we issued a final rule that allows retirement plan investors to take climate change and other environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors into consideration when making investment decisions:

Oh really?

Did you not just see a prime example of what happens when "ESG" takes over a corporation?  Why, you did.  It's called Twitter.

Three quarters of the people, all hired with "ESG" in mind, were just fired by Musk who as a private owner has zero obligation to any such so-called "principle."  The various screaming parties in the ESG cult all predicted immediate doom and disaster.  No such disaster has occurred; the firm's only service it provides to the public is running just fine with one quarter of the staffing load -- and thus cost -- it used to have.

If you think Twitter is unique in this regard you're too stupid to have a retirement and deserve to lose every cent of whatever you claim to be "investing."

Let's put this in simple terms: If "ESG" is a net positive for a company then nobody has to exempt anything or make it a separate subject of consideration and in fact doing so is stupid because if it in fact makes the firm more competitive and operating at a lower cost per unit of output it wins all on its own.

What the Department of Labor has said by issuing this advisory is that your "retirement plan" can now be disadvantaged to any degree whatsoever, including losing all of it, when (not if) these "ESG" initiatives cause the firms invested in to underperform or fail outright and when that occurs you can't sue the plan provider for violating their fiduciary responsibility to you as the true owner of the asset.

In other words the Department of Labor is formally admitting that these "ESG" initiatives are not to the benefit of the firm's operating results and thus are also not to your benefit as an investor.  This fact has now become a formal admission by our Federal Government.

What's worse?  This "rule" amounts to an admission of collusive price-fixing -- albeit indirect -- between what are supposed to be competing firms.  Under 100+ year old law that is a serious criminal felony.

You will get screwed out of trillions of dollars over the coming years as a result of this and you are responsible for that screwing because you have and continue to permit this sort of rank corruption to take place without demanding it stop and backing up that demand with whatever is necessary to eliminate it.

So be it.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)