13 thoughts on “ESG”

    1. Prager is interesting because involved teacher unions and “Ex FBI”
      Not mention Russia and China. And US drug companies.

    2. Musk fired the company the janitors worked for, not the janitors. He fired them a few days early (he had told them he wasn’t renewing their contract) for failure to perform.

      What the company does with them is not Musk’s problem.

  2. I followed up a few of the links and it’s assertions all the way down. For example, it is claimed:

    Companies (and eventually individuals) that do not achieve a high ESG score can be punished; banks may refuse to provide loans to, or limit capital investments available to the company.

    If you follow the two links in that sentence, you would expect to be linked to actual evidence for the respective parts – signs of individual discrimination on the part of “ESG” or perhaps stories of businesses being effectively punished for a low ESG score. Instead, it’s links to more and more assertions with no evidence anywhere in sight.

    I know there’s plenty of big funds and pensions (CalPERS being another one) that dabble in this stuff, so if it’s a real problem, there should be real examples to point to.

  3. Glad Vanguard saw the light..

    The job of fund managers is to maximize the funds value. Not to sing kumbaya

    1. Not to sing kumbaya

      …with other peoples’ money. Once again, we have that convenient ethical failing where people think it’s fine to virtue signal by using someone else’s wealth.

      1. You mean like Blackrock?

        The decision to invest in Blackrock is a private financial decision.

        In a Libertarian World, people who donate to their local Public Television station and have an “In this house we believe” sign on their front yard are free to invest in Blackrock, put a solar panel on their roof and drive a Tesla. I mean, provided the solar panel and the Tesla aren’t subsidized.

        The problem is if the choice is forced by regulation, subsidy, or non-disclosure.

        1. I might add that this is what is silly with LEED ratings of “environmentally conscious buildings.”

          My rule for energy savings is if it saves me money over a reasonable period of time, I buy it. If you have a subsidy distorted market, you need to come up with all kinds of formulas that are a poor imitation of market signals.

          For example, if something costs a lot because a lot of labor is involved, the people who are making the thing in turn consume energy, so if you buy some expensive gadget to “save energy”, are you really saving energy? Given that the big cost driver in our economy is energy, the way to save on energy is to be cheap. Driving the old clunker may use more gas, but buying a new car consumes the resources and labor to produce it, which eventually spreads out to hidden forms of energy expenditure.

          1. I’ve had the pleasure of working in several new LEED buildings, and my observations are:
            • The “points” system to get certification has rather arbitrary values for what design choices nets how many points.
            • Architects (term used loosely) tend to go for the stuff that nets maximum points for minimum outlay. Marking x% of the parking spots (those nearest the entrance) as reserved for low-emissions vehicles, for example, even if in practice they will remain unused, is a good way to get points just by adding signage.
            • It did not occur to me, on the 1st occasion when I was using the toilet at a moment when the power failed, that the water-saving faucets had no over-ride to allow them to dispense water with no mains power. Unfortunately I’d already applied soap to my hands when I discovered this. Fortunately, I knew where the nearest mop-sink was located, and that custodial closet had been left open and contained a manually-operated faucet.
            • In one of these buildings I found the giant plasma-TV in the lobby showing a constant data display of building all-source energy usage quite amusing. Don’t LCD TV’s have MTBF hours many times higher than Plasma, and energy usage a small fraction?

          2. Not only do you get points for parking reserved for low-emissions vehicles, do you also get points for people being healthier because they are walking farther?

    2. Maybe payback from Vanguard for the late Ted Kennedy who had disrespected Supreme Court nominee Alito for having his retirement money in a Vanguard 403 (b) (the 401 (k) arrangement for professors and people working for non-profits)?

      The controversy is that then Judge Alito ruled on a case involving Vanguard when he had “a financial interest in Vanguard” according to the Senator. At the time, there was this big mystery about this “Vanguard”, whether it was some kind of tax-dodge investment run out of the Cayman Islands for big-moneyed types.

      I guess he was Professor Alito and Vanguard, currently one of the largest mutual fund and stock trading firms serving small investors, was his selection for his payroll-deduction for his retirement plan.

Comments are closed.