Environmental, Social, Governing. ESG

[dunwithtrump]

Here's an ESG bank that will give you 3% interest on your savings if you just spend $1,000 a month on a debit card. I've been with them for a year and I earn 5% up to $10,000 since that's what it was when I joined. Oh, and name the amount of your monthly fees, even if it's zero. They plant trees, invest only in green technologies, and much more

But some here wouldn't DEIGN to patronize a do-goody, progressive, bank. You'll leave cash on the table if it means doing the right thing.

Aspiration: Do good and do well.

https://www.aspiration.com/
https://my.aspiration.com/auth/login/

[HokieHam]

NPC says ESG good!

[fatman]

It’s a bunch of BS.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/qai/2022/0 ... index/amp/

Exxon is ESG, but Tesla is not? Insanity.

[dunwithtrump]

It’s a bunch of BS.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/qai/2022/0 ... index/amp/

Exxon is ESG, but Tesla is not? Insanity.

My click-baity title using ESG aside, I sincerely believe right wingers will not invest their liquid savings in an unquestionably ESG bank even though they'll leave money on the table by not doing so. I'm not here to argue what bank has the highest saving rates etc., My point is that conservatives are easily convinced to vote against their own best interests and this bank deal open to all, is a really great way to make them feel that cognitive dissonance. If they're getting 1% on their corporate money market accounts, this one will tug a bit harder.

[hokie80]

Here's an ESG bank that will give you 3% interest on your savings if you just spend $1,000 a month on a debit card. I've been with them for a year and I earn 5% up to $10,000 since that's what it was when I joined. Oh, and name the amount of your monthly fees, even if it's zero. They plant trees, invest only in green technologies, and much more

But some here wouldn't DEIGN to patronize a do-goody, progressive, bank. You'll leave cash on the table if it means doing the right thing.

Aspiration: Do good and do well.

https://www.aspiration.com/
https://my.aspiration.com/auth/login/

If they can beat all the others, I’ll put money in them.

But right now, I can make more elsewhere.

Heck, in 3 years on the lake lot I bought and just sold, i had a 93% return after paying capital gains (30% return per year).

[RiverguyVT]

...and we're stupid and brainwashed....

[hokie80]

.

https://www.nerdwallet.com/m/banking/st ... accounts-5

[HokieHam]

...and we're stupid and brainwashed....

Yup…….totally unaware.

[RiverguyVT]

..although, I do appreciate the market argument for this stuff.

[HokieJoe]

https://www.reuters.com/business/sustai ... 023-01-12/

Vanguard Group's decision last month to quit a key climate change coalition underscores how the retail investors who dominate its client base focus less on environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG) priorities than institutional investors.

Vanguard said last month it would drop out of the Net Zero Asset Managers (NZAM) initiative, whose members commit to making their investment portfolios emission-neutral by 2050. It said 80% of its close to $8 trillion in assets are in its index funds, which primarily attract retail investors.

These funds generally do not have discretion to include or exclude stocks beyond a pre-set mandate, and most do not account for carbon emissions.

Vanguard did not explain what changed since 2021, when it joined NZAM, but said it was responding to a desire of its clients to provide "clarity" and make its independence clear.

Vanguard's biggest competitors, BlackRock Inc (BLK.N) and State Street Corp's (STT.N) asset-management arm, rely more on institutional investors including pension funds and foundations. Both BlackRock and State Street have stuck with NZAM.

Hopefully, lawsuits will eventually take care of the rest.

[dunwithtrump]

...and we're stupid and brainwashed....

As I said, I'm getting 5% for being an OG for over a year. This isn't my portfolio, the point is ESG - which you will be convinced to hate because the wealthy oil companies are paying fauxnews et Al to convince you to hate it is competitive and has been for a while.

You are a programmed useful idiot for the wealthy class.

[dunwithtrump]

Hopefully, lawsuits will eventually take care of the rest.

So you want to restrict what people can invest their own money in based upon *YOUR* political preferences. How capitalist of you.

Just like the Public Option debate during the ACA debate. The right whined and whined how
"It's not fair, the government won't take profits. How can the insurance companies possibly compete!"

Yeah, that's kinda the point.

Unfortunately, Obama is only slightly left of the corporate republican party and caved in 2.09 seconds flat on the public option.

[HokieHam]

https://www.reuters.com/business/sustai ... 023-01-12/

Vanguard Group's decision last month to quit a key climate change coalition underscores how the retail investors who dominate its client base focus less on environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG) priorities than institutional investors.

Vanguard said last month it would drop out of the Net Zero Asset Managers (NZAM) initiative, whose members commit to making their investment portfolios emission-neutral by 2050. It said 80% of its close to $8 trillion in assets are in its index funds, which primarily attract retail investors.

These funds generally do not have discretion to include or exclude stocks beyond a pre-set mandate, and most do not account for carbon emissions.

Vanguard did not explain what changed since 2021, when it joined NZAM, but said it was responding to a desire of its clients to provide "clarity" and make its independence clear.

Vanguard's biggest competitors, BlackRock Inc (BLK.N) and State Street Corp's (STT.N) asset-management arm, rely more on institutional investors including pension funds and foundations. Both BlackRock and State Street have stuck with NZAM.

Hopefully, lawsuits will eventually take care of the rest.

Yup.

[Mcl3 Hokie]

Hopefully, lawsuits will eventually take care of the rest.

So you want to restrict what people can invest their own money in based upon *YOUR* political preferences. How capitalist of you.

Just like the Public Option debate during the ACA debate. The right whined and whined how
"It's not fair, the government won't take profits. How can the insurance companies possibly compete!"

Yeah, that's kinda the point.

Unfortunately, Obama is only slightly left of the corporate republican party and caved in 2.09 seconds flat on the public option.

I think you have it backwards. It's fine to have ESG friendly funds, and allow investors to select them if they want that return profile. What's not fine is substituting government ESG ideology for fiduciary responsibility.

[hokie80]

https://www.reuters.com/business/sustai ... 023-01-12/

Vanguard Group's decision last month to quit a key climate change coalition underscores how the retail investors who dominate its client base focus less on environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG) priorities than institutional investors.

Vanguard said last month it would drop out of the Net Zero Asset Managers (NZAM) initiative, whose members commit to making their investment portfolios emission-neutral by 2050. It said 80% of its close to $8 trillion in assets are in its index funds, which primarily attract retail investors.

These funds generally do not have discretion to include or exclude stocks beyond a pre-set mandate, and most do not account for carbon emissions.

Vanguard did not explain what changed since 2021, when it joined NZAM, but said it was responding to a desire of its clients to provide "clarity" and make its independence clear.

Vanguard's biggest competitors, BlackRock Inc (BLK.N) and State Street Corp's (STT.N) asset-management arm, rely more on institutional investors including pension funds and foundations. Both BlackRock and State Street have stuck with NZAM.

Hopefully, lawsuits will eventually take care of the rest.

Yup.

[hokie80]

https://www.reuters.com/business/sustai ... 023-01-12/

Vanguard Group's decision last month to quit a key climate change coalition underscores how the retail investors who dominate its client base focus less on environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG) priorities than institutional investors.

Vanguard said last month it would drop out of the Net Zero Asset Managers (NZAM) initiative, whose members commit to making their investment portfolios emission-neutral by 2050. It said 80% of its close to $8 trillion in assets are in its index funds, which primarily attract retail investors.

These funds generally do not have discretion to include or exclude stocks beyond a pre-set mandate, and most do not account for carbon emissions.

Vanguard did not explain what changed since 2021, when it joined NZAM, but said it was responding to a desire of its clients to provide "clarity" and make its independence clear.

Vanguard's biggest competitors, BlackRock Inc (BLK.N) and State Street Corp's (STT.N) asset-management arm, rely more on institutional investors including pension funds and foundations. Both BlackRock and State Street have stuck with NZAM.

Hopefully, lawsuits will eventually take care of the rest.

Yup.

[hokie80]

Hopefully, lawsuits will eventually take care of the rest.

So you want to restrict what people can invest their own money in based upon *YOUR* political preferences. How capitalist of you.

Just like the Public Option debate during the ACA debate. The right whined and whined how
"It's not fair, the government won't take profits. How can the insurance companies possibly compete!"

Yeah, that's kinda the point.

Unfortunately, Obama is only slightly left of the corporate republican party and caved in 2.09 seconds flat on the public option.

I think you have it backwards. It's fine to have ESG friendly funds, and allow investors to select them if they want that return profile. What's not fine is substituting government ESG ideology for fiduciary responsibility.

BOOM!

[HokieJoe]

Hopefully, lawsuits will eventually take care of the rest.

So you want to restrict what people can invest their own money in based upon *YOUR* political preferences. How capitalist of you.

Just like the Public Option debate during the ACA debate. The right whined and whined how
"It's not fair, the government won't take profits. How can the insurance companies possibly compete!"

Yeah, that's kinda the point.

Unfortunately, Obama is only slightly left of the corporate republican party and caved in 2.09 seconds flat on the public option.

If you want an exclusive environmentally focused investment, go for it. But that isn't what has been happening.

https://strive.com/strive-asset-managem ... ng-giants/

Break Up the ESG Investing Giants

BlackRock, Vanguard and State Street effectively control each other—and their market competitors. The Clayton Act was made for situations like this.

Dan Morenoff, August 31, 2022

Three of the largest investment shops in the U.S.—BlackRock, Vanguard and State Street—have long used their dominance in passive-investment funds to force corporations to comply with their preferred set of environmental, social and governance policies. Their reign, however, may be nearing its rightful end, as America’s law enforcers are waking up to the threats the Big Three pose to investors and the economy.

In an Aug. 4 letter to BlackRock CEO Larry Fink, 19 state attorneys general questioned how the company’s ESG advocacy squares with its fiduciary duties to investors. The attorneys general specifically raised whether BlackRock’s “coordinated conduct with other financial institutions”—i.e., the two other investing giants—to demonetize the oil-and-gas industry raises potential antitrust issues.

The attorneys general are digging into an important matter, but there is a much more worrying question they must explore: Why are the Big Three pursuing these policies in lockstep? Why have no institutions in the financial-services industry except one—the recently launched Strive Asset Management—opted to place the investor first, by giving priority to profit over social issues? The seeming answer raises concerns far beyond the Big Three’s anti-oil-and-gas collusion.

Through their management of passive investments, the Big Three collectively hold the largest voting blocs for nearly the entire S&P 500. Among them, they control a predominant share of the exchange-traded fund, or ETF, market, and of most participants in nearly every other market. Two of the three (BlackRock and State Street) are publicly traded companies, and so their officers disclose under oath in regular federal filings their institutional shareholders. In this paperwork, they regularly tell us not only what they own, but who owns them.

The answer reads like a punch line: The Big Three own each other and themselves.

Oil and gas, firearm manufacturer's, pushing DEI initiatives, etc. The objective of a company is to maximize shareholder's profits- not push social policy.

[dunwithtrump]

I think you have it backwards. It's fine to have ESG friendly funds, and allow investors to select them if they want that return profile. What's not fine is substituting government ESG ideology for fiduciary responsibility.

Actually, no I don't. You have been spun with misinformation from the right.

The government has said the rule is valid because it still requires retirement plans to put financial considerations ahead of ESG factors

A 2020 regulation had required retirement plans to consider only financial factors in selecting investments. The new rule sets guidelines for ESG investing, including requiring that socially conscious investments are still financially sound.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/can-repub ... y%20sound.

[RiverguyVT]

Here's an ESG bank that will give you 3% interest on your savings if you just spend $1,000 a month on a debit card. I've been with them for a year and I earn 5% up to $10,000 since that's what it was when I joined. Oh, and name the amount of your monthly fees, even if it's zero. They plant trees, invest only in green technologies, and much more

But some here wouldn't DEIGN to patronize a do-goody, progressive, bank. You'll leave cash on the table if it means doing the right thing.

Aspiration: Do good and do well.

https://www.aspiration.com/
https://my.aspiration.com/auth/login/

This, early in a week where a progressive bank is taken over, and banks with prog objectives get hammered... all due to treasury rates driven by an administration's progressive ideologies.

LOL

So glad Recip is back.

[HokieFanDC]

It’s a bunch of BS.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/qai/2022/0 ... index/amp/

Exxon is ESG, but Tesla is not? Insanity.

Did you know you can still invest in cleantech using "Q.ai's CleanTech Kit"?

[HokieHam]

Here's an ESG bank that will give you 3% interest on your savings if you just spend $1,000 a month on a debit card. I've been with them for a year and I earn 5% up to $10,000 since that's what it was when I joined. Oh, and name the amount of your monthly fees, even if it's zero. They plant trees, invest only in green technologies, and much more

But some here wouldn't DEIGN to patronize a do-goody, progressive, bank. You'll leave cash on the table if it means doing the right thing.

Aspiration: Do good and do well.

https://www.aspiration.com/
https://my.aspiration.com/auth/login/

This, early in a week where a progressive bank is taken over, and banks with prog objectives get hammered... all due to treasury rates driven by an administration's progressive ideologies.

LOL

So glad Recip is back.

[dunwithtrump]

This, early in a week where a progressive bank is taken over, and banks with prog objectives get hammered... all due to treasury rates driven by an administration's progressive ideologies.

Man you tools really are stupid. This was a bank where venture capital was parked and they failed because they were greedy and stupid, not because they invested in ESG. In fact no reports on this bank's demise ever even mention ESG.

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/silicon ... 43348.html

Get used to it. ESG is the future of investing and Big Oil is destined to become a mere chemical raw material/commodity industry as we transition to electricity (if MAGA would just sit down and STFU).

[RiverguyVT]

This, early in a week where a progressive bank is taken over, and banks with prog objectives get hammered... all due to treasury rates driven by an administration's progressive ideologies.

Man you tools really are stupid. This was a bank where venture capital was parked and they failed because they were greedy and stupid, not because they invested in ESG. In fact no reports on this bank's demise ever even mention ESG.

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/silicon ... 43348.html

Get used to it. ESG is the future of investing and Big Oil is destined to become a mere chemical raw material/commodity industry as we transition to electricity (if MAGA would just sit down and STFU).

“Greed” (that dastardly leftist dog whistle word) had zero to do with this.


Oh. And oil already IS a chemical raw material/commodity.

[dunwithtrump]

Man you tools really are stupid. This was a bank where venture capital was parked and they failed because they were greedy and stupid, not because they invested in ESG. In fact no reports on this bank's demise ever even mention ESG.

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/silicon ... 43348.html

Get used to it. ESG is the future of investing and Big Oil is destined to become a mere chemical raw material/commodity industry as we transition to electricity (if MAGA would just sit down and STFU).

“Greed” (that dastardly leftist dog whistle word) had zero to do with this.

Once again, I brought the receipts and you brought a naked assertion.