Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

The New Coffee Room

  1. TNCR
  2. General Discussion
  3. Biden vetoes resolution that had bipartisan support

Biden vetoes resolution that had bipartisan support

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
36 Posts 8 Posters 110 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • JollyJ Jolly

    I thnk it does.

    If one wishes to invest in "green" funds or companies, they're out there. You know it when you invest. But to make funds do so is compromising the best return on a client's money.

    jon-nycJ Offline
    jon-nycJ Offline
    jon-nyc
    wrote on last edited by jon-nyc
    #23

    @Jolly said in Biden vetoes resolution that had bipartisan support:

    I thnk it does.

    If one wishes to invest in "green" funds or companies, they're out there. You know it when you invest. But to make funds do so is compromising the best return on a client's money.

    This doesn’t make them do so, it allows them to do so. The GOP’s messaging was also misleading.

    Only non-witches get due process.

    • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
    LuFins DadL 1 Reply Last reply
    • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

      @Jolly said in Biden vetoes resolution that had bipartisan support:

      I thnk it does.

      If one wishes to invest in "green" funds or companies, they're out there. You know it when you invest. But to make funds do so is compromising the best return on a client's money.

      This doesn’t make them do so, it allows them to do so. The GOP’s messaging was also misleading.

      LuFins DadL Offline
      LuFins DadL Offline
      LuFins Dad
      wrote on last edited by
      #24

      @jon-nyc said in Biden vetoes resolution that had bipartisan support:

      @Jolly said in Biden vetoes resolution that had bipartisan support:

      I thnk it does.

      If one wishes to invest in "green" funds or companies, they're out there. You know it when you invest. But to make funds do so is compromising the best return on a client's money.

      This doesn’t make them do so, it allows them to do so. The GOP’s messaging was also misleading.

      My question is does it encourage them to consider ESG in the calculations?

      The Brad

      jon-nycJ 1 Reply Last reply
      • LuFins DadL LuFins Dad

        @jon-nyc said in Biden vetoes resolution that had bipartisan support:

        @Jolly said in Biden vetoes resolution that had bipartisan support:

        I thnk it does.

        If one wishes to invest in "green" funds or companies, they're out there. You know it when you invest. But to make funds do so is compromising the best return on a client's money.

        This doesn’t make them do so, it allows them to do so. The GOP’s messaging was also misleading.

        My question is does it encourage them to consider ESG in the calculations?

        jon-nycJ Offline
        jon-nycJ Offline
        jon-nyc
        wrote on last edited by
        #25

        @LuFins-Dad No it just permits it.

        Only non-witches get due process.

        • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
        MikM 1 Reply Last reply
        • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

          @LuFins-Dad No it just permits it.

          MikM Offline
          MikM Offline
          Mik
          wrote on last edited by
          #26

          @jon-nyc said in Biden vetoes resolution that had bipartisan support:

          @LuFins-Dad No it just permits it.

          But secondary to fiduciary responsibility. Of course, that's rather difficult to prove. The caveat here is to know your financial advisor.

          “I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals.” ~Winston S. Churchill

          jon-nycJ 1 Reply Last reply
          • MikM Mik

            @jon-nyc said in Biden vetoes resolution that had bipartisan support:

            @LuFins-Dad No it just permits it.

            But secondary to fiduciary responsibility. Of course, that's rather difficult to prove. The caveat here is to know your financial advisor.

            jon-nycJ Offline
            jon-nycJ Offline
            jon-nyc
            wrote on last edited by
            #27

            @Mik I don’t think it eliminates fiduciary responsibility per se, I think it allows considering ESG ratings to be considered within the bounds of fiduciary responsibility.

            But I’m not entirely sure about that.

            Only non-witches get due process.

            • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
            MikM 1 Reply Last reply
            • HoraceH Offline
              HoraceH Offline
              Horace
              wrote on last edited by
              #28

              The only cut and dried effect of the original legislation I could see, was that funds with explicit ESG goals were prohibited. The veto would have reinstated that rule.

              The language about ESG being an allowed parameter, but within existing fiduciary responsibilities, seems meaningless, if maybe relevant in a court where a case in point might be argued. There are always ways to hand-wave an economic connection to social or environmental values.

              Education is extremely important.

              1 Reply Last reply
              • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                @Mik I don’t think it eliminates fiduciary responsibility per se, I think it allows considering ESG ratings to be considered within the bounds of fiduciary responsibility.

                But I’m not entirely sure about that.

                MikM Offline
                MikM Offline
                Mik
                wrote on last edited by
                #29

                @jon-nyc said in Biden vetoes resolution that had bipartisan support:

                @Mik I don’t think it eliminates fiduciary responsibility per se, I think it allows considering ESG ratings to be considered within the bounds of fiduciary responsibility.

                But I’m not entirely sure about that.

                It doesn't eliminate it at all. But as I read it, it might only come into play if the decision were between two roughly equal financial instruments where one was associated with ESG programs and the other was not.

                As always, the devil is in the details, and also the implementation.

                “I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals.” ~Winston S. Churchill

                1 Reply Last reply
                • LuFins DadL Offline
                  LuFins DadL Offline
                  LuFins Dad
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #30

                  My problem is the “Social” of the governance. We need less corporate involvement in the social issues of the day. We don’t need companies increasing their DEI initiatives to drive up share price.

                  The Brad

                  LuFins DadL AxtremusA 2 Replies Last reply
                  • LuFins DadL LuFins Dad

                    My problem is the “Social” of the governance. We need less corporate involvement in the social issues of the day. We don’t need companies increasing their DEI initiatives to drive up share price.

                    LuFins DadL Offline
                    LuFins DadL Offline
                    LuFins Dad
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #31

                    @LuFins-Dad said in Biden vetoes resolution that had bipartisan support:

                    My problem is the “Social” of the governance. We need less corporate involvement in the social issues of the day. We don’t need companies increasing their DEI initiatives to drive up share price.

                    It also vastly increases Union power.

                    The Brad

                    AxtremusA 1 Reply Last reply
                    • LuFins DadL Offline
                      LuFins DadL Offline
                      LuFins Dad
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #32

                      So… If I wanted to invest into funds that don’t do so well on the ESG scoreboard, which would those be?

                      The Brad

                      AxtremusA 1 Reply Last reply
                      • LuFins DadL LuFins Dad

                        My problem is the “Social” of the governance. We need less corporate involvement in the social issues of the day. We don’t need companies increasing their DEI initiatives to drive up share price.

                        AxtremusA Away
                        AxtremusA Away
                        Axtremus
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #33

                        @LuFins-Dad said in Biden vetoes resolution that had bipartisan support:

                        My problem is the “Social” of the governance. We need less corporate involvement in the social issues of the day. We don’t need companies increasing their DEI initiatives to drive up share price.

                        How do you go from "social" in the ESG context to "DEI"?
                        Kindly explain.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        • LuFins DadL LuFins Dad

                          @LuFins-Dad said in Biden vetoes resolution that had bipartisan support:

                          My problem is the “Social” of the governance. We need less corporate involvement in the social issues of the day. We don’t need companies increasing their DEI initiatives to drive up share price.

                          It also vastly increases Union power.

                          AxtremusA Away
                          AxtremusA Away
                          Axtremus
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #34

                          @LuFins-Dad said in Biden vetoes resolution that had bipartisan support:

                          @LuFins-Dad said in Biden vetoes resolution that had bipartisan support:

                          My problem is the “Social” of the governance. We need less corporate involvement in the social issues of the day. We don’t need companies increasing their DEI initiatives to drive up share price.

                          It also vastly increases Union power.

                          Also, how do you go from "DEI" to Union power?
                          Kindly explain.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          • LuFins DadL LuFins Dad

                            So… If I wanted to invest into funds that don’t do so well on the ESG scoreboard, which would those be?

                            AxtremusA Away
                            AxtremusA Away
                            Axtremus
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #35

                            @LuFins-Dad said in Biden vetoes resolution that had bipartisan support:

                            So… If I wanted to invest into funds that don’t do so well on the ESG scoreboard, which would those be?

                            https://www.morningstar.com/esg-screener

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            • jon-nycJ Offline
                              jon-nycJ Offline
                              jon-nyc
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #36

                              ESG means whatever its gatekeepers want it to mean, Ax. And it clearly has evolved over time.

                              It’s basically a privatized version of Senator Warren’s monstrous proposal from 2019.

                              Only non-witches get due process.

                              • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                              1 Reply Last reply
                              Reply
                              • Reply as topic
                              Log in to reply
                              • Oldest to Newest
                              • Newest to Oldest
                              • Most Votes


                              • Login

                              • Don't have an account? Register

                              • Login or register to search.
                              • First post
                                Last post
                              0
                              • Categories
                              • Recent
                              • Tags
                              • Popular
                              • Users
                              • Groups