Onerous legal rules for Impact Investing?

You can trust that lawyers will not miss a chance to make things complicated - and then charge ever-rising fees to disentangle the rules and regulations that they helped to create. Case in point this report by Freshfields about the obligations of fund managers to take impact (socially/environmentally) of the decisions into account. The problem with imposing these obligations is that any lobby group - however small - can start legal proceedings and impose substantial costs on the funds (while often supported by taxpayer money, directly or indirectly or by donations from charities, ngo's or think tanks that in their turn are only representing the view of a small but often vociferous minority). Taken to the extreme there could be a challenge to the investment in a milk delivery company because (take any of the options) it uses petrol or diesel for its vans, uses metals sourced from 'bad' countries, does not have a workforce split evenly between male/female, old/young, white/non-white etc. The possibilities are endless. As are the costs and burdens on business and ultimately the end consumer/investor, Joe Sixpack, you and me.
Freshfield Report

(15-Dec-2021)

ESG: How will 'Racial Justice' be measured?

This initiative has the potential to become a never-ending saga. How many angels can dance on the tip of a needle? Will rating agencies become the arbiters? (and charge you a hefty fee for this?)
(7-Aug-2020)

Racial Injustice Will Have Greater Weight in ESG Scores, S&P Global Says

Climate Change, Diversity, Human Rights, Income Equality

Climate Change, Diversity, Human Rights, Income Equality - all very worthy causes but the solution is not to push business to provide all the answers. That just means that politicians are left off the hook as they should be providing a framework that can take care of these issues.

• Use too much coal, oil? - There is a simple solution and it is not so prone to be aubused fraudulently than the carbon tax: higher taxes on production/sale.
• Diversity - simple legislation can mandate ratios for different ages, sexes, even 'races', but get a democratic majority for any law (and please, not just 50.1%)
• Human Rights - Don't ask managements to judge in which countries a business should operate, again, politics needs to make a (democratic) decision.
• Income Inequality - no point moaning, too many pieces of legislation further growing inequality and achieve the opposite of what politicians claim they try to.
  (19-August-2019)
  

AntiTrust massively eroded - Should Fiduciaries care?

Should Investors - and their hired hands in the Fund Management/Private Banking Industry - really care if Oligopolies and Monopolies are not held in check? Higher profits at the cost of higher inequality may be attractive in a Darwinian world but how does this fit in with the current focus on ESG, SRI and Impact Investing?
(9-Jan-2019)
Why the Regulators went soft on Monopolies

Seed Oligopoly - next battleground for ESG/SRI Investment?

Just a question of time before the investors in the Seed providers will come under heavy fire from those concerned about good ESG/SRI practices. How much does it cost to invent? discover? a new seed variety? Have those breeding new varieties of flowers, pigs etc left tons of money on the table? Given that the seed companies are so keen on protecting their 'intellectual' property one can only be suspicious of their motives. How much does it cost to develop a new seed variety, and how much in annual rent are they exacting?
(8-Jan-2019)
India's Top Court backs Genertically modified Seed Oligopoly

China closes Christian Church - where does SRI/ESG Community stand?

A very topical issue!
And Merry Christmas to all Readers!
Be more pro-active in the New Year and let us know your views!
(19-Dec-2018)
https://lnkd.in/gfFkzvq

Apple, - time for SRI Investors to step up

Is SRI Investing only a slogan to put into marketing brochures? Or should investors take a closer look at questionable practices at firms they hold a stake in? If they are pledging allegiance to long-term investing it is the latter. Vanguard, State Street, Fidelity, show your true colours!
(3-May-2018)
Apple faces complaints - BBC

Should Chinese Companies be given access to 'West'?

Maybe it is too late, but given this kind of news, should Chinese Companies be given access to 'Western' Capital Markets and be allowed to acquire companies (and indirectly extend their sway over huge numbers of employees?). So far the SRI and ESG - let alone the Corporate Governance Crowd - has abstained from expressing strong and clear views on this issue - but given the determination with which Xi and his minions proceed this debate cannot be swept under the carpet forever. Similar concerns can be raised with all other non-democratic states - and please no hair-splitting, we all know an authoritarian society when we see one.
(30-Nov-2017)
China's Tech Giants help Government surveillance effort (Wall St Journal, Paywall)

Corporate Bullies - what has ESG/SRI crowd to say about it?

With growing concern about ESG and SRI issues in the top echelons of the Investment Industry it would be nice to see some action and not just pious public relation statements and advertising. One may not agree on issues such as the one described in the article, but at least investment fiduciaries should make their position clear.
Stop subsidizing the Big Wind bullies | New York Post

Indexes should not be blind

The importance of Indexes (and their well-paid providers) has expanded dramatically during the past few decades. First it was the institutions which benchmarked more and more products, now it is the avalanche of passive money, not only through ETF's, that hugs indexes slavishly.
But given the fact that the world has become more complicated it can no longer be right to leave value judgements out of index construction. There simply WAS no investment in Venzuela, China etc and not too many people cared about the environment, social issues or human rights a few decades ago.
Investors Have Lost Sight of the Purpose of Indexes - Bloomberg

Santander employs staff on contracts that guarantee just 12 hrs work a year

Deplorable? certainly, but that would include regulators, government 'experts' (SRI/ESG) in the 'Ficuciaries' that invest on our behalf. Hear no evil, see no evil? And the CEO sitting there by the grace of Nepotism is fawned on by the gullible Media.
(27-Mar-2017)
Santander employs staff on contracts that guarantee just 12 hours work a year