Wednesday, 30 June 2021

Well, it's alright for him...

Prince Charles, off on one.

Here

Deeply. Deeply, infuriating.

One, there is no 'climate emergency'.

Two, I want my pension funds invested for best return.

Three, it's probably against the Trustees pension investment rules to make a political statement on investing pension funds. As Arthur Scargill discovered.

18 comments:

George Carty said...

Ethical investing is a complete con anyway, because anyone who sells shares in a firm whose activities they morally disapprove of is merely transferring that revenue stream to someone else with fewer scruples.

The offending company itself isn't affected at all, especially when the firms most likely to be targeted (fossil fuel companies in this case, but also tobacco companies) are mostly mature firms which won't be needing to issue new shares to fund their activities.

Mark Wadsworth said...

Agreed.

Bayard said...

GC, that's because people think that buying shares in a company is investing in that company and has an effect on that company. It isn't. Sure the money is invested, but it is invested for a return, which that company provides. The company doesn't give a damn who owns its shares, unless there is a boardroom struggle going on.
However, it's not a complete con, in that some people prefer not to be in receipt of funds that have been generated by means that they consider unethical. They don't care if someone else is in receipt of them, why should they? it's nothing to do with them.

Bayard said...

When Prince Charles is King, he can suspend the laws of thermodynamics for the duration of the climate emergency. That will sort things out.

Doonhamer said...

Who gets lovely lovely money from each and every offshore UK bird chopping whale confuser?
Well of course one knows that one is different. So wasting energy in boiling multiple eggs so that one can get one at exactly the right condition is just a sacrifice that one must make.

ontheotherhand said...

Every blooming asset management conference has a big section about 'ESG' as evil finance virtue signals to itself. All funds will perform slightly worse each year because of all of the costs of consulting and reporting on ESG. A bit like an Energy Performance Certificate on buying a house, it is primarily a new tax that creates non-jobs.

Lola said...

OTOH. Actually. No. :-)
I have access to ESG funds that are very competitively priced. Slightly more than non ESG, but still good value. Of course, not many people in the trade use them as no mileage...

ontheotherhand said...

Lola, they would be even more competitively priced if there was no ESG. If ESG means anything, then the underlying invested companies have to expend effort on ESG reporting, the asset manager has to expend effort of ESG selection including buying new ESG data provider output, the 3rd party service providers including Depositary, Administrator and Auditor have to check the ESG claims and report on them, the regulators are increasingly mandating ESG reporting and declarations. None of that is free.

Mark Wadsworth said...

OTOH or L, can you explain what ESG means?

ontheotherhand said...

Sorry. ESG stands for Environmental, Social, Governance. I suppose there was CSR Corporate Social Responsibility before it, and so trying to force 'ethics' from the top down has been tried before. The finance industry still feels guilty after the GFC and is trying to compensate. And so it goes on.... I went to business school shortly after Enron, and we all had to take a core Ethics course. I was much amused when it emerged that half the year had cheated on the take home exam by copying one left on the printer!

Bayard said...

OTOH, I take it the "ethics" in the course were based on the ideal, not on reality. If the latter, finding the exam on the printer WAS the exam. Those that copied it passed, the others failed.

Lola said...

OTOH B.MW. ESG. It's all bollocks anyway. Fr'instance. My notion of what's ethical will differ form yours. It's a subjective value, for the most part. e.g. I support strong defence of the realm. That means making arms, which some is a conflict with ESG. Except, as the prime duty of government and often the very reason the state exists is to protect the citizen from coercion by foreigners.

Generally ESG is part of the Progressive Agenda. It's about capitalism bad socialism good.

But, 'our' ESG portfolios are as about as efficient as you can get. Nevertheless in theory there is truth in what OTOH says it isn't borne out in practice. Probably because a well run company is a well run company and will always do well. It's ESG friendly because it is well run, not the other way about.

Mark Wadsworth said...

OTOH, L, ta for explaining.

Mark Wadsworth said...

By the way, there is no shame in cheating in exams and so on.

The shame is in getting caught. Those who get caught are not just cheats but also stupid. Those who get away with it can deny they cheated with impunity.

ol said...

Nice post. I was checking this blog and I'm impressed! Extremely useful information. Thank you and keep up the good work. I recommend dissertation writing services I think you do not regret visiting and using this service!

Lola said...

MW OTOH On ethics, the FCA are hot on that - in their own inimitably useless PC Progressive way. Trouble it's all based on their 'rule book' - of over 1 million paras and counting.

We simply ignore the FCA and operate in line with the last 6 of the Ten Commandments....

And that shows the extent of the failure of the Financial Catastrophe Authority.

James Higham said...

Exactly.

Robin Smith said...

It's a cult.

The only way to fight a cult... is with another cult.

Using logic and reason is the act of a fool.