investing is less efficient forms of energy surprisingly leads to less efficient returns on investment ... someone should sue the pants off the ESG managers for ignoring their fiduciary duty to the investors ... a client who will be dead in 10-30 years doesn't need or want a 50 year investment horizon ... and all the ESG nonsense aims at saving the planet in 50-100 years ... (one sign of a scam is the long horizon with no way the measure intermediate goals, and sketchy faulty "models" ...)
One benefit of inflation is that will cause a reevaluation of the malinvestment that occurred under ZIRP. Painful, very likely. But as Buffet (or someone said), when the tide goes out, those swimming naked are exposed.
Right. A corollary to the Buffet maxim is this: When the tide goes out, even great companies can seem like they are exposed. I think 2001 is a perfect example of this. Amazon and other tech companies got really cheap. Some were in fact chaff, but some where unbelievable buys. I think we will see the same with crypto eventually as Crypto Winter deepens.
Considering the ESG theme has some direct and indirect ties to the WEF/Davos, would love to see a post from you on WEF/Davos. Do we really want a world where the "less than 1%" unelected club get to dictate how the other 99%+ shall conduct themselves, while those same "less than 1%" individuals just go about their usual routines? I don't see them making any sacrifices they wish to impose on "the common folks" . . . no suggestions the big corporations they own and/or run clean up their own acts (figuratively and literally), but rather impose their "better world" views and diktats upon the populace (suggestions of carbon footprint tracking, global digital currencies, etc.). As the saying goes, "rules for thee, not for me".
The WEF crowd and Krause Schwab are finally getting some well deserved attention for their totalitarian ideas. Some of the most effective criticism is coming from Russell Brand, of all places, on his YouTube channel. Brand is exceptionally dangerous to the lefty elite as he skewers his own side for there massive failings and encourages lefties to question their elites. Lefties will watch him where they would never tune into someone on the right. I don’t agree with him on many things, but I do agree with him on questioning the people you may follow for their level of truth and especially their ulterior motives for the agenda they are pushing.
I was reminded recently that there is another definition of the term “one-percenters” used maybe fifty years ago about the claim that 99% of motorcycle clubs were legit and peaceful, full of normal guys who just loved motorcycles, and only 1% were psychopathic criminals. Prescient.
ESG has been another one of those well-marketed things, like "factor investing" years ago . . . FWIW, factor investing in it's truest form is known as active portfolio management, which has been done for a long time, but without the cool name. : ) I'm glad to see at least some of the investing population is starting to see through the ESG fog, and Jeff I commend you dedicating a blog to call it out.
I remembered today that Exxon-Mobil was replaced by a software company in the DJIA in the last year. I was curious and looked it up. Exxon-Mobil was replaced by Salesforce. As I was looking, I also saw that Pfizer was replaced by Amgen. This makes no sense to me. E-M and Pfizer have roughly $300 billion market caps. Salesforce and Amgen each have about half those caps. Is this ESG? Demoting petroleum companies? And Pfizer? That's one of the largest and most successful companies in American history. What gives here?
investing is less efficient forms of energy surprisingly leads to less efficient returns on investment ... someone should sue the pants off the ESG managers for ignoring their fiduciary duty to the investors ... a client who will be dead in 10-30 years doesn't need or want a 50 year investment horizon ... and all the ESG nonsense aims at saving the planet in 50-100 years ... (one sign of a scam is the long horizon with no way the measure intermediate goals, and sketchy faulty "models" ...)
great point
One benefit of inflation is that will cause a reevaluation of the malinvestment that occurred under ZIRP. Painful, very likely. But as Buffet (or someone said), when the tide goes out, those swimming naked are exposed.
Right. A corollary to the Buffet maxim is this: When the tide goes out, even great companies can seem like they are exposed. I think 2001 is a perfect example of this. Amazon and other tech companies got really cheap. Some were in fact chaff, but some where unbelievable buys. I think we will see the same with crypto eventually as Crypto Winter deepens.
Jeff, nice column! Thank you. Amen to the last sentence.
thank you
Considering the ESG theme has some direct and indirect ties to the WEF/Davos, would love to see a post from you on WEF/Davos. Do we really want a world where the "less than 1%" unelected club get to dictate how the other 99%+ shall conduct themselves, while those same "less than 1%" individuals just go about their usual routines? I don't see them making any sacrifices they wish to impose on "the common folks" . . . no suggestions the big corporations they own and/or run clean up their own acts (figuratively and literally), but rather impose their "better world" views and diktats upon the populace (suggestions of carbon footprint tracking, global digital currencies, etc.). As the saying goes, "rules for thee, not for me".
Ha, I think you just made the post!
The WEF crowd and Krause Schwab are finally getting some well deserved attention for their totalitarian ideas. Some of the most effective criticism is coming from Russell Brand, of all places, on his YouTube channel. Brand is exceptionally dangerous to the lefty elite as he skewers his own side for there massive failings and encourages lefties to question their elites. Lefties will watch him where they would never tune into someone on the right. I don’t agree with him on many things, but I do agree with him on questioning the people you may follow for their level of truth and especially their ulterior motives for the agenda they are pushing.
**Klaus Schwab
I was reminded recently that there is another definition of the term “one-percenters” used maybe fifty years ago about the claim that 99% of motorcycle clubs were legit and peaceful, full of normal guys who just loved motorcycles, and only 1% were psychopathic criminals. Prescient.
Great article Jeff.
thx!
ESG has been another one of those well-marketed things, like "factor investing" years ago . . . FWIW, factor investing in it's truest form is known as active portfolio management, which has been done for a long time, but without the cool name. : ) I'm glad to see at least some of the investing population is starting to see through the ESG fog, and Jeff I commend you dedicating a blog to call it out.
I wish I was as good at marketing!
Perhaps we should talk offline.
I remembered today that Exxon-Mobil was replaced by a software company in the DJIA in the last year. I was curious and looked it up. Exxon-Mobil was replaced by Salesforce. As I was looking, I also saw that Pfizer was replaced by Amgen. This makes no sense to me. E-M and Pfizer have roughly $300 billion market caps. Salesforce and Amgen each have about half those caps. Is this ESG? Demoting petroleum companies? And Pfizer? That's one of the largest and most successful companies in American history. What gives here?
Curious if anybody else has a take.