Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Who Are My Investors?

avc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 264 posts

Re: Who Are My Investors?

#191

Post by unknownkadath »

nicolas_t wrote: post #182
roenxi wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obviously a functional democratic society will stomp a dictatorial one on pretty much any axis you care to think of. Having acknowledged that central point, we can't just say "dictators are bad". We can say "democracy is better", but there are instances where democracy doesn't work. For a realpolitic example, great powers have a long history of quietly corrupting and overthrowing democracies where their interests con…

> Obviously a functional democratic society will stomp a dictatorial one on pretty much any axis you care to think of. A lot of Singaporeans might disagree there. Enlightened dictatorship can be really good however the probability of a having a great dictator is extremely low.

A lot of Singaporeans would disagree with you, but they know better than to speak out.

Re: Who Are My Investors?

#192

Post by unknownkadath »

magicbuzz wrote: post #168
lordnacho wrote: post #110

I've come across this problem a few times when running a hedge fund. To what degree does one care where the money came from, aside from following AML rules? I get the feeling you only write articles like that if you have more people wanting to invest than you have capacity for. - A friend called, asking for a recommendation for a job he was applying for. And advice about whether it was worth taking. Turned out, it wa…

If you don't draw the line at dictatorships that grind up American journalists - where do you draw the line?

The road to hell is paved with good returns, it seems.

Re: Who Are My Investors?

#193

Post by [deleted] »

readhn wrote: post #153
howlgram wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just want to mention that Gaddafi brought a lot of development to Libya and his death did nothing for his people. It's easy to say "oh he was a dictator and dictators are bad" but it's not so simple.

the same could be said about a lot of dictators. these guys make it so that there is no other option (by killing opponents) for the country.

[deleted]

Re: Who Are My Investors?

#194

Post by unknownkadath »

bigiain wrote: post #129
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Pretty much every single comment so far is cynical. "No one really wants to know how the sausage is made", lots of money is tainted anyway, it's just PR fluff, etc etc. It seems like a deeper problem than that, which is that money is fungible. It's the same thing as saying we shouldn't buy Saudi oil. If the only result is that you buy some other oil and the people who would have bought that oil buy the Saudi oil, n…

> nothing meaningful has changed Except that you don't now have blood on your hands... If "being able to sleep at night" gets counted as "meaningful", I'd say something has changed. If the only question you count as "meaningful" is "did we leave any money on the table". Perhaps you should think more deeply about the world...

Thank you for this. It needed to be said.

Re: Who Are My Investors?

#195

Post by intended »

lordnacho wrote: post #110

I've come across this problem a few times when running a hedge fund. To what degree does one care where the money came from, aside from following AML rules? I get the feeling you only write articles like that if you have more people wanting to invest than you have capacity for. - A friend called, asking for a recommendation for a job he was applying for. And advice about whether it was worth taking. Turned out, it wa…

The way I’ve come to define this issue is that Homo sapiens lives in a world built for homo economicus. And homo economicus is busy hacking Homo sapiens to see exactly how much it can be hacked.

There’s no “financially or economically” sound choice here.

If the marginal utility of taking money from a murderer is higher than not taking it, then you take it.

Morals are assumed to be held by people and there’s no adjustment for how weak they are as a slow amorphous force.

Our systems are actually designed to be objective and away from soft things like feelings.

Re: Who Are My Investors?

#196

Post by jypepin »

I've never been in the game, so it's hard for me to judge, and too easy to say "yeah! Always do the right/perfect thing". I still appreciate this kind of comments, especially is they help some people, sometimes make a better decision.

But I think it's not always as straight forward as what the article is making it sound.

A few following questions - Pension funds? How proud should they be about managing their money? I'm sure pension funds do a lot of shady things, have corruption, etc. even the ones for teachers, firemen etc.

- What if your company is doing something very good for the world, but has trouble finding financing. Does it balances out? Is it better to let something great for the world die in the name of not taking dirty money? Or vice versa?

- Where do you draw the line? Related to my first question. A gulf dictator is bad, but corrupted US funds are better? How about taking money from Leman Brothers post-crisis for example?

Re: Who Are My Investors?

#197

Post by downandout »

dcposch wrote: post #38

Pretty much every single comment so far is cynical. "No one really wants to know how the sausage is made", lots of money is tainted anyway, it's just PR fluff, etc etc. The classic HN Middlebrow Dismissal in full effect. Counterpoint: cynicism is too easy. Actually giving a shit is harder, it's uncomfortable, it involves compromise. Yes, if you refuse investment from any country that has ever violated a human right,…

be transparent about who their LPs are

That would be a deal breaker for many potential LPs, and not because all of them are criminals or despots. Some people just don't like others to know what they are doing with their money.

The bottom line is, if enough VCs take this stance, any bad actor that wants to invest will simply put their money into clean shell companies and invest that way, or partner with other, clean LPs. That isn't cynicism, that is reality. If people want to throw money at VCs, they'll do it - one way or another.

Re: Who Are My Investors?

#199

Post by puranjay »

howlgram wrote: post #146
lordnacho wrote: post #110

I've come across this problem a few times when running a hedge fund. To what degree does one care where the money came from, aside from following AML rules? I get the feeling you only write articles like that if you have more people wanting to invest than you have capacity for. - A friend called, asking for a recommendation for a job he was applying for. And advice about whether it was worth taking. Turned out, it wa…

I just want to mention that Gaddafi brought a lot of development to Libya and his death did nothing for his people. It's easy to say "oh he was a dictator and dictators are bad" but it's not so simple.

I've found that the west has a democracy bias. It assumes that democracy is intrinsic to people and it's only a matter of "liberating" them from tyranny.

But as history is proof, there is nothing intrinsic about democracy. Democratic revolutions were hardly organic in much of the world. Most countries have known nothing but monarchy and/or dictatorships. To impose democracy on them would perhaps be as cruel as letting them be ruled by dictators.

I know this isn't a popular opinion, but I'd say that people should be allowed to manage their own affairs. If a country is better off with a dictator, then so be it.

Re: Who Are My Investors?

#200

Post by rocqua »

afro88 wrote: post #171
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Pretty much every single comment so far is cynical. "No one really wants to know how the sausage is made", lots of money is tainted anyway, it's just PR fluff, etc etc. It seems like a deeper problem than that, which is that money is fungible. It's the same thing as saying we shouldn't buy Saudi oil. If the only result is that you buy some other oil and the people who would have bought that oil buy the Saudi oil, n…

> It's the same thing as saying we shouldn't buy Saudi oil. If the only result is that you buy some other oil and the people who would have bought that oil buy the Saudi oil, nothing meaningful has changed. I think this touches on another thing I've struggled for clarity on lately. How many degrees of separation do you need before you're willing to take investment from someone linked to something you find morally rep…

There isn't a clear line, and there probably cannot be one.

First of all, more than just 'degree of separation' matters. You also need to know what fraction comes from bad sources. If it is 3 fronts stacked, you are still essentially dealing with the bad source.

I see 2 options:

1) Flip it. At what standard do I eliminate e.g. 20% of all funding. Or more generally, plot repugnancy against the percentage of funding sources lost, and pick an optimum

2) Make news matter. It might not feel objective to drop a deal for 3 degrees of separation when you read a story. After all, there is probably other stuff that has 3 degrees of separation. However, by reacting to that news you:

* Outsource information gathering to Journalists, who are specialized and do it for many more people than you * Increasing the impact of journalism. By making investors care about what is written about them.

The second point matters, because fear of bad PR is essentially the only capitalist force that pushes companies towards moral behavior.

Post reply on HN