101–110 of 253 posts
I'm pretty unclear on how anyone even thinks divestment works, actually. When a company sells stock in an IPO, buying stock from them allows them to raise capital, so it seems clear to me that you shouldn't buy stock from a fossil fuel company. But that's non-investment, not divestment. Divestment is about selling existing stock. It's true that divestment drives down the stock price. This could mean that if a company…
Value of shares is based both on revenues from holding the share and increase in value as growth. If the superannuation and sovereign wealth and trust funds worldwide (Trillion-dollar investment vehicles) stop investing in something it functionally loses 'gold plated' status and cannot be held to be less-speculative (in reality all shares are speculative but there are differences of degree and the holdings in the lon…
Has the reduction in tobacco companies' stock prices materially affected smoking rates? I don't think so.
Wow, that's absolutely insane that I have to go through half an hour of 'opting out' from different ad networks in order to visit the actual website I was going to in the first place without being tracked. Thank developers for ad-block technology.
I'd say these "opt-out" options are not gonna work in practice.
So where does the dollar to invest in climate innovation come from if you don't take the dollar out of the fossil fuel stock? What he said was nonsensical and innumerate. Perhaps its because he has effectively infinite money? His comment don't really hold up even under basic charity. The dollar in fossil fuels is a dollar not in another industry with a better story for the environment. The rest of us have a limited p…
"Climate innovation" is also going have limited impact on global warming, if by "climate innovation" you mean lower cost power sources like solar or wind.
The problem is that lower-cost clean fuel is not drive hydrocarbons away since pumping already-found oil out of the ground pretty much can't be beaten in price.
The only that can stop CO2 pollution is states using their regulatory power to stop it.
One factor to consider is that pension funds and other funds with social impact would do well to divest if such a regulatory crack-down is to take place.
-- "CO2 pollution" is good way to phrase it too, since other pollution problems aren't handled with the kind of worthless half-measures that CO2/greenhouse-gas problem has been mishandled with.
I'm pretty unclear on how anyone even thinks divestment works, actually. When a company sells stock in an IPO, buying stock from them allows them to raise capital, so it seems clear to me that you shouldn't buy stock from a fossil fuel company. But that's non-investment, not divestment. Divestment is about selling existing stock. It's true that divestment drives down the stock price. This could mean that if a company…
Divestment pushed South Africa to abolish apartheid.
Divesting from SA meant smaller tax base, fewer jobs and a fall from international prominence.
Divesting from a company/industry means that the stock price may fall. Assuming that the actual profitability of the company remains unchanged all divesting did was make the stock a better buy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If anything, shouldn't the green contingent buy more stock in oil companies to try and effect a hostile takeover?
That seems very unlikely to be the most cost-effective use of capital. Exon Mobile has a market capitalization of $309 billion. So figure $200 billion for a hostile takeover --- that's approaching the yearly cost of a Green New Deal plans, and you've only taken out one fossil fuel company.
I'm pretty unclear on how anyone even thinks divestment works, actually. When a company sells stock in an IPO, buying stock from them allows them to raise capital, so it seems clear to me that you shouldn't buy stock from a fossil fuel company. But that's non-investment, not divestment. Divestment is about selling existing stock. It's true that divestment drives down the stock price. This could mean that if a company…
If I own shares in a retailer and I decide that, say, soda is bad, I can try to use my shareholder rights to talk to them about how prominently they display soda and possibly reducing their shelf real estate for soda. But what if I own shares of a soda company? What exactly should I do in that case? Try to convince them to exit their primary market and become an entirely different company? Why would I waste my time a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly, carbon regulation will be a lot easier to pass if the direct impact to peoples' finances is lessened.
But some other investor bought the stock, didn't they?
Do I expect it to necessarily make a big difference (especially in the short term, without becoming a broader movement)? No. I do believe, however, that it's not nothing, and that we need to pursue everything.
There's also a personal aspect - I want nothing to do fossil fuel stocks. I try to limit my emissions in my personal life, so why not exercise that preference in whatever small way I can in my financial life?
So where does the dollar to invest in climate innovation come from if you don't take the dollar out of the fossil fuel stock? What he said was nonsensical and innumerate. Perhaps its because he has effectively infinite money? His comment don't really hold up even under basic charity. The dollar in fossil fuels is a dollar not in another industry with a better story for the environment. The rest of us have a limited p…
Note, I don't act according to this advice: I'm invested in sustainable funds despite my own arguments. But I don't expect this to go very far, so I'm also donating to appropriate causes.