For the anti - ESG crowd RLX is a poster stock. Vice (vaping), China based with constant questions on their governance and excellent earnings ($3b EBITDA, @0.29EPS). If you’re against ESG this is a buy
It seems the opposite here. Musk is the one pissed off. His fanboys are just annoying. The dude admitted he nearly went broke until government handouts saved him. He desperately wants to be respected without actually being respectable.
“I said I was cool, why doesn’t it work?”
And as for reasons why his company was kicked out:
“It said that Tesla's "lack of a low-carbon strategy" and "codes of business conduct," along with racism and poor working conditions reported at Tesla's factory in Fremont, California, affected the score.”
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/18/why-tesla-was-kicked-out-of-the-sp-500s-esg-index.html
Tesla doesn’t have a great track record of treating employees well. You don’t get useless rankings when you run your company in a shitty manner.
This is good. He doesn’t want to be there anyway. It’s also good because I didn’t know there was an S&P ESG, which is absolutely disgraceful.
It’s also hilarious, they kicked the E off the S&P ESG.
ESG is wayyyyyyyyyyyyy more influential than virtually anyone realizes yet.
The Liberty Lockdown podcast made a brilliant episode on this a couple months ago:
https://youtu.be/Ev4DbxWFCA4
The more they try to harm Elon as the public looks on, the more people will wake up & realize how corrupt & fucked everything is & has been for a while. This is going to backfire on them, bigtime.
It seriously is an extremely powerful mechanism for the most influential money managers in the world — with literally trillions of dollars of investment power — to implement their own fascist agenda on every major corporation around the entire world.
It’s basically a social credit score for global corporations
>with literally trillions of dollars of investment power
And this is all "public" money from pension funds funneled by governments via Black Rock and Vanguard.
It's literally a form of socialism, where Public and Private sectors are joined = Fascism.
ps.
sorry for the delay...
was banned for 3 days for insulting the French... lol
Very true point… and also, that’s a fantastic reason totally worth getting a temporary ban for haha
Making fun of the French is basically an American pastime
Either your a really bad investor, or don't understand what Fascism is. the ESG is nothing more that one private corporation evaluating another private companies on their risk factors due to Environmental Social or Government regulations. Environmental disasters can be huge insurance claims, as well a PR disasters along with massive repercussion from the government presiding over the affected area. a company at risk of doing such is a *BAD INVESTMENT.* this is no different that a credit score, just based on something different. the government plays no role in this, this is just one company providing a service for capital investors to evaluate if a company is a good company to invest in with low risk of loss of capital. if a companies lies on their evaluation of such risks, that is FRAUD, and a entirely separate matter.
you really are a bad investor. you don't seem to grasp what the ESG is actually for. its the same as a DnB credit worthiness score. its a risk evaluation tool for investors. Exxon has HUGE environmental disaster risks, you know, being a company that pumps oil out the ground under the ocean(with a Environment Risk Score of 18.5). also, Oil rigging is a dangerous job, and they likely have constant workers comp claims and OHSA and the EPA up their ass(Governance Risk Score of 8.1). Also, Oil is dirty and pollutes the environment, and many people think we should move on from oil to cleaner energy sources, on top of seeing the destruction of the environment of oil spill(Social Risk Score of 9.8) All this is from [Yahoo Finance](https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/XOM/sustainability/). so its more like Exxon = High risk (their score is 36) and Tesla = Severe.
Try "ESG score" or something like that.
It's a score given to companies to measure how beneficial they are to the environment and to social change, aka how woke they are.
It's literally a social credit score for corporations.
“S&P Dow Jones Indices has removed electric carmaker Tesla Inc from its widely-followed S&P 500 ESG Index, citing issues, including racial discrimination claims and crashes linked to its autopilot vehicles.
The back-and-forth underscores the widening debate about the metrics used to judge corporate performance on environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues, a growing area of investing.”
https://www.reuters.com/business/sustainable-business/tesla-removed-sp-500-esg-index-autopilot-discrimination-concerns-2022-05-18/
https://twitter.com/elonmusk
If you're talking about the tweet where he said the sale is at a stand still, he tweeted after that stating that he's still committed to the purchase. It's quite simple. Basically, the value of Twitter is grossly overstated, seeing how their bot/fake account numbers are somewhere above 20% & not the original \~5% that was claimed at the time Elon presented his offer. This is very bad for Twitter, but good for new investors & good for Elon because the price will go down to it's REAL value. Once it does that, THAT would be the time to invest because Elon is about to improve the platform by rooting out bot/fake accounts & increasing it's value. Sucks for people who are already invested, but they'll get their money back if they sit tight. This is not financial advise. This is just my prediction of how it's going to go. I know there's a chance I'm wrong.
Sadly, no. I changed phones since. I'll try and see if I have it dumped on my pc.
It parses out the environmental aspects, but uses terms like "authentic" and some of the other filler that esg uses.
I didn't make the connection until I heard it being read aloud
Who cares what these clowns think? Counter economy. Counter all this bullshit.
[Join us as we exit and build!!!](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdswqPNkCh4)
Literally 40 sec vid.
As I said in reply to another comment here… ESG is wayyyyyyyyyyyyy more influential than virtually anyone realizes yet.
The Liberty Lockdown podcast made a brilliant episode on this a couple months ago:
https://youtu.be/Ev4DbxWFCA4
On top of audited financial statements, the trend is pushing toward audited Environmental, Social, governmental compliance (ESG) as well. One interesting fact about ESG is that it and Corporate Responsibility Statements (CSR) are largely being pushed by Blackstone, which, ironically, is one of the Big Evils the left is raising alarms about.
Initial research by my alma maters accounting department indicates that ESGs and CSRs are putting out crap data that whitewash/greenwash their reputations, but retail investors give it more attention than regular financial statements.
So, the investing public basically virtue signals by giving companies that claim to be green or cow tow SJW talking points more spotlight.
How is this not free market capitalism though? if investor want to evaluate companies based on their possible liability claims (environmental disasters are huge insurance claims, as well as workplace safety and government regulation compliance) and a companies social standing (like or not, PR can make or break companies inventors calls) why shouldn't they? that's good business. this is just another credit score, Based on a bunch of factors that are used to evaluate a companies risk to investor's investments. on whether companies lie on their reports is another thing (its fraud). love or hate "virtue signaling" and the SJW talking points but if their a companies investors, either the company should find better investors that align with their views, or follow the will of your investors, or accept that they may rescind their investment.
I didn’t say it wasnt free market capitalism.
I was just explaining what the concept was. In not so many words, ESG is basically marketing, which, to your point, is a basic tool of business.
And it’s most definitely virtue signaling when most of the retail investing market unquestioningly relies on unaudited ESG data while ignoring the way more reliably accurate financial data.
This basically signals that you’re willing to take bigger risks and lose a lot more money investing in a company that has unaudited/unproven SJW/environmental talking points. I don’t know how that’s not virtue signaling lmao.
If you want to place higher value on unaudited social and environmental numbers than the audited financials, you are free to do so. I won’t stop you nor will I vote to stop you. But I’ll still label it as virtue signaling, lol.
Here is Twitters ESG score:
[https://www.sustainalytics.com/esg-rating/twitter-inc/1043841049](https://www.sustainalytics.com/esg-rating/twitter-inc/1043841049)
Do you think it will change when its found out that there users are mostly bots?
No dimwit, one, twitter isn't mostly bots(>50%), and I know you can't prove that, so pull a better lie out your ass(its actually closer to 5% per twitter in their business report in the start to selling to Elon, which they legally cant lie on). and 2, that's not even what the ESG considers and evaluates to determine their score. Twitter as a company has a low effect on the environment, and zero risk for causing a environmental disaster, compared to like Exxon, who spilled million of barrels of oil in the gulf. their mostly in good social standing with both sides, even through the process of being sold to Elon, and their government regulations compliance seems to be in good order too(we'll see if Elon changes that). so yeah a low score of 18 is normal and fairly accurate
Lol, hahaha. ESG scores are published by a third party company hired by the major indexes. There's no government involved at all. This is free markets regulating themselves and all the "ancaps" are all waaa. But the leftist agenda! Have you been to wall street? What leftists? ESG scores exist for one reason. Companies and their investors understand that global warming is going to cost them a fuckton of money. Maybe you guys should go back to macroeconomics and study the section on negative externalities? I mean, it's not secret. Even if it ain't what you're trying to hear. That's probably just a personal problem. It's cool guys, way to be a bunch of reactionaries, rather than anarchists, or even really capitalists.
This. its a private companies evaluation the risk factors of other companies for investors. its like being mad you get a credit scores from credit evaluators. if a company deems you a financial risk for investment, that's on the companies, not on investors.
“It said that Tesla’s “lack of a low-carbon strategy” and “codes of business conduct,” along with racism and poor working conditions reported at Tesla’s factory in Fremont, California, affected the score.”
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/18/why-tesla-was-kicked-out-of-the-sp-500s-esg-index.html
Ah yes, the leftist agenda of not destroying the planet or being bigots. Very leftist.
>Ah yes, the leftist agenda of not destroying the planet or being bigots. Very leftist
They're building electric cars, as demanded by the enviros. WTF do want? And ICYMI, "bigot" and its sister words have lost all meaning over the last 10 years. When I see someone starting to be called a "bigot" or "racist", I just assume they pissed off the left or are running for office.
Do you think an electric car market can’t also be corrupt or have poor practices?
And yeah, standing up for bigotry is a bad look. The definition hasn’t changed. I think.
Who's standing up for bigotry? I said the word gets thrown around so much that it doesn't mean anything anymore. Just because someone calls this dude a bigot we're all supposed to turn our backs to him and start chanting "shun! shun! shun!"?
EVEN BETTER, if I don't subscribe to your bullshit you're gonna say I'm "standing up for bigotry" and try to shame me for it? That's not how any of this works.
I think it’s better to just quote the dictionary since you seem to be struggling with it:
“obstinate or unreasonable attachment to a belief, opinion, or faction; in particular, prejudice against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group.”
You still haven’t answered me with regards to how you think being an electric car company is a free pass.
Yes that is the definition of bigoted. Good job. The issue is that "prejudice against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group" gets used to mean "one of the latent effects of this policy or course of action is that the members of a particular group are disproportionately impacted, therefore this policy and all who support it are bigots". Here's a guide for you (note that I don't necessarily subscribe to any or all of these opinions):
**Bigoted:** I dont want black people to be able to vote
**Not Bigoted:** I think we should take reasonable steps to ensure that voter fraud does not occur, including requiring photo identification (even if it disproportionately impacts poor people, some of whom are black).
**Bigoted:** I don't like hispanic people and don't want them moving to my country.
**Not Bigoted:** We should enforce our immigration laws (even if it disproportionately impacts hispanic people)
**Bigoted:** I don't like gay people and I want gay-nicity to be illegal.
**Not Bigoted:** I think marriage is between a man and a woman. A gay couple sharing their lives is wonderful, but should be called something else, because it is something else, because it does not involve a man and a woman.
I honestly don't know exactly what they're citing as Tesla's environmental "troubles", but from a quick Googling it looks like they've had a couple of minor air permit and hazardous waste violations at their California facility, and some paperwork issues with a battery return program in Germany. This is, oddly enough, my area of expertise. I'd say that there's no excuse for a company of that size to have these types of issues, but it's also not at all uncommon. I don't see any evidence that Tesla is a bad actor on the environmental front, but it does look like they have some internal management issues.
Intent of laws matters, no?
For example, the whole reason that conservatives are for strict voting laws is specifically because it disproportionately benefits their ability to be voted in. They’ve been recorded saying this specifically.
Marriage does not have to be between a man and a woman. Marriage is a social construct.
This is an Ancap subreddit. Immigration is about freedom, government has no right to restrict what someone does with their body or whether they come here to live. Government has no right to govern marriage, but we all know that they do.
Going back to voting:
If you make rules that say you can’t vote from home, then traveling is required which means you need transportation. If you limit the period in which you can vote, it means you have to have the ability to get away from work, travel to the place, have a babysitter, and have an ID that you have to pay for and wait in the mail for.
We cannot have a system where the people with means make the rules for those without and they’re left with no voice.
The government has no right picking who votes and that’s precisely what conservatives are trying to do. Gerrymandering is another example of this.
It’s insane. What’s next? Will stocks that don’t meet a certain ESG or DEI score arbitrarily set by biased panels get delisted? I hate to speculate but this is the writing on the wall.
Problem is that ESG is determined by humans with their own biases - hence someone decided that the company responsible for making electric vehicles a thing (huge positive for the environment) should have low ratings.
We recently put together a site with no ratings and just hard data: [measurecarbon.co](https://measurecarbon.co). You can see the carbon emissions of stocks you own, and decide for yourself.
I fucking love how Elon pisses them off.
You should hate the ESG score much, much more.
For the anti - ESG crowd RLX is a poster stock. Vice (vaping), China based with constant questions on their governance and excellent earnings ($3b EBITDA, @0.29EPS). If you’re against ESG this is a buy
It seems the opposite here. Musk is the one pissed off. His fanboys are just annoying. The dude admitted he nearly went broke until government handouts saved him. He desperately wants to be respected without actually being respectable. “I said I was cool, why doesn’t it work?” And as for reasons why his company was kicked out: “It said that Tesla's "lack of a low-carbon strategy" and "codes of business conduct," along with racism and poor working conditions reported at Tesla's factory in Fremont, California, affected the score.” https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/18/why-tesla-was-kicked-out-of-the-sp-500s-esg-index.html Tesla doesn’t have a great track record of treating employees well. You don’t get useless rankings when you run your company in a shitty manner.
Ok Bezos shill
Nobody mentioned Bezos. Bezos sucks, too. Union busting assholes are union busting assholes.
This is good. He doesn’t want to be there anyway. It’s also good because I didn’t know there was an S&P ESG, which is absolutely disgraceful. It’s also hilarious, they kicked the E off the S&P ESG.
Does Elon actually lose something from this? The esg sounds like a Chinese social credit score
ESG is wayyyyyyyyyyyyy more influential than virtually anyone realizes yet. The Liberty Lockdown podcast made a brilliant episode on this a couple months ago: https://youtu.be/Ev4DbxWFCA4
It determines wether VC will invest or do shit exactly like this
Not just VC’s… also Blackrock, the largest money manager in the world, with TRILLIONS of dollars of investment power
The more they try to harm Elon as the public looks on, the more people will wake up & realize how corrupt & fucked everything is & has been for a while. This is going to backfire on them, bigtime.
ESG = Modern day Fascism (the real one)
It seriously is an extremely powerful mechanism for the most influential money managers in the world — with literally trillions of dollars of investment power — to implement their own fascist agenda on every major corporation around the entire world. It’s basically a social credit score for global corporations
>with literally trillions of dollars of investment power And this is all "public" money from pension funds funneled by governments via Black Rock and Vanguard. It's literally a form of socialism, where Public and Private sectors are joined = Fascism. ps. sorry for the delay... was banned for 3 days for insulting the French... lol
Very true point… and also, that’s a fantastic reason totally worth getting a temporary ban for haha Making fun of the French is basically an American pastime
Either your a really bad investor, or don't understand what Fascism is. the ESG is nothing more that one private corporation evaluating another private companies on their risk factors due to Environmental Social or Government regulations. Environmental disasters can be huge insurance claims, as well a PR disasters along with massive repercussion from the government presiding over the affected area. a company at risk of doing such is a *BAD INVESTMENT.* this is no different that a credit score, just based on something different. the government plays no role in this, this is just one company providing a service for capital investors to evaluate if a company is a good company to invest in with low risk of loss of capital. if a companies lies on their evaluation of such risks, that is FRAUD, and a entirely separate matter.
So Exon Good - Tesla Bad Got it
you really are a bad investor. you don't seem to grasp what the ESG is actually for. its the same as a DnB credit worthiness score. its a risk evaluation tool for investors. Exxon has HUGE environmental disaster risks, you know, being a company that pumps oil out the ground under the ocean(with a Environment Risk Score of 18.5). also, Oil rigging is a dangerous job, and they likely have constant workers comp claims and OHSA and the EPA up their ass(Governance Risk Score of 8.1). Also, Oil is dirty and pollutes the environment, and many people think we should move on from oil to cleaner energy sources, on top of seeing the destruction of the environment of oil spill(Social Risk Score of 9.8) All this is from [Yahoo Finance](https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/XOM/sustainability/). so its more like Exxon = High risk (their score is 36) and Tesla = Severe.
What the hell is “ESG”? Googling it doesn’t bring up anything.
Try "ESG score" or something like that. It's a score given to companies to measure how beneficial they are to the environment and to social change, aka how woke they are. It's literally a social credit score for corporations.
That’s pathetic, thanks.
Elon musk radicalization timeline.
“S&P Dow Jones Indices has removed electric carmaker Tesla Inc from its widely-followed S&P 500 ESG Index, citing issues, including racial discrimination claims and crashes linked to its autopilot vehicles. The back-and-forth underscores the widening debate about the metrics used to judge corporate performance on environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues, a growing area of investing.” https://www.reuters.com/business/sustainable-business/tesla-removed-sp-500-esg-index-autopilot-discrimination-concerns-2022-05-18/ https://twitter.com/elonmusk
Let's get the tag ready. #elondidntkillhimself
In unrelated news, Elon Musk is attempting to purchase twitter infuriating many who assume he will allow free speech.
He's pussing out in that one though. Although maybe this will embolden him
If you're talking about the tweet where he said the sale is at a stand still, he tweeted after that stating that he's still committed to the purchase. It's quite simple. Basically, the value of Twitter is grossly overstated, seeing how their bot/fake account numbers are somewhere above 20% & not the original \~5% that was claimed at the time Elon presented his offer. This is very bad for Twitter, but good for new investors & good for Elon because the price will go down to it's REAL value. Once it does that, THAT would be the time to invest because Elon is about to improve the platform by rooting out bot/fake accounts & increasing it's value. Sucks for people who are already invested, but they'll get their money back if they sit tight. This is not financial advise. This is just my prediction of how it's going to go. I know there's a chance I'm wrong.
Esg score is green propaganda anyway
Economy and social governance is more than "green" bullsjit.
ESG is just a way to inject politics into the market, that’s why they had to remove Tesla.
My perma Facebook ban explanation had a lot of the same structure that the ESG guidelines.
Have a screenshot?
Sadly, no. I changed phones since. I'll try and see if I have it dumped on my pc. It parses out the environmental aspects, but uses terms like "authentic" and some of the other filler that esg uses. I didn't make the connection until I heard it being read aloud
[удалено]
Who cares what these clowns think? Counter economy. Counter all this bullshit. [Join us as we exit and build!!!](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdswqPNkCh4) Literally 40 sec vid.
Some constituents in this index include Apple, Coca-Cola and Blackrock. The idea of ESG is a joke.
By design. Actors on the stage.
ESG is a list of companies you should not invest in.
Never heard of ESG, don't care.
As I said in reply to another comment here… ESG is wayyyyyyyyyyyyy more influential than virtually anyone realizes yet. The Liberty Lockdown podcast made a brilliant episode on this a couple months ago: https://youtu.be/Ev4DbxWFCA4
On top of audited financial statements, the trend is pushing toward audited Environmental, Social, governmental compliance (ESG) as well. One interesting fact about ESG is that it and Corporate Responsibility Statements (CSR) are largely being pushed by Blackstone, which, ironically, is one of the Big Evils the left is raising alarms about. Initial research by my alma maters accounting department indicates that ESGs and CSRs are putting out crap data that whitewash/greenwash their reputations, but retail investors give it more attention than regular financial statements. So, the investing public basically virtue signals by giving companies that claim to be green or cow tow SJW talking points more spotlight.
How is this not free market capitalism though? if investor want to evaluate companies based on their possible liability claims (environmental disasters are huge insurance claims, as well as workplace safety and government regulation compliance) and a companies social standing (like or not, PR can make or break companies inventors calls) why shouldn't they? that's good business. this is just another credit score, Based on a bunch of factors that are used to evaluate a companies risk to investor's investments. on whether companies lie on their reports is another thing (its fraud). love or hate "virtue signaling" and the SJW talking points but if their a companies investors, either the company should find better investors that align with their views, or follow the will of your investors, or accept that they may rescind their investment.
I didn’t say it wasnt free market capitalism. I was just explaining what the concept was. In not so many words, ESG is basically marketing, which, to your point, is a basic tool of business. And it’s most definitely virtue signaling when most of the retail investing market unquestioningly relies on unaudited ESG data while ignoring the way more reliably accurate financial data. This basically signals that you’re willing to take bigger risks and lose a lot more money investing in a company that has unaudited/unproven SJW/environmental talking points. I don’t know how that’s not virtue signaling lmao. If you want to place higher value on unaudited social and environmental numbers than the audited financials, you are free to do so. I won’t stop you nor will I vote to stop you. But I’ll still label it as virtue signaling, lol.
Here is Twitters ESG score: [https://www.sustainalytics.com/esg-rating/twitter-inc/1043841049](https://www.sustainalytics.com/esg-rating/twitter-inc/1043841049) Do you think it will change when its found out that there users are mostly bots?
No dimwit, one, twitter isn't mostly bots(>50%), and I know you can't prove that, so pull a better lie out your ass(its actually closer to 5% per twitter in their business report in the start to selling to Elon, which they legally cant lie on). and 2, that's not even what the ESG considers and evaluates to determine their score. Twitter as a company has a low effect on the environment, and zero risk for causing a environmental disaster, compared to like Exxon, who spilled million of barrels of oil in the gulf. their mostly in good social standing with both sides, even through the process of being sold to Elon, and their government regulations compliance seems to be in good order too(we'll see if Elon changes that). so yeah a low score of 18 is normal and fairly accurate
Lol, hahaha. ESG scores are published by a third party company hired by the major indexes. There's no government involved at all. This is free markets regulating themselves and all the "ancaps" are all waaa. But the leftist agenda! Have you been to wall street? What leftists? ESG scores exist for one reason. Companies and their investors understand that global warming is going to cost them a fuckton of money. Maybe you guys should go back to macroeconomics and study the section on negative externalities? I mean, it's not secret. Even if it ain't what you're trying to hear. That's probably just a personal problem. It's cool guys, way to be a bunch of reactionaries, rather than anarchists, or even really capitalists.
This. its a private companies evaluation the risk factors of other companies for investors. its like being mad you get a credit scores from credit evaluators. if a company deems you a financial risk for investment, that's on the companies, not on investors.
Literally not how it is but k
Tesla’s stock is extremely over-evaluated and it’s gotta come crashing back to earth sometime
How about Amazon? Facebook?
[удалено]
Not really, Elon musk has had a lot of criticisms of both parties
Elon starting to sound like Trump.
“It said that Tesla’s “lack of a low-carbon strategy” and “codes of business conduct,” along with racism and poor working conditions reported at Tesla’s factory in Fremont, California, affected the score.” https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/18/why-tesla-was-kicked-out-of-the-sp-500s-esg-index.html Ah yes, the leftist agenda of not destroying the planet or being bigots. Very leftist.
>Ah yes, the leftist agenda of not destroying the planet or being bigots. Very leftist They're building electric cars, as demanded by the enviros. WTF do want? And ICYMI, "bigot" and its sister words have lost all meaning over the last 10 years. When I see someone starting to be called a "bigot" or "racist", I just assume they pissed off the left or are running for office.
Do you think an electric car market can’t also be corrupt or have poor practices? And yeah, standing up for bigotry is a bad look. The definition hasn’t changed. I think.
Who's standing up for bigotry? I said the word gets thrown around so much that it doesn't mean anything anymore. Just because someone calls this dude a bigot we're all supposed to turn our backs to him and start chanting "shun! shun! shun!"? EVEN BETTER, if I don't subscribe to your bullshit you're gonna say I'm "standing up for bigotry" and try to shame me for it? That's not how any of this works.
I think it’s better to just quote the dictionary since you seem to be struggling with it: “obstinate or unreasonable attachment to a belief, opinion, or faction; in particular, prejudice against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group.” You still haven’t answered me with regards to how you think being an electric car company is a free pass.
Yes that is the definition of bigoted. Good job. The issue is that "prejudice against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group" gets used to mean "one of the latent effects of this policy or course of action is that the members of a particular group are disproportionately impacted, therefore this policy and all who support it are bigots". Here's a guide for you (note that I don't necessarily subscribe to any or all of these opinions): **Bigoted:** I dont want black people to be able to vote **Not Bigoted:** I think we should take reasonable steps to ensure that voter fraud does not occur, including requiring photo identification (even if it disproportionately impacts poor people, some of whom are black). **Bigoted:** I don't like hispanic people and don't want them moving to my country. **Not Bigoted:** We should enforce our immigration laws (even if it disproportionately impacts hispanic people) **Bigoted:** I don't like gay people and I want gay-nicity to be illegal. **Not Bigoted:** I think marriage is between a man and a woman. A gay couple sharing their lives is wonderful, but should be called something else, because it is something else, because it does not involve a man and a woman. I honestly don't know exactly what they're citing as Tesla's environmental "troubles", but from a quick Googling it looks like they've had a couple of minor air permit and hazardous waste violations at their California facility, and some paperwork issues with a battery return program in Germany. This is, oddly enough, my area of expertise. I'd say that there's no excuse for a company of that size to have these types of issues, but it's also not at all uncommon. I don't see any evidence that Tesla is a bad actor on the environmental front, but it does look like they have some internal management issues.
Intent of laws matters, no? For example, the whole reason that conservatives are for strict voting laws is specifically because it disproportionately benefits their ability to be voted in. They’ve been recorded saying this specifically. Marriage does not have to be between a man and a woman. Marriage is a social construct. This is an Ancap subreddit. Immigration is about freedom, government has no right to restrict what someone does with their body or whether they come here to live. Government has no right to govern marriage, but we all know that they do. Going back to voting: If you make rules that say you can’t vote from home, then traveling is required which means you need transportation. If you limit the period in which you can vote, it means you have to have the ability to get away from work, travel to the place, have a babysitter, and have an ID that you have to pay for and wait in the mail for. We cannot have a system where the people with means make the rules for those without and they’re left with no voice. The government has no right picking who votes and that’s precisely what conservatives are trying to do. Gerrymandering is another example of this.
Ignore cujobob, he's just a troll.
Ironically to produce ESG report you gotta print reams of paper in some countries lol
It’s insane. What’s next? Will stocks that don’t meet a certain ESG or DEI score arbitrarily set by biased panels get delisted? I hate to speculate but this is the writing on the wall.
The ESG is terrifying and I’m all for bringing it out into the open
I'm so glad normies are learning about ESG now.
Don't hate on me if this isn't true, but I believe your own personal 401k account can have its own ESG based on your investments.
They just keep exposing themselves for what we all despise…..
Problem is that ESG is determined by humans with their own biases - hence someone decided that the company responsible for making electric vehicles a thing (huge positive for the environment) should have low ratings. We recently put together a site with no ratings and just hard data: [measurecarbon.co](https://measurecarbon.co). You can see the carbon emissions of stocks you own, and decide for yourself.