- 259
- 458
- Joined
- May 19, 2017
I think the the argument that we all are directly funding the modern industrial complex-which has roots in colonization. The direct question for my core mission is how to close the wealth gap that currently exists in my particular culture.
The cited examples were relevant to this thread (products) but recent examples such as an NBA owner directly helping the elimination of brown people might effect some differently.
All will react to the blatant selective outrage differently by being aware/affected of such issues. Buying and trading shares of Tesla has allowed me to acquire assets for my family. For my personal mission, that is a core mission. As we acquire more wealth, ESG will be come more important.
For some-they operate in a different spectrum. It’s understandable-to question why isn’t that same refusal to ‘support’ a person applied to other industries/companies that will help shape the future? What solutions do we have? Are all of our investment accounts aren’t holding these companies? Because depending on time horizon, a company having access to $1000 of your money for 10 years in shares would be more valuable than a one quarter net profit of $4800 from a car purchase. That isn’t speculation. So are everyone’s index funds all ESG focused?
I’m not actually challenging-or defending anything but there is an ideology that also selects certain people as a target. There are companies in all publicly traded indexes that have some of the worst practices of this modern era of its workers abroad including the company that is the subject of this discussion but it’s never highlighted. My particular contribution after researching is to not invest in some of them. But to each their own.
The same companies and founders that I mentioned have been invested in by the very same people who control a large balance of assets today. The final talking point is the separation of man from company, which again is selectively blurred within this discussion due to bias which is understandable. Pointing that out isn’t defending virtue of anyone, and frankly blending two different POVs-i.e. the bringing up of the ‘great’ operators of our and past times to show = this a connecting case of traits is distinctly different than simply ‘pointing out hypocrisy’ in critical examination of this operator.
My last point is the things that have been going on within Tesla the company is unfortunately par for the course in the automotive industry, again I’m not sure how that’s inaccurate.
The cited examples were relevant to this thread (products) but recent examples such as an NBA owner directly helping the elimination of brown people might effect some differently.
All will react to the blatant selective outrage differently by being aware/affected of such issues. Buying and trading shares of Tesla has allowed me to acquire assets for my family. For my personal mission, that is a core mission. As we acquire more wealth, ESG will be come more important.
For some-they operate in a different spectrum. It’s understandable-to question why isn’t that same refusal to ‘support’ a person applied to other industries/companies that will help shape the future? What solutions do we have? Are all of our investment accounts aren’t holding these companies? Because depending on time horizon, a company having access to $1000 of your money for 10 years in shares would be more valuable than a one quarter net profit of $4800 from a car purchase. That isn’t speculation. So are everyone’s index funds all ESG focused?
I’m not actually challenging-or defending anything but there is an ideology that also selects certain people as a target. There are companies in all publicly traded indexes that have some of the worst practices of this modern era of its workers abroad including the company that is the subject of this discussion but it’s never highlighted. My particular contribution after researching is to not invest in some of them. But to each their own.
The same companies and founders that I mentioned have been invested in by the very same people who control a large balance of assets today. The final talking point is the separation of man from company, which again is selectively blurred within this discussion due to bias which is understandable. Pointing that out isn’t defending virtue of anyone, and frankly blending two different POVs-i.e. the bringing up of the ‘great’ operators of our and past times to show = this a connecting case of traits is distinctly different than simply ‘pointing out hypocrisy’ in critical examination of this operator.
My last point is the things that have been going on within Tesla the company is unfortunately par for the course in the automotive industry, again I’m not sure how that’s inaccurate.
Last edited:
in the back 
.
