Major Hedge Fund Manager Demands Big Funds Force Companies to Act on Climate Change

Maxine Waters
Official Photo of Congresswoman Maxine Waters

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

It is never enough; despite recent moves to green their portfolios, major Hedge Fund manager Chris Hohn has accused Blackrock and Vangard of not doing enough. But this push for more climate action is just the tip of a much larger threat which I believe is hanging over the heart of Corporate America.

Chris Hohn blasts BlackRock and Vanguard over climate change

Billionaire hedge fund manager calls on big asset managers to challenge companies on global warming

Attracta Mooney
, Investment Correspondent OCTOBER 25, 2020

Billionaire hedge fund manager Christopher Hohn has accused BlackRock and Vanguard of acting like sheep when it comes to climate change, arguing that large asset managers are taking “insufficient and ineffective action” on global warming.

His letters are the latest example of the intense scrutiny facing the $89tn asset management industry over its role in tackling climate change. Many large fund managers, which have immense sway over the world’s biggest businesses, have warned that global warming could hit investment returns.

But Sir Christopher accused “most asset managers” of “total greenwash”, arguing they were far too complacent about the risks of global warming.

“The asset management industry is a joke in respect to what they are actually doing [around climate change],” he said. “They talk but they don’t actually do anything effective.”

Read more:

The reality is Blackrock and other big companies are completely onboard with the green agenda. Their biggest obstacle to an activist attack on American business is President Trump.

The path to greener investment is not assured, with other companies still shrugging off asset managers’ new threat. “Our companies are not worried,” says Charles Crain at the National Association of Manufacturers, whose members include ExxonMobil. 

In the US there is a growing pushback against investors acting as climate warriors. Asset managers are gearing up for a row with the Trump administration over a new proposal that threatens investors’ ability to incorporate ESG principles into pension portfolios. At the same time, many well-known asset managers are still reluctant to vote against management, meaning the vast majority of climate resolutions do not pass.

Read more:

ESG (Environmental Social and Governance) is fully on the Democrat agenda. In August 2020 the US Congressional Committee on Financial Services, led by Maxine Waters, made a number of policy recommendations which should send a chill down the spines of anyone who likes a return on their investments.

Legislative Proposals
H.R. ____: ESG Disclosure Simplification Act of 2019 (Rep. Vargas): 
This bill requires public companies to disclose certain ESG metrics, which the SEC is required to establish in a rule. The bill also requires public companies to disclose annually in their proxy statements a description of the company’s views on the link between ESG metrics and long-term business performance, as well as the process the issuer uses to determine such impacts. In addition, the bill includes a sense of Congress that the ESG metrics that the SEC establishes are automatically deemed material to investors. Finally, this bill creates a Sustainable Finance Advisory Committee within the SEC, which would make recommendations to the SEC on which ESG metrics public companies should be required to disclose; would submit a report to the SEC within 18 months that identifies challenges and opportunities for investors in sustainable finance; and would periodically recommend policy changes that would encourage the flow of capital toward sustainable finance.

H.R. ____: Shareholder Protection Act of 2019: This bill requires public companies to submit quarterly reports to both the SEC and investors detailing the amount, date, and nature of the company’s expenditures for political activities. If the political expenditure was made in support of (or opposition to) a particular candidate, or was made to a trade association, then the company must disclose the candidate and/or trade association. The bill also requires public companies to disclose in their annual reports any political expenditures over $10,000 in the previous year, as well as the nature and amount of any political expenditures the company plans to make in the upcoming year.

H.R. ____: Corporate Human Rights Risk Assessment, Prevention, and Mitigation Act of 2019: This bill requires public companies to annually identify — and rank by severity — any human rights risks or human rights impacts in their value chains. Companies must also disclose any actions they have taken to avoid or mitigate the human rights risks and impacts identified in the annual report, or, if no action was taken, an explanation for why the company took no action.

H.R. ____: To require issuers required to file an annual or quarterly report under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to disclose the total amount of corporate tax such issuer paid in the period covered by the report, and for other purposes: This bill requires public companies to disclose (in their 10-Qs and 10-Ks) their total pre-tax profits, and total amounts paid in State, Federal, and foreign taxes. The bill also requires companies to disclose a number of specific tax- related items for each of its subsidiaries, as well as on a consolidated basis, such as total accrued tax expenses, stated capital, and total accumulated earnings.

H.R. ____: Climate Risk Disclosure Act of 2019 (Rep. Casten): This bill requires public companies to disclose in their annual reports information relating to the financial and business risks associated with climate change. The bill also requires the SEC to establish, in consultation with other relevant Federal agencies, climate-related risk disclosure metrics and guidance, which will be industry-specific, and will require companies to make both quantitative and qualitative disclosures.

Read more:

In my opinion, putting all these required actions under the aegis of shareholder disclosure would create an enormous financial risk and burden for US companies.

Defining ESG (Environmental Social and Governance) as automatically “material” for investors would mean companies would be liable for disclosure failures; they could be sued for making misleading ESG statements, or not revealing an ESG issue.

But ESG itself is not well defined, it pretty much means whatever activists want it to mean. The definition changes every time someone discovers a new claim for grievance. So even if a company does their absolute best to comply with such laws, there would always be room to launch a vexatious activist lawsuit, based on a new imaginative interpretation of ESG issues.

Large companies would struggle. Many small companies in my opinion could be wiped out by compliance costs and constant legal harassment.

Activists have already attempted to punish companies on ESG issues, but for now the law mostly does not favour frivolous ESG lawsuits or even activist shareholder resolutions. President Trump has been especially active blocking this kind of abuse.

Maxine Water’s legislative proposals could change all that.

I suspect in the scenario Maxine Water’s proposed laws are passed, companies would find it easier to simply up their payments of danegeld to try to buy activists off. Of course activists would still likely launch the occasional lawsuit, to remind companies who was in charge.

Strengthening the hand of activists demanding payoffs would in my opinion likely have a chilling effect on US business confidence.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
October 25, 2020 6:28 pm

There are the other kind of activist investors who sue companies for harming the value of their investments. If they find they can’t profitably invest in American companies, they will take their money elsewhere. That could make it difficult for American companies to raise funds by selling stocks.

Reply to  commieBob
October 25, 2020 8:50 pm

Whenever you see the word governance, you know that you do not have any say in what is being imposed.

arguing that large asset managers are taking “insufficient and ineffective action” on global warming.

Maybe that is because the job of asset managers is to manage assets, not to pander to leftwing propaganda and activist pseudo-scientists

Wiliam Haas
October 25, 2020 6:33 pm

She does not know what he is talking about. None of these companies has the power to stop the Earth’s climate from changing. Based on the paleoclimate record and the work done with models, one can conclude that the climate change we have been experiencing is caused by the sun and the oceans over which mankind has no control. Despite the hype, there is no real evidence that CO2 has any effect on climate and there is plenty of scientific rationale to support the conclusion that the climate sensitivity of CO2 is effectively zero. Hence there is no climate crisis. There may be many good reasons to be conserving on the use of fossil fuels but climate change is not one of them. There is no climate crisis and committing economic suicide will not help matters either. The best that we can do to prepare for weather calamities is to strengthen the global economy as much as possible. It is all a matter of science.

AGW is a conjecture based on only partial science and is full of holes. For example, the AGW conjecture depends upon the existence of a radiant greenhouse effect caused by trace gases in the Earth’s atmosphere with LWIR absorption bands. A real greenhouse does not stay warm because of so called greenhouse gases or because IR radiation is trapped inside the greenhouse. A real greenhouse stays warm because the glass limits cooling by convection. It is entirely a convective greenhouse effect that keeps a real greenhouse warm. So too on Earth where instead of glass, gravity and the heat capacity of the atmosphere limits cooling by convection. It is entirely a convective greenhouse effect that keeps the surface of the Earth on average 33 degrees C warmer than it would otherwise be. 33 degrees C is the amount of warming derived from first principals and 33 degrees C is what has been measured. Any additional warming caused by a radiant greenhouse effect has not been detected. If CO2 really affected climate one would expect that the increase in CO2 over the past 30 years would have caused at least a measurable increase in the dry lapse rate in the troposphere but that has not happened. A radiant greenhouse effect has not been detected in a real greenhouse, in the Earth’s atmosphere, or anywhere else in the solar system. The radiant greenhouse effect is hence science fiction so hence the AGW conjecture is science fiction as well.

But for those who still believe in the radiant greenhouse effect, initial calculations of the climate sensitivity came up with a nominal figure of 1.2 degrees C for a doubling of CO2 not including feedbacks. Christopher Monckton and associates came up with the conclusion, based on measurements, that if all the warming since 1850 were caused by CO2 then the climate sensitivity of CO2 could not possible be more than 1.2 degrees C including feedbacks. A researcher from Japan pointed out that the original radiametric calculations forgot to include that fact that a doubling of CO2 will cause a slight decrease in the dry lapse rate in the troposphere which is a cooling effect that lowers the climate sensitivity of CO2 by more than a factor of 20, from 1.2 degrees C to less than .06 degrees C which is too small to measure. So no wonder that no one has been able to measure the climate sensitivity of CO2 because there is nothing to measure.

Then there is the issue of H2O feedback. The AGW conjecture assumption is that CO2 based warming causes more H2O to enter the atmosphere which causes more warming that causes even more H2O to enter the atmosphere and so forth. Not only is H2O a greenhouse gas but molecule per molecule H2O is a stronger IR absorber than is CO2 and on average there is roughly 50 times more H2O in the atmosphere. Compared to H2O the contribution of CO2 to the overall radiant greenhouse effect must be trivial. What the AGW conjecture ignores is that besides being the primary greenhouse gas, H2O is a primary coolant in the Earth’s atmosphere. The overall cooling effect of H2O is evidenced by the fact that the wet lapse rate is significantly less than the dry lapse rate which is a cooling effect. So instead of a potentially unstable positive feedback, H2O provides a negative climate stabilizing feedback. So instead of multiplying the climate sensitivity of CO2 by a nominal 3 we should divide the climate sensitivity of CO2 by 3 yielding a climate sensitivity of CO2 os less than .02 degrees C which is too small to measure and is effectively zero. So all of this effort to reduce CO2 emissions because doing so might provide a better climate is a total waste of money. But even if we could somehow stop the Earth’s climate from changing as it has been doing for eons, extreme weather events and sea level rise would continue because they are both part of the current climate. If the future is anything like that past, the current interglacial period may gradually end but it may take many thousands of years to do so and the next ice age will be upon us for roughly 100,000 years so we should all learn to enjoy the warmth of the current interglacial period while it is still here.

Reply to  Wiliam Haas
October 25, 2020 11:20 pm

You’re preaching to the choir… to the seminarians in fact. Eco-nazis don’t care about frivolous things reality, science and truth. They only care about power and the climate emergency bs gives them political cover to seize it.

Reply to  PCman999
October 26, 2020 3:51 am

I think he just made up his own science… which doesn’t actually work

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  griff
October 26, 2020 5:27 am

Your ignorant greentroll arguments don’t actually work.

Reply to  griff
October 26, 2020 7:59 am

Griffiepoo: Show us concrete and empirical evidence that CO2 controls global temperatures.

You still haven’t answered my question about the survival of Polar Bears through the Holocene Thermal Optimum.

Reply to  griff
October 26, 2020 12:47 pm

says little minded griff, who is unable to produce any actual science on anything

You truly are a sad little trollette, griff.

Its as though you spent all your time thinking up the MOST STUPID things to type.

Its your only success. !

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Wiliam Haas
October 26, 2020 5:31 am

“None of these companies has the power to stop the Earth’s climate from changing.”

That’s the bottom line.

Not only can they not stop the climate from doing its thing, they can’t even prove that CO2 is a problem that needs stopping.

The Climategate Charlatans got this ball rolling and now the power-hungry and the money-hungry have gotten into the scam and it has taken off like a rocket among the Elites of the world.

And it’s all a Big Lie. The whole Western World is being swindled. Millions of people living in a False Reality and we have to sit here and watch them go nuts, and their delusions may directly affect our lives.

Let’s hope we are on the Road to Sanity November 4, 2020 (Trump wins!). Otherwise, Maxine Waters and her fellow travelers will become our nightmare. Our personal freedoms will be hanging by a thread subject to the whims of the authoritarian Democrats.

October 25, 2020 6:33 pm

No new manufacturer (of significance) will invest in high-cost alarmist countries.
In Australia many are getting out because it just doesn’t pay. Take GSK who recently confirmed the closure of their Melbourne manufacturing facility at the end of 2022. This closely follows Pfizer Australia’s recent decision to cease manufacturing at their Perth site by 2023.
And it’s happening with smaller manufacturers as well for example HiChem closing their Melbourne plant (despite having been upgraded over the past five years).
What breaks the camel’s back here?
1. High electricity tariffs.
2. Fake workplace injury claims (big business-killing extortion industry in Australia).

Rhoda R
Reply to  Warren
October 25, 2020 8:41 pm

All part of the Chinese push to get all manufacturing moved over to China. THEY aren’t worried about the climate but they sure want us to be.

Steve East
Reply to  Warren
October 26, 2020 3:53 am

GSK was indicted in USA and China in 2012 on VERY SERIOUS corruption charges ! The eventual fine in USA ran to a record $3 Billion and again in China a half Billion! Now who was in charge of product development from 2006 and the President of the company …Patrick Vallance … the very guy who is now dictating to government on lockdowns etc whilst holding some £600K worth of vaccine shares !The CEO of that company at that time was Andrew Witty who is now leading the WHO covid vaccine organisation!!!Australia is well shot of such companies !

October 25, 2020 6:38 pm

Anyone else tired of this BS?

Joel O'Bryan
Reply to  Scissor
October 25, 2020 7:45 pm

Yes. But we still can’t check out. If we stop fighting the Marxists, the Left wins and you and I end up under socialism and headed for a gulag because we won’t submit.
Fight them today with the pen and ballot box bullets.
Quit, and one day you and I will have to fight them with real bullets.

Ron Long
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
October 26, 2020 2:57 am

That’s why the upcoming election in USA is very important, Joel, because either the Senate or the Presidency, or both, must remain in Republican hands. Max Max cannot get any bills through either the Senate or the President right now, so her markups are just virtue signaling to her loony tunes constituents. Lose both Senate and Presidency and watch out. Maybe this whole CAGW issue can get before the Supreme Court soon? Scopes Monkey Trial II?

Reply to  Scissor
October 26, 2020 9:33 am

I’ve already told my broker to get out of Blackrock and will get out of any other investment that makes such a stupid investment decision. Enough of this BS by ignorant fools. The Dunning-Kruger effect in operation.

Gunga Din
October 25, 2020 7:06 pm

3 decades ago I worked 2nd shift. Not much on TV before or after work. I watched C-SPAN a lot.
Walters, SJ Lee, Biden, Schumer (when he was a congressman), etc. (No memory of Pelosi from back then. Guess she wasn’t very memorable?)
Fruit needs time to ripen. They are past overripe.

Reply to  Gunga Din
October 25, 2020 8:54 pm

Desiccation is common way of extending the self life of soft fruit.

This may explain why Waters looks like a dried prune. She’s still well beyond her statutory self life and needs to be put in the dumpster.

October 25, 2020 7:35 pm

Act now or the donations won’t flow as fast to Maxi.

Reply to  ResourceGuy
October 25, 2020 8:42 pm

Hey, isn’t hair straightening a form of cultural appropriation ? I find that very offensive.

She also seemed to be a lot more “black” in the 80s. Was she wearing blackface back then or is she being lightened up now to play for the white voters?
comment image

Hopefully Joe Collins will be able kick this wacko fake out of congress.
He has a pretty slick campaign vid shown on Rubin Report:

Richard (the cynical one)
Reply to  Greg
October 25, 2020 9:31 pm

I know well, for many years, a Bahamian lady whose skin shade has gradually lightened naturally over the years, has never, would never lighten her appearance, and so your charge, Greg, may well be groundless. If you wish to disagree with her ideas or political point of view (as I do) have at her. But to stoop to discredit on the basis of appearance is very shallow and biased.

Reply to  Richard (the cynical one)
October 26, 2020 12:34 am

Waters very publicly called on Democrat supporters to form mobs and physically accost prominent Republicans whenever they saw them in public. She merits no respect from anyone.

Trump was ( rightly ) mocked for his fake tan and died hair. He has subtly and slowly reverted to his natural white hair and a more natural skin tone and looks a lot better for it. “Orange man bad” is now widely adopted by his supporters to depict outbreaks of TDS by the left.

You may be correct that a dark skinned person may become lighter if they avoid the sun their melanin levels will vary too. However, prominent politicians have professional makeup artists and their appearance is carefully manicured. What I was attacking was a perceived deliberate change in skin tone by Waters, done for PR image.

White people get “cancelled” if they have ever dressed up for the night as an arabian prince or anyone of another race. All I’m doing is firing back their own stupid rules in a satirical comment.

Pat Frank
Reply to  Greg
October 26, 2020 12:11 am

Joe Collins’ website:

Any reader in CA congressional district 43 may want to support his candidacy, and vote for him Nov. 3rd.

October 25, 2020 7:36 pm

Investing money based on virtue signaling is a gamble at the least.

Joel O'Bryan
Reply to  markl
October 25, 2020 8:05 pm

They are banking on the Government to deliver a politically determined market winner.
Nothing more than crony capitalism meets hungry politicians eager to take campaign contribution bribes. Pay to play. As old as human civilization.

Reply to  markl
October 25, 2020 11:54 pm

It’s worse than that Markl.

Our pension funds, here in Australia are investing heavily in the renewable energy sector.

Superannuation is a compulsory deduction for all employees, which you can access on retirement. There are private superannuation funds and industry funds. Some people choose to run self managed funds, this is where you have full control of of how your money is invested, as long as you are savy enough to do everything by the book.

Most people have no idea how their super is invested, they leave it all in the hands of superfund managers. The industry superfunds, for teachers and nurses and such invest heavily in renewables. This is a huge risk and it isn’t right! It should be illegal to invest other people’s money in a product that only exists because it’s largely propped up by government subsidies.

The renewables industry has never been thought through. It cannot last for too much longer, when it comes crashing down, and it will, it’s going to hurt a lot of people financially.

Reply to  Megs
October 26, 2020 7:24 am

“It should be illegal to invest other people’s money in a product that only exists because it’s largely propped up by government subsidies.”

Meg, this is happening in Canada as well.

Were they expecting the financial impact of broad-based lockdowns?
In Ontario, there will be another rate hike very soon and small businesses will be hit very hard.

“Legal opinions are mixed, but some say that the Ontario government should move to cancel the long term contracts signed by the Liberals and take an aggressive stance in the courts.

Getting rid of these contracts is the only way that Ontario will be able to regain competitive hydro rates, and once again become an attractive jurisdiction for businesses and others for whom hydro is a key cost factor as well as relieve pressure on households facing energy poverty at a very difficult time.”

Reply to  Sommer
October 26, 2020 6:35 pm

Thanks for the links Sommer.

This whole scheme is the biggest fraud in the history of modern man. Create a problem that doesn’t exist, then the ruse, a cure that will be the only way to prevent the world from ending.

It sounds crazy doesn’t it, with large amounts of money you can do anything. It seems to me that billionaires never have enough money, it brings so much power. A handful of ‘scientists’ sold out the planet decades ago, to rich, powerful and greedy politicians. They have no scruples about perpetuating the lie, in fact it’s become so big that they have to follow through, not because they realise the damage they are doing, but to protect themselves. This is evident with what has been brought the world’s attention by way of a laptop. There are many more, people to be exposed that is.

And the MSM and social media are nothing short of disgraceful. What ever happened to truth in journalism? Leaving out information is not being truthful, spouting propaganda is simply reinforcing one’s own opinion. All any of that informs people of is misinformation.

This is all at the expense of the ‘majority’, the ordinary people.

We can only hope that POTUS gets in for another 4 years!

October 25, 2020 7:39 pm

I think that you’d see a lot of companies going private if there is any way they can swing it, and larger companies breaking up into smaller companies which can go private.

Brook HURD
October 25, 2020 8:22 pm

Every time that I think that the left can not possibly come up with anything more insane than what they proposed last week, they come up with with insane garbage like this.

October 25, 2020 8:24 pm

“It is never enough…”
comment image
No, negligible isn’t enough.

Reply to  Loydo
October 25, 2020 9:00 pm

No, negligible isn’t enough. You are right. Plants are still struggling at 400 ppmv. We should aim for 1000ppmv, plants would be far more productive the Sahel would become fertile and we could push off the next glaciation for a few thousand years.

It’s going to be hard work but if we burn everything we can find and explore to find new resources we may get above 800 at least.

Richard (the cynical one)
Reply to  Greg
October 25, 2020 9:33 pm

And that, Greg, I heartily agree with!

old construction worker
Reply to  Greg
October 26, 2020 4:46 am

1000ppmv, Monsanto wouldn’t like that.

Reply to  Loydo
October 25, 2020 11:14 pm


As you have continued to prove, there is NO EVIDENCE of any detrimental effects of increased atmospheric CO2.

Let’s all hope that atmospheric CO2 keeps increasing, for the BENEFIT of all life on this CARBON-BASED planet of ours.

Below 280ppm, a lot of plant life doesn’t grow too well.

You did know that, didn’t you, loy ?

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  Loydo
October 26, 2020 7:00 am

“Negligible” perfectly describes man’s CO2 emissions’ effect on climate. Too bad, because that means it will have little, if any effect on slowing down and/or ameliorating the effects of the next cooling or even glacial period. So yes, it isn’t even close to enough.

October 25, 2020 8:26 pm

Solar and wind energy companies MUST divulge all reliance on materials from China in 10K reports, including depletion of rare earth elements, and how this drain on “endangered” elements impacts national defense issues, and impacts the abuse of child labor in African countries where rare earth elements are mined? When reporting “profitability”, all taxpayers subsidies MUST be subtracted from gross value, and timelines for reimbursement of these subsidies to taxpayers revealed. Also, 10K reports MUST divulge without obfuscation, the real energy costs of solar and wind power. For example, high energy inputs and pollution burdens on the environment during manufacture of ultra-refined silicon wafers for solar cell manufacture (needing arc-furnace temperatures, producing ultra toxic silicon fluorides, etc.) and the high process costs for ocean based wind turbines which employ energy-intensive manganese-steel alloy (for corrosion resistance) turbines.

In 10K reports, the impact on wildfires has to be divulged: for example, why are power lines from wind and solar emplacements not buried? What percentage of wildfires are caused by renewable energy mismanagement in this respect? What is the culpability of lack of efficiency and reliability of Big Wind and Big Solar toward high consumer energy costs, including the costs and health effects of brownouts?

Let’s really get a reckoning. shall we? This is not a request, BTW.


Reply to  bubbagyro
October 26, 2020 3:53 am

‘why are power lines from wind and solar emplacements not buried? ‘

Why are power lines to domestic and commercial properties from fossil fuel plants not buried?

October 25, 2020 8:29 pm

Not sure who said it first, but it’s still true: You can vote your way into socialism, but you have to shoot your way out.

John F Hultquist
October 25, 2020 8:38 pm

I see nothing wrong with a fund company setting up means for folks to invest in green and woke things.
I won’t accept that my money has to go there.
Just saying.

Reply to  John F Hultquist
October 25, 2020 8:52 pm

Of course. Let the free market sort it out.
But to do that, we have to first get rid of all preferential treatment.

October 25, 2020 8:56 pm

Virtual signalling has a cost and eventually you run out of other peoples money.
If you can’t pass on the cost of virtual signalling you won’t do it.
A major property developer ( in Victoria, Australia) wanted to install sole on EVERY home in new subdivision. But power company now understands the impact this will have on grid ( local an state) so will charge the developer for the costs associated with upgrading infrastructure and estimated loss of revenue.
This cost was huge and the developer quickly canned the idea

Reply to  Waza
October 25, 2020 8:57 pm


October 25, 2020 10:57 pm

Sir Christopher Hohn is as dirty as Hedge Fund Managers get. He is one of the primary funding sources of Extinction Rebellion, a radical Marxist group in UK. He also has direct ties to the Clintons and has profited on pay to play schemes with the Clinton Foundation as one of their largest “donors”. His Children’s Investment Fund Foundation (CIFF) is how he avoids taxation while conducting aggressive investment schemes within the Foundation. The investment gains within the Foundation are extraordinary and go untouched by regulators. This is how most of the world’s elites launder their investment gains tax free. The elites are making big investment gambles on “climate change” and are trying to ensure their long term profits. I suspect Hohn is protected at the highest levels of UK Government.

Reply to  Edward
October 26, 2020 3:03 am

Exactly. Look what he did to Deutsche Boerse and ABN AMRO
TCI, The children’s Investment Fund.

Martin Lawrence
Reply to  Edward
October 26, 2020 10:03 am

I completely agree that Hohn is a disgrace. He not only funds the stinky rebellion from his own pocket but he has chanelled funds to them ” for education projects” through his Charity CIFF He is probably the stinkys largest donor having given them hundreds of thousands of pounds He also uses CIFF to fund activist lawyers Client Earth.

October 26, 2020 3:40 am

“Danegeld”, writes Eric.
Yes, that’s an apposite metaphor. These parasites will never be satisfied; cannot be bought off. Businesses must stand up to them as Alfred the Great did to the Danes who very nearly took the whole of England.

Bruce Cobb
October 26, 2020 5:18 am

The arguments of Chris Hohn and his ilk are outrageously false, and turn logic on its head. If Blackrock, Vanguard etc. are “acting like sheep” it is with respect to whatever extent they are going along with the Greenie ideology, at investors’ expense, so it is a double-outrage. Investors are essentially being forced to pay for an ideology, whether or not they agree with it.

John Garrett
October 26, 2020 5:38 am

The massive consolidation of the mutual fund industry and the accompanying concentration of assets under management has worried me for some time.

That concentration places the proxy voting power in the hands of a very small number of people.

Larry Fink of BlackRock is fundamentally dishonest. That firm was originally built through acquisitions of incompetent, high-fee mutual funds. Later, BlackRock launched hundreds of high-fee ETFs that were sold to gullible consumers by intentionally misleading marketing. At heart, Larry Fink is essentially a salesman and a promoter. Located in Manhattan, BlackRock and Fink embody all the worst elements of Wall Street.

Vanguard is located in Valley Forge, Pennsylvania. Founded by the recently deceased Jack Bogle, Vanguard stands in distinct contrast to an operation like BlackRock. Because it is owned by its customers, Vanguard is operated on an “at cost” basis. The firm pioneered passive investing (i.e., indexing) and low fee, low cost investing. It has always competed on the basis of having the lowest fees (which translate to higher returns for its investors). Throughout its history, Vanguard has been the epitome of good investment management practices. I am nevertheless very worried that senior Vanguard management has succumbed to the siren song of the “CO2-driven, catastrophic/dangerous anthropogenic global warming/climate change” CONJECTURE.

If you own mutual funds or ETFs, make your views on the CO2-driven, global warming/climate change CONJECTURE known to the investment managers.

For those of you who own investments directly, it is CRITICALLY IMPORTANT that you VOTE YOUR PROXIES against shareholder proposals that require corporations and their managers to address CO2-driven, anthropogenic global warming/climate change issues.

October 26, 2020 8:20 am

What? Blackrock has not changed its name yet? It’s obviously racist.

October 26, 2020 9:13 am

Isn’t Hohn famous also, along with a$s-whole buddies like Algore, on brokering “certificates”, that is pieces of printed paper called carbon offsets? The carbon credits market is actually hilarious-when I was a kid I used to print out “Champion of the World” certificates to give to my friends. It goes along with their highly subsidized Tesla cars; although the printouts will last longer than the Teslas with their glued together frames.

You can fool some of the people all of the time.


Reply to  bubbagyro
October 26, 2020 9:44 am

Like griff and loydo-fus

October 26, 2020 9:44 am

What does Hohn have in his personal portfolio?

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights