Originally tweeted by Will Hild (@WillHild) on May 10, 2023.
Today, @GOPoversight is holding a hearing on the threat posed by the ESG agenda to both American business and our economy at large.
Thank you to Chairman @RepJamesComer for helping shine a light on this pivotal issue ⬇️
Alabama @AGSteveMarshall: "ESG is a clear and present danger to consumers and to our democracy. An unelected cabal of global elites is using ESG to hijack our capitalist system, capture corporations and threaten the hard-earned dollars of American workers…"
Utah AG @SeanReyesUT:
"Ever since the signing of the Paris Agreement there's been an open conspiracy to bypass Congress…by key players in our financial system…these organizations seek to use their collective market power to force burdensome changes on American companies…"
The facts are clear: ESG investing underperforms the broader market.
@RepClayHiggins and @SeanReyesUT discuss:
One of the main cogs in the ESG machine is the proxy advisory duopoly held by Institutional Shareholder Services and Glass Lewis.
Together, they work in-tandem to help push ESG proposals onto American businesses.
@RepArmstrongND and @SeanReyesUT discuss how:
.@AGSteveMarshall explains how ESG is having a *very real impact* on Alabama farmers and farmers nationwide:
.@laurenboebert outlines how @BlackRock is using *your retirement funds* to force corporate America into compliance with their ESG agenda:
.@RepRussellFry breaks down what a fiduciary is, what they are *legally required* to do and how woke asset managers (like @BlackRock) are blatantly ignoring their legal obligations to their customers and shareholders:
Alabama @AGSteveMarshall debunks the analogy used by progressives' star witness @ILTreasurer, while at the same time highlighting how ESG has no definition and is instead just a vehicle for progressives' preferred policy priorities of the moment:
.@USRepGaryPalmer explains how the ESG agenda is actively undermining the US on the global stage, while propping-up Communist China:
.@RepRobertGarcia accidentally said the quiet part out-loud:
"[Democrats] aren't here to put working people above big corporations…"
Rep. @timburchett and @SeanReyesUT discuss the threat that the radical, UN-backed Net-Zero Asset Managers Alliance poses to our economy and our overall energy security:
Originally tweeted by Will Hild (@WillHild) on May 10, 2023.
Well we do have the Four Horsemen of he ESG Hades Apocalypse to enforce their Whims.
BlackRock, Vanguard, First Street and State Street with a Combined $20,000,000,000,000
In Assets from Unions, Pension Funds, 401k’s and IRAs to use as Leverage.
Are any of your DOLLARS 🙂 n the Muscle Basket?
Note USG yearly Budget is now about $6.2 trillion. $31.5 Trillion National Debt. USA
Obama’s third term is still on track thanks to VP Sanders.
Obama throwing his voice at the Biden puppet upside his hand on his lap.
Any corporation, its executives, and Board who puts ESG on their agenda is risking an ordinary shareholder class action suit.
By long established corporate law, the ONLY duty a corporation has to its shareholders is the maximize their investment return.
Now, in the 1970’s and 1980’s this got slightly broadened to maximize stakeholder returns. In addition to shareholders, stakeholders included customers and employees. Sort of made sense. A union strike damages customers and shareholders. So a balancing of the three competing contradictory interests makes good governance sense. Employees want higher wages meaning higher costs. Customers want lower prices. Both wants mean less profit. Shareholders want more profit resulting in higher stock prices. So let senior management and the Board sort it all out, as they are closest to the nitty gritty.
No such legal logic supports ESG. And when no less than Pfizer (mRNA COVID 19 harmful vax with suppressed/contaminated clinical trial data) touts their ESG, that is proof positive it isn’t legit.
You’re right on, Rud. When I was a Director it was always “maximize shareholder wealth”. And, the issue of shareholder lawsuits, especially minority shareholders, requires some attention. Now, there is a tendency of CAGW activists to buy 10 shares and attack, wasting shareholder funds.
Why couldn’t a venture capital firm use the opposite strategy.
Raise a trillion dollars and split it up among all of the funds that you think are just about to elect to allocate on ESG.
If they outperform the market, you take your cut and tell your investors how smart you are.
If they underperform the market, you sue the crap out of them for breach of fiduciary duty.
The big players love it when they can hedge both sides, and that seems like an almost cost-free hedge.
“But wait, you Idiot, wouldn’t you be driving investments to the ESG funds?”
Yes I would, but I think so many would significantly underperform that breaking a few would have great value pour encourager les autres.
‘Now, in the 1970’s and 1980’s this got slightly broadened to maximize stakeholder returns. In addition to shareholders, stakeholders included customers and employees. Sort of made sense.’
The profitable production of goods and services requires that entrepreneurs successfully deploy many factors of production, including labor. It’s just my opinion, but I think once ‘intellectuals’ and their political sponsors get traction in referring to anyone other than the owners of the firm as ‘stakeholders’, there are bound to be problems ahead.
What, no speakers from CA, NY, MA and the like? not a chance!