RvTV95XBeoWealthiest 10% of US Households Responsible for 40% of Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Study
Do your part and recycle your plastics, peasants!
Flies away in private jet
A valid critique, but also worth mentioning, as discussed in the article, much of the GHG emissions for the top 10% (which includes households down to ~$200k) comes from passive income.
Friendly reminder to check who you bank with and what’s in your 401k if you find yourself in that group.
bob_wileyHuh? How is my 401k being counted toward my CO2 emissions? That makes 0 sense.
Vinegarhttps://youtu.be/NJ7W6HFHPYs - This video from Climate Town explains how the bank or credit union only keeps a fraction of your money in reserve when you deposit your money in a savings account, certificate of deposit, or other bank account. The bank/CU is investing the majority of your money, and ecological harm is not a consideration when they are choosing investments. When you deposit money with a financial institution it is almost certain that some portion of your money is being invested in ecologically harmful organizations.
Similarly, your 401k funds are likely in index funds or mutual funds that hold significant shares in ecologically and socially harmful companies like ExxonMobil, Nestle, Chevron, Coca-Cola, et. al.
Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) investment funds exist that ideally exclude ecologically & socially harmful industries, but every ESG fund I have ever encountered is not nearly exclusive enough and has significantly higher fees.
For example - the Vanguard ESG International Stock ETF VSGX excludes adult entertainment, recreational drugs, gambling, weapons, nuclear power, and fossil fuels, yet Nestle is the second largest holding in the fund, and many of the other stocks in the fund likely contribute to environmental and social harm indirectly.
Consider investing in small-businesses and organizations in your local community instead. It is truly bizarre and unique to our time that investing on Wall Street is more accessible than investing on Main Street.
If I buy or sell stock long after an IPO, I’m not giving or taking money from the company. Stocks are simply being bought and sold between other investors. It means nothing to the actual company other than a scoreboard they can point to, as the stock should reflect the performance and outlook of the company.
You can support a company by buying what they’re selling. Similarly, not buying what they are selling will show a lack of support.
What your advocating for with investing in small local companies has been show to reduce investing participation, as people are saddled with so many options they don’t know what to do and do nothing. It is also dramatically more risky, as they are now investing in single stocks. They are also investing based on emotion and ideals rather than the realities of what will drive an investment to go up. This seems like really bad advice they will hurt people’s retirement, while doing nothing to help the environment.
By contributing to demand for a stock you increase the valuation of that stock. Securities Based Lending is often how companies and executives secure loans and avoid taxable events. By contributing to demand for a stock we facilitate additional funding for the issuer of the stock and it's largest shareholders.
I absolutely agree, cash flow is a much more immediate concern to any company, but one wealthy shareholder divesting can have the same financial impact as ten thousand average citizens boycotting. Local investing is more difficult and risky, but also more rewarding and necessary. It is not just about a monetary return, it is about building social capital and local resiliency.
You're arguing that people should give no consideration to the long-term social and ecological harms of their investments beyond what will make them the most money. By directing our actions in that purely incentivized way we sacrifice everything unprofitable, and that alienation is exactly what causes so many chronic societal issues. I agree that an individual can have very little impact alone, but capitalism places this burden at the individual level.
Securities-Based Lending | J.P. Morgan Private Bank
Sometimes liquidity needs arise, whether they’re planned or unexpected. With a securities-backed line of credit in place, you’ll have ready access to capital without having to liquidate your investments. You can use your marketable securities, such as stocks, bonds and mutual funds, as collateral. And of course, we’ll consider how it all fits into your overall wealth plan—balancing your short-term needs with long-term goals to create the right approach for you.
We’re not talking about people trying to pull some kind of GME thing to manipulate a stock and artificially inflate its value. We’re talking about people investing in retirement accounts primarily. Someone’s ETF/mutual fund choice in their retirement account is not going to have those kinds of targeting impact on individual stocks in that fund.
When investing in something like the S&P 500, it’s not saying, “I believe and support these 500 specific companies,” it’s saying you believe in the American economy. An emerging market fund would similarly be a diversified bet on that sector. A fund keyed in on a particular market sector, like energy, retail, or home builders, would show belief in that industry.
I think the average person investing in their 401k should seek diversity above all else, because a retirement fund is a retirement fund, not a political or social statement. I’m not saying to invest in, or not to invest in, an oil company. I’m saying to invest in funds that give exposure to a broad cross section of the market and if there is an oil company in there, oh well, it’s just part of the economy.
Let your actions, what you buy from companies, dictate their success failure. If/when renewable energy hits its tipping point, the index will likely include those renewable energy companies in the fund, and maybe even one day remove the oil companies if they are on their way out. And if/when that happens, great, you’re already invested and have nothing extra to do.
Investing in some kind of broad market index is not the same as being a big investor showing support for a company by giving a direct investment and being invested in the success of that individual company. I don’t care what happens to any individual stock in the S&P, as long as the overall market is moving in the right direction. And for 99.99999% of investors, they shouldn’t either.
If someone has some funds to invest beyond their retirement fund, and they want to help promising local businesses and invest directly with them. I think that’s great, but that’s not a retirement fund, it’s an expensive lottery ticket in most cases.